Leucine zipper-EF-hand containing transmembrane protein 1 (Letm1) is a mitochondrial protein that is associated with seizure attacks in Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome. This study aimed to investigate the expression pattern of Letm1 in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) and pilocarpine-induced rat model of epilepsy, and to determine if altered Letm1 leads to mitochondrial dysfunction and increased susceptibility to seizures. Using immunohistochemical, immunofluorescent, western blotting, and transmission electron microscopic methods, we have found that Letm1 was significantly decreased in TLE patients, and gradually decreased in experimental rats from 1 to 7 days after onset of seizures. Letm1 knock-down by a lentivirus bearing LV-Letm1-sh resulted in mitochondrial swelling and decreased expression of Letm1 target protein mitochondrially encoded cytochrome B (MT-CYB). Behavioral study revealed that inhibition of Letm1 caused early onset of the first seizure, increased seizure frequency, and duration. However, administration of Letm1 homolog nigericin failed to prevent epilepsy. These results indicate that inhibition of Letm1 and mitochondrial dysfunctions contributes to the development of epileptic seizures. Appropriate Letm1 level may be critical for maintaining normal neuronal functions.

BackgroundNew-generation antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) tend to replace traditional AEDs as the first-line choice for epilepsy. However, whether this change results in better outcome, especially in China, remains unknown.Methodology/Principal FindingsTwo broad spectrum AEDs, the traditional drug of sustained-release formulation of valproate (SRVPA) and the new-generation drug of topiramate, were compared in patients with epilepsy as monotherapy in this multi-centre, observational cohort study from 2000 to 2011. The primary outcome was time to treatment failure. The secondary outcomes included time to first seizure, time to 12-month remission, and time to 24-month remission. Drug tolerability was assessed. Cox proportional hazard models (95% confidence interval [CI]) were used to analyse the relative risks expressed as hazard ratios (HR).Of the 1008 recruited patients, 519 received SRVPA and 489 received topiramate. SRVPA was better than topiramate (28.3% vs. 41.5%; HR = 0.62, [95% CI 0.49–0.77]; p<0.0001) in primary outcome, and in time to first seizure (56.1% vs. 69.3%; HR = 0.73, [95% CI 0.62–0.86]; p = 0.0002). No significant difference was observed between two groups in time to 12-month remission (52.6% vs. 42.5%; HR = 1.01, [95% CI 0.84–1.23]; p = 0.88) and time to 24-month remission (34.7% vs. 25.2%; HR = 1.11, [95% CI 0.88–1.42]; p = 0.38). 36 patients (6.9%) in SRVPA group and 37 patients (7.6%) in topiramate group presented treatment failure associated with intolerable adverse events, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.70).ConclusionsThe SRVPA is more suitable than topiramate for Chinese epileptic patients, and our results support the viewpoint that traditional AEDs should be the first-line choice for epilepsy rather than new-generation AEDs.

No abstract