Observational studyEpilepsia2025
Real-world comparison of first-line antiseizure monotherapy and the role of age at treatment initiation in newly diagnosed childhood epilepsy: A cohort study from a tertiary center.
Observational study in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study was undertaken to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of first-line antiseizure medication (ASM) monotherapy in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy, focusing on comparative outcomes across developmental age groups and ASM types, and identifying clinical risk factors of treatment failure.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed 10 years of electronic medical records from Shenzhen Children's Hospital. Children aged ≤18 years who initiated monotherapy with one of five ASMs (oxcarbazepine, valproate, levetiracetam, topiramate, or lamotrigine) were included. The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as sustained seizure and side effect freedom at the defined analytic endpoint. Outcomes based on the 2010 International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) definition were also evaluated. Nineteen clinical variables across six domains were analyzed. Multivariable Cox regression and stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to adjust for confounding.
resultsAmong 7060 eligible patients with a median follow-up of 14.0 months, 47.9% achieved treatment success, and 48.3% met ILAE criteria. The median seizure- and side effect-free survival was 24.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.3-26.5 months). Oxcarbazepine (32.3%), valproate (31.7%), and levetiracetam (22.5%) were the most commonly prescribed ASMs. Treatment success did not differ significantly across ASM types or age groups. Epileptic spasms (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.98-4.09), generalized seizures (HR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.49-2.13), seizures before reaching maintenance dose (HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.37-1.70), delayed treatment initiation (HR ~ 1.30), and neurodevelopmental delay (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.26-1.60) were significant risk factors of treatment failure. SIGNIFICANCE: First-line ASMs showed similar effectiveness in routine pediatric care. Childhood epilepsy treatment outcomes were more strongly influenced by seizure characteristics, neurodevelopmental comorbidities, and timing of initiation than by ASM choice or age. These findings support extrapolating ASM efficacy across pediatric age groups and highlight the value of real-world evidence in treatment decision-making.
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.