Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32847927›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide versus standard treatments for epilepsy: a comparison of standard and new antiepileptic drugs (SANAD-II).

Silviya Balabanova, Claire Taylor, Graeme Sills, Girvan Burnside, Catrin Plumpton, Phil E M Smith, Richard Appleton, John Paul Leach, Michael Johnson, Gus Baker and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Levetiracetam add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Efficacy and safety of branded vs generic lacosamide in epilepsy: a retrospective real-world study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Observational
  6. Disparities in seizure outcomes revealed by large language models.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    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

15 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Silviya BalabanovaLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6989-8099
Claire TaylorLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.
Graeme SillsSchool of Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Girvan BurnsideBiostatistics, University of Liverpool, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.
Catrin PlumptonCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Phil E M SmithDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4250-2562
Richard AppletonPaediatric Neurology, Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
John Paul LeachSchool of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Michael JohnsonDepartment of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London Faculty of Medicine-South Kensington Campus, London, UK.
Gus BakerMolecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.
Munir PirmohamedDepartment of Pharmacology, University of Liverpool Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.
Dyfrig A HughesCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Paula R WilliamsonBiostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Catrin Tudur-SmithBiostatistics, University of Liverpool, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Liverpool, UK.
Anthony Guy MarsonMolecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK marjon01@liverpool.ac.uk.
University of Liverpool · GBBangor University · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust · GBKensington College of Business · GBUniversity Hospital of Wales · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0408-15077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAntiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are the mainstay of epilepsy treatment. Over the past 20 years, a number of new drugs have been approved for National Health Service (NHS) use on the basis of information from short-term trials that demonstrate efficacy. These trials do not provide information about the longer term outcomes, which inform treatment policy. This trial will assess the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of the newer treatment levetiracetam and zonisamide. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a phase IV, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled clinical trial comparing new and standard treatments for patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Arm A of the trial randomised 990 patients with focal epilepsy to standard AED lamotrigine or new AED levetiracetam or zonisamide. Arm B randomised 520 patients with generalised epilepsy to standard AED sodium valproate or new AED levetiracetam. Patients are recruited from UK NHS outpatient epilepsy, general neurology and paediatric clinics. Included patients are aged 5 years or older with two or more spontaneous seizures requiring AED monotherapy, who are not previously treated with AEDs. Patients are followed up for a minimum of 2 years. The primary outcome is time to 12-month remission from seizures. Secondary outcomes include time to treatment failure (including due to inadequate seizure control or unacceptable adverse reactions); time to first seizure; time to 24-month remission; adverse reactions and quality of life. All primary analyses will be on an intention to treat basis. Separate analyses will be undertaken for each arm. Health economic analysis will be conducted from the perspective of the NHS to assess the cost-effectiveness of each AED. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been approved by the North West-Liverpool East REC (Ref. 12/NW/0361). The trial team will disseminate the results through scientific meetings, peer-reviewed publications and patient and public involvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT 2012-001884-64; ISRCTN30294119.

Indexed as

AnticonvulsantsEpilepsyCarbamazepineChildChild, PreschoolClinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansLevetiracetamMulticenter Studies as TopicPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicState MedicineZonisamideAnticonvulsantsCarbamazepineLevetiracetamZonisamideclinical trialsepilepsyhealth economicshealth policypaediatric neurology

Identifiers

PMID32847927
PMCPMC7451282
OpenAlexW3081080622

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.