Our study first confirmed that COL4A1 mutations are associated with schizencephaly and hemolytic anemia. Based on the finding that COL4A1 mutations were frequent in patients with porencephaly and schizencephaly, genetic testing for COL4A1 should be considered for children with these conditions.

Rationale: Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) is the persistence of status epilepticus despite second-line treatment. Super-refractory SE (SRSE) is characterized by ongoing status despite 48 h of anaesthetic treatment. Due to the high case fatality in RSE of 16e39%, off label treatments without strong evidence of efficacy in RSE are often administered. In single case-reports and small case series totalling 28 patients, acute implantation of VNS in RSE was associated with 76% and 26% success rate in generalized and focal RSE respectively. We performed an updated systematic review of the literature on efficacy of VNS in RSE/ SRSE by including all reported patients. Methods: We systematically searched EMBASE, CENTRAL, Opengre.eu, and ClinicalTrials.gov, and PubMed databases to identify studies reporting the use of VNS for RSE and/or SRSE. We also searched conference abstracts from AES and ILAE meetings. Results: 45 patients were identified in total of which 38 were acute implantations of VNS in RSE/SRSE. Five cases had VNS implantation for epilepsia partialis continua, one for refractory electrical status epilepticus in sleep and one for acute encephalitis with refractory repetitive focal seizures. Acute VNS implantation was associated with cessation of RSE/SRSE in 74% (28/38) of acute cases. Cessation did not occur in 18% (7/38) of cases and four deaths were reported (11%); all of them due to the underlying disease and unlikely related to VNS implantation. Median duration of the RSE/SRSE episode pre and post VNS implantation was 18 days (range: 3e1680 days) and 8 days (range: 3e84 days) respectively. Positive outcomes occurred in 82% (31/38) of cases. Conclusion: VNS can interrupt RSE and SRSE in 74% of patients; data originate from reported studies classified as level IV and the risk for reporting bias is high. Further prospective studies are warranted to investigate acute VNS in RSE and SRSE.

Aims. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an established option of adjunctive treatment for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, however, evidence for long-term efficacy is still limited. Studies on clinical outcomes of VNS in Asia are also limited. We report the overall outcome of a national, prospective registry that included all patients implanted in Japan. Methods. The registry included patients of all ages with all seizure types who underwent VNS implantation for drug-resistant epilepsy in the first three years after approval of VNS in 2010. The registry excluded patients who were expected to benefit from resective surgery. Efficacy analysis was assessed based on the change in frequency of all seizure types and the rate of responders. Changes in cognitive, behavioural and social status, quality of life (QOL), antiepileptic drug (AED) use, and overall AED burden were analysed as other efficacy indices.Results. A total of 385 patients were initially registered. Efficacy analyses included data from 362 patients. Age range at the time of VNS implantation was 12 months to 72 years; 21.5% of patients were under 12 years of age and 49.7% had prior epilepsy surgery. Follow-up rate was >90%, even at 36 months. Seizure control improved over time with median seizure reduction of 25.0%, 40.9%, 53.3%, 60.0%, and 66.2%, and responder rates of 38.9%, 46.8%, 55.8%, 57.7%, and 58.8% at three, six, 12, 24, and 36 months of VNS therapy, respectively. There were no substantial changes in other indices throughout the three years of the study, except for self/family-accessed QOL which improved over time. No new safety issues were identified. Conclusions. Although this was not a controlled comparative study, this prospective national registry of Japanese patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, with >90% follow-up rate, indicates long-term efficacy of VNS therapy which increased over time, over a period of up to three years. The limits of such trials, in terms of AED modifications and during follow-up and difficulties in seizure counting are also discussed.

No abstract

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) provides palliation of seizure reduction for patients with medically refractory epilepsy. VNS is indicated for symptomatic localization-related epilepsy with multiple and bilateral independent foci, symptomatic generalized epilepsy with diffuse epileptogenic abnormalities, refractory idiopathic generalized epilepsy, failed intracranial epilepsy surgery, and other several reasons of contraindications to epilepsy surgery. Programing of the parameters is a principal part in VNS. Output current and duty cycle should be adjusted to higher settings particularly when a patient does not respond to the initial setting, since the pivotal randomized trials performed in the United States demonstrated high stimulation made better responses in seizure frequency. These trials revealed that a ≥ 50% seizure reduction occurred in 36.8% of patients at 1 year, in 43.2% at 2 years, and in 42.7% at 3 years in 440 patients. Safety of VNS was also confirmed because side effects including hoarseness, throat discomfort, cough, paresthesia, and headache improved progressively during the period of 3 years. The largest retrospective study with 436 patients demonstrated the mean seizure reduction of 55.8% in nearly 5 years, and also found 75.5% at 10 years in 65 consecutive patients. The intermediate analysis report of the Japan VNS Registry showed that 60% of 164 cases got a ≥ 50% seizure reduction in 12 months. In addition to seizure reduction, VNS has positive effects in mood and improves energy level, memory difficulties, social aspects, and fear of seizures. VNS is an effective and safe option for patients who are not suitable candidates for intracranial epilepsy surgery.

Objective: Our study assessed perampanel monotherapy in patients (aged ≥12 years) with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) in Japan and South Korea. Methods: Study 342 (NCT03201900; FREEDOM) is a single-arm, open-label, Phase III study. Patients initially received perampanel in a 32-week 4-mg/d Treatment Phase (6-week Titration; 26-week Maintenance Periods). If they experienced a seizure during the 4-mg/d Maintenance Period, they could be up-titrated to 8 mg/d across an additional 30-week Treatment Phase (4-week Titration; 26-week Maintenance Periods). Primary endpoint was the seizure-freedom rate during the Maintenance Period (4 mg/d and last evaluated dose [4 or 8 mg/d]). Secondary endpoints included time to first seizure onset and to withdrawal during Maintenance. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were monitored. Results: At data cutoff (February 28, 2019), 89 patients with FOS (84 [94.4%] with newly diagnosed epilepsy and 5 [5.6%] with recurrence of epilepsy after a period of remission) had received ≥1 perampanel dose; 16 patients discontinued during the 4-mg/d Titration Period, meaning 73 patients entered the 4-mg/d Maintenance Period and were included in the primary analysis set for efficacy. Seizure-freedom rate in the 26-week Maintenance Period was 46/73 (63.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.9-74.0) at 4 mg/d and 54/73 (74.0%; 95% CI: 62.4-83.5) at 4 or 8 mg/d. | 275 YAMAMOTO eT Al.F I G U R E 1 Study design. a In the event of tolerability issues, the dose of perampanel could be reduced from 4 mg/d to 2 mg/d during Weeks 3 and 4 of the Titration Period, at the investigators' discretion. If the dose could not be up-titrated back to 4 mg/d, patients were discontinued from the study. b Patients experiencing seizures while receiving perampanel 4 mg/d could receive perampanel 8 mg/d at the investigators' discretion. If the 8-mg/d dose was not tolerated, patients could be down-titrated to 6 mg/d and continue the Maintenance Period. If patients experienced seizures while receiving perampanel 6 or 8 mg/d, or if the 6-mg/d dose was not tolerated, they ended the Treatment Phase. Abbreviation: QD, once daily

No abstract

Objective: This post hoc analysis evaluated whether continued treatment with perampanel monotherapy beyond initial titration may be appropriate for patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with currently untreated epilepsy to achieve seizure freedom with an effective dose. Methods: Study 342 (NCT03201900; FREEDOM) is a single-arm, open-label, Phase III study of perampanel monotherapy. Patients aged ≥12 years with untreated FOS received perampanel 4 mg/d in a 32-week Treatment Phase (6-week Titration and 26-week Maintenance Periods); in case of seizure(s) during Maintenance Period, patients could enter a 30-week Treatment Phase (4-week Titration and 26week Maintenance Periods) to be up-titrated to perampanel 8 mg/d. The primary endpoint was seizure-freedom rate during Maintenance Period in the modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Analysis Set (patients who had ≥1 post-dose efficacy measurement during Maintenance Period); safety was monitored. This analysis of 4mg/d efficacy data assessed the proportion of patients achieving seizure freedom during the Maintenance Period (responders) relative to patients with an early/ later response (depending on seizure status during the Titration Period).