SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2023
The efficacy and safety of third-generation antiseizure medications and non-invasive brain stimulation to treat refractory epilepsy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis study.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Non-invasive neurostimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy: systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness, safety, and optimal stimulation parameters.Journal of neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in treatment of refractory epilepsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- Transcranial direct current stimulation in the management of epilepsy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring the Role of Early Add-On Cenobamate in Uncontrolled Focal Epilepsy: A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Cenobamate: An Appraisal Five Years On.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Elevated Serum Concentrations of Lacosamide and Perampanel in a Pediatric Patient Following Coadministration of Clarithromycin forThe journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2026Article
- Cannabidiol in Developmental Epilepsy: Organoid-Guided Precision Medicine Across Critical Neurodevelopmental Windows.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Review
- Non-invasive neuromodulation for drug-resistant epilepsy: a contemporary structured review of mechanisms, clinical evidence and future directions.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- Network analysis of antiseizure medication use, efficacy, and safety in epilepsy: A retrospective cohort study in a tertiary care center.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2025Article
- Cenobamate: A Review in Focal-Onset Seizures.CNS drugs · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Overview of the Current Status and Advancements in Various Treatment Strategies against Epilepsy.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The new antiseizure medications (ASMs) and non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) are controversial in controlling seizures. So, this network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of five third-generation ASMs and two NIBS therapies for the treatment of refractory epilepsy. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases. Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM), perampanel (PER), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) were selected as additional treatments for refractory epilepsy in randomized controlled studies and other cohort studies. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, add-on studies that evaluated the efficacy or safety of medication and non-invasive brain stimulation and included patients with seizures were uncontrolled by one or more concomitant ASMs were identified. A random effects model was used to incorporate possible heterogeneity. The primary outcome was the change in seizure frequency from baseline, and secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients with ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency, and the rate of treatment-emergent adverse events. Results: Forty-five studies were analyzed. The five ASMs and two NIBS decreased seizure frequency from baseline compared with placebo. The 50% responder rates of the five antiseizure drugs were significantly higher than that of placebo, and the ASMs were associated with fewer adverse events than placebo ( Conclusion: The five third-generation ASMs were more effective in controlling seizures than placebo, among which CNB, ESL, and LCM were most effective, and BRV exhibited better safety. Although rTMS and tDCS did not reduce seizure frequency as effectively as the five drugs, their safety was confirmed. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ (CRD42023441097).
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.