ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2018
Adjunctive lacosamide treatment for adult focal-onset epilepsy: focus on comorbid intellectual/developmental disorders and differing responses.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical factors associated with perampanel retention, response, seizure freedom and tolerability: real-world evidence from the PERMIT Extension study.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Article
- Safety and Tolerability of Lacosamide in Patients With Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData regarding lacosamide treatment as an adjunctive therapy in patients representative of a focal-onset epilepsy population including those with and without intellectual/developmental disorders (IDDs) are limited. PURPOSE: To evaluate the retention rates of lacosamide in focal-onset epilepsy patients with and without IDD. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all consecutive electronic and paper medical records of patients diagnosed with focal-onset epilepsy who were treated with lacosamide in two tertiary epilepsy centers.
resultsOne hundred and thirty-six patients who met the inclusion criteria were studied. Number of patients with IDD was 46 (33.8%). Median lacosamide dose was 300 mg/day. A total of 39 patients (28.7%) experienced side effects, and 22 of them (16.2%) discontinued lacosamide. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year retention rates of lacosamide in patients with IDD were 68%, 62%, and 53%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the retention rates were significantly lower in patients with IDD when compared to patients without IDD (
conclusionWhen compared to patients without IDD, retention rates of lacosamide adjunctive therapy were lower in patients with IDD. However, these rates were higher than the rates suggested with previously registered AEDs including lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate. Therefore, irrespective of having comorbid IDD, we might suggest that lacosamide is a well-retained drug with a high efficacy profile in patients with focal-onset epilepsy.
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.