ArticleBrain and behavior2017
Transition from oxcarbazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate: A single center study.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacogenetics and Oxcarbazepine in Children and Adolescents: BeyondJournal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 2024Review
- Comparative Economic Outcomes in Patients with Focal Seizure Initiating First-Line Eslicarbazepine Acetate Monotherapy versus Generic Antiseizure Drugs.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2021Article
- Dibenzazepine Agents in Epilepsy: How Does Eslicarbazepine Acetate Differ?Neurology and therapy · 2018Article
- Eslicarbazepine acetate in the treatment of adults with partial-onset epilepsy: an evidence-based review of efficacy, safety and place in therapy.Core evidence · 2018Review
- Pooled efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate as add-on treatment in patients with focal-onset seizures: Data from four double-blind placebo-controlled pivotal phase III clinical studies.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2017Article
- Transition from oxcarbazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate: A single center study.Brain and behavior · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThere is limited clinical evidence for comparison between oxcarbazepine (OXC) and eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in terms of tolerability, or how to execute the change from OXC to ESL. We report the process of transitioning patients with focal epilepsy from previous OXC treatment to ESL due to tolerability problems. The rationale for change from OXC is reported, and the outcome with respective to this rationale is analyzed in terms of tolerability and efficacy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe subjects were transitioned overnight from OXC to ESL in a hospital inpatient setting. An evaluation of the effects of the transition was made after 1 and 3 months. All adverse events (AEs) were recorded following the transition period. Subjects were classified by outcome in terms of AEs.
resultsTwenty-three subjects were transitioned from OXC to ESL. Fifteen patients OXC-related AEs reduced significantly after transition. Particularly, most of (93%) the AEs presented in the morning resolved after transition to ESL. No patient had an increase in seizure frequency following the transition. The incidence of ESL-related AEs was 39% at 1 month and 13% at 3 month follow-up; however, all patients continued ESL throughout the study period.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that patients suffering from OXC-related AEs improve in terms of tolerability after a switch to ESL with maintaining seizure control. This improvement is more pronounced if the OXC-related AEs are most evident following morning dosing of OXC. Transition can be safely executed in an outpatient setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.