Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26147937›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Comparative Long-Term Effectiveness of a Monotherapy with Five Antiepileptic Drugs for Focal Epilepsy in Adult Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Qing-Yi Zeng, Tian-Tian Fan, Pan Zhu, Ru-Qian He, Yi-Xin Bao, Rong-Yuan Zheng, Hui-Qin Xu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Is there a role for diet monotherapy in adult epilepsy?Epilepsy & behavior case reports · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Qing-Yi ZengDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Tian-Tian FanRehabilitation Center, The First Hospital of Zibo, Zibo, Shandong Province, P.R. China.
Pan ZhuDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Ru-Qian HeDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Yi-Xin BaoDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Rong-Yuan ZhengDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Hui-Qin XuDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, P.R. China.
Wenzhou Medical University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University · CNCentral Hospital of Zibo · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and compare long-term effectiveness of five antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for monotherapy of adult patients with focal epilepsy in routine clinical practice.

methodsAdult patients with focal epilepsy, who were prescribed with carbamazepine (CBZ), valproate (VPA), lamotrigine (LTG), topiramate (TPM), or oxcarbazepine (OXC) as monotherapy, during the period from January 2004 to June 2012 registered in Wenzhou Epilepsy Follow Up Registry Database (WEFURD), were included in the study. Prospective long-term follow-up was conducted until June 2013. The endpoints were time to treatment failure, time to seizure remission, and time to first seizure.

resultsThis study included 654 patients: CBZ (n=125), VPA (n=151), LTG (n=135), TPM (n=76), and OXC (n=167). The retention rates of CBZ, VPA, LTG, TPM, and OXC at the third year were 36.1%, 32.4%, 57.6%, 37.9%, and 41.8%, respectively. For time to treatment failure, LTG was significantly better than CBZ and VPA (LTG vs. CBZ, hazard ratio, [HR] 0.80 [95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.96], LTG vs. VPA, 0.53 [0.37-0.74]); TPM was worse than LTG (TPM vs. LTG, 1.77 [1.15-2.74]), and OXC was better than VPA (0.86 [0.78-0.96]). After initial target doses, the seizure remission rates of CBZ, VPA, LTG, TPM, and OXC were 63.0%, 77.0%, 83.6%, 67.9%, and 75.3%, respectively. LTG was significantly better than CBZ (1.44 [1.15-1.82]) and OXC (LTG vs. OXC, 0.76 [0.63-0.93]); OXC was less effective than LTG in preventing the first seizure (1.20 [1.02-1.40]).

conclusionLTG was the best, OXC was better than VPA only, while VPA was the worst. The others were equivalent for comparisons between five AEDs regarding the long-term treatment outcomes of monotherapy for adult patients with focal epilepsy in a clinical practice. For selecting AEDs for these patients among the first-line drugs, LTG is an appropriate first choice; others are reservation in the first-line but VPA is not.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepineEpilepsies, PartialFemaleFructoseHumansLamotrigineMaleMiddle AgedOxcarbazepineProspective StudiesSeizuresAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepineFructoseLamotrigineOxcarbazepineTopiramateTriazinesValproic Acid

Identifiers

PMID26147937
PMCPMC4493091
OpenAlexW2298036133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.