Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42292625›Full record

ArticleTranslational pediatrics2026

Clinical efficacy and predictive model development for levetiracetam in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy of unknown etiology.

Huimin Yan, Yichong Hou, Xinyu Cao, Lin Wan, Zhichao Li, Jian Zu, Guang Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Huimin Yan *Department of Pediatrics, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yichong Hou *The School of Mathematics and Statistics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Xinyu Cao *Department of Pediatrics, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Lin WanDepartment of Pediatrics, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhichao LiDepartment of Pediatrics, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Jian Zu *The School of Mathematics and Statistics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Guang Yang *Department of Pediatrics, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Levetiracetam (LEV) is one of the most widely used antiseizure medications (ASMs) in pediatric epilepsy owing to its broad-spectrum antiseizure efficacy, favorable safety profile, and good tolerability. However, considerable interindividual variability exists in treatment response to LEV. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LEV monotherapy in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy of unknown etiology, to identify clinical predictors associated with LEV treatment response, and to develop and validate a machine learning (ML)-assisted clinical risk assessment scale based on routinely available clinical information, thereby providing an objective and quantitative tool to support individualized treatment decision-making in pediatric epilepsy. Methods: This single-center cohort study enrolled 115 children with newly diagnosed epilepsy of unknown etiology who were treated at The First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital between October 2021 and October 2024. All patients received LEV monotherapy and were followed up for 12 months. Treatment success was defined as seizure freedom for at least 12 consecutive months from the initiation of LEV. Clinical characteristics were collected, relevant predictors were selected, ML algorithms were applied to construct models, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used to interpret feature importance. A clinical risk assessment scale was ultimately developed. Results: Among the 115 children, the 12-month seizure-freedom rate was 73.9% (85/115). Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurred in 11.3% (13/115) of patients, all of which were Grade 1-2 in severity with no serious adverse events. Statistical analysis identified six clinical features for inclusion in the risk scale: the time from first seizure to treatment initiation, seizure frequency, seizure type (Tonic-Clonic), age at onset, history of febrile seizures, and sex. The scale demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.812 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.747-0.877]. Conclusions: LEV monotherapy demonstrated good efficacy and tolerability in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy of unknown etiology. The time from first seizure to treatment initiation was the strongest independent clinical predictor of LEV efficacy, and its positive predictive effect may be attributable to the high proportion of self-limited epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (SeLECTS) in this cohort. The clinical risk assessment scale developed in this study requires only six routine clinical parameters obtainable at the visit, demonstrates good discriminative validity and clinical utility, and may serve as a decision-support tool for individualized LEV treatment in tertiary epilepsy centers and specialist settings where complete etiological workup can be performed at the time of initial clinical encounter. Its applicability in resource-limited settings where etiological classification cannot be promptly established warrants further investigation. External validation in multicenter, large-sample prospective cohorts is warranted.

Indexed as

clinical risk assessment scaleLevetiracetam (LEV)machine learning (ML)pediatric epilepsytreatment response prediction

Identifiers

PMID42292625
PMCPMC13263512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.