Trial reportLancet (London, England)2021
The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Lancet (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 72 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
72 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 185 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Levetiracetam in Patients With Pediatric Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy, treatment retention, and tolerability of newer- versus older-generation antiseizure medications in older adults with epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Persistent sodium currents in neurons: potential mechanisms and pharmacological blockers.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2024Pooled it
- Risk assessment of arrhythmias related to three antiseizure medications: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- GWAS meta-analysis of over 29,000 people with epilepsy identifies 26 risk loci and subtype-specific genetic architecture.Nature genetics · 2023Pooled it
- Anti-seizure efficacy and retention rate of carbamazepine is highly variable in randomized controlled trials: A meta-analysis.Epilepsia open · 2022Pooled it
- Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Cognitive Side Effects of Antiseizure Medications in Adults with Epilepsy: An Update with a Focus on New Therapeutic Agents.CNS drugs · 2026Review
- From Acute Symptomatic Seizures to Post-Stroke Epilepsy: A Narrative Review of Diagnosis and Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Integrating machine learning and retrospective cohort to explore the effects of AEDs on the prognosis of LGG and identify related molecular targets.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2026Article
- Initial Monotherapy and Further Anti-seizure Medication Regimens in Adult Patients with Epilepsy: A Population-Based, Longitudinal, Retrospective Analysis of German Prescription Data.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
- Trends in antiseizure medication monotherapy for pediatric epilepsy in the United States.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- The kynurenine pathway storm in epilepsy: mechanisms and therapeutic implications.Acta epileptologica · 2026Review
- SV2A expression in blood cells as a possible biomarker candidate for levetiracetam treatment response.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Trends in paediatric antiseizure-medication use and costs in France, 2014-2023: a nationwide population-based analysis.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Prevalence and Predictors of Psychiatric Comorbidities in Adults with Epilepsy: A Cross-sectional Study from a Tertiary Care Centre.Annals of neurosciences · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and implementation of an inpatient mental health care pathway at an epilepsy center: A prospective service evaluation.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Physician Perspectives on Web-Based Real-World Statistics for Better-Informed Drug Selection in Epilepsy: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Observational
- Optimizing the diagnostic timing for drug-resistant epilepsy: balancing timeliness and stability with an antiseizure medication waiting period.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026Article
12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
20 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLevetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy.
methodsThis randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64).
findings990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95-1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83-1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08-1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319-1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110-1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs.
interpretationThese findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials.
fundingNational Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
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.