ReviewFrontiers in neurology2024
The efficacy and safety of novel antiepileptic drugs in treatment of epilepsy of patients with brain tumors.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuron-Glioma Synapses in Tumor Progression.Biomedicines · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of novel antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in treating epilepsy in patients with brain tumors (BTRE). Methods: A search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2023, with English language restriction. Results: In this meta-analysis, 18 clinical trials involving 755 BTRE patients were included to assess the efficacy and safety of novel AEDs in BTRE treatment. At the last follow-up, a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency was experienced by 72% of patients (random-effects model, 95% CI = 0.64-0.78) using novel AEDs. At the last follow-up, seizure freedom was experienced by 34% of patients (random-effects model, 95% CI = 0.28-0.41) using novel AEDs. The pooled incidence of AEs was found to be 19% (95% CI: 13%-26%), with a withdrawal rate due to adverse effects of only 3%. Comparable efficacy and incidence of adverse effects were observed between lacosamide and perampanel. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that novel antiepileptic drugs are deemed effective for seizure control in brain tumor patients, particularly when used as adjunctive therapy. Although lacosamide and perampanel received more focus in studies, no significant difference was observed in the efficacy and adverse reactions of these two drugs in seizure control. Further randomized controlled trials are deemed necessary to validate our findings.
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.