Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30587993›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2019

Levetiracetam for epilepsy: an evidence map of efficacy, safety and economic profiles.

Zhan-Miao Yi, -, Cheng Wen, Ting Cai, Lu Xu, Xu-Li Zhong, Si-Yan Zhan, Suo-Di Zhai

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Cenobamate reduces epileptiform activity in theFrontiers in neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Levetiracetam Mechanisms of Action: From Molecules to Systems.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  9. Observational
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhan-Miao YiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China, zhaisuodi@163.com.
-Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China, zhaisuodi@163.com.
Cheng WenDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China, zhaisuodi@163.com.
Ting CaiDepartment of Epidemiology and Bio-statistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Lu XuDepartment of Epidemiology and Bio-statistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Xu-Li ZhongDepartment of Pharmacy, Children's Hospital Affiliated to Capital Institute of Pediatrics, Beijing, China.
Si-Yan ZhanDepartment of Epidemiology and Bio-statistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Suo-Di ZhaiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China, zhaisuodi@163.com.
Peking University · CNCapital Institute of Pediatrics · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy, safety and economics of levetiracetam (LEV) for epilepsy. MATERIALS AND

methodsPubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey.eu and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, case reports and economic studies published from January 2007 to April 2018. We used a bubble plot to graphically display information of included studies and conducted meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesize the evidence.

resultsA total of 14,803 records were obtained. We included 30 SRs/meta-analyses, 34 RCTs, 18 observational studies, 58 case reports and 2 economic studies after the screening process. The included SRs enrolled patients with pediatric epilepsy, epilepsy in pregnancy, focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy and refractory focal epilepsy. Meta-analysis of the included RCTs indicated that LEV was as effective as carbamazepine (CBZ; treatment for 6 months: 58.9% vs 64.8%, OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.50-1.16; 12 months: 54.9% vs 55.5%, OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.79-1.93), oxcarbazepine (57.7% vs 59.8%, OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.34-5.23), phenobarbital (50.0% vs 50.9%, OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.51-2.82) and lamotrigine (LTG; 61.5% vs 57.7%, OR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.90-1.66). SRs and observational studies indicated a low malformation rate and intrauterine death rate for pregnant women, as well as low risk of cognitive side effects. But psychiatric and behavioral side effects could not be ruled out. LEV decreased discontinuation due to adverse events compared with CBZ (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.41-0.65), while no difference was found when LEV was compared with placebo and LTG. Two cost-effectiveness evaluations for refractory epilepsy with decision-tree model showed US$ 76.18 per seizure-free day gained in Canada and US$ 44 per seizure-free day gained in Korea.

conclusionLEV is as effective as CBZ, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital and LTG and has an advantage for pregnant women and in cognitive functions. Limited evidence supports its cost-effectiveness. REGISTERED NUMBER: PROSPERO (No CRD 42017069367).

Indexed as

cost-effectivenessmalformationsneurological developmentpsychiatric side effectsquality of liferesponder rateseizure freedom

Identifiers

PMID30587993
PMCPMC6301299
OpenAlexW2903609539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.