Summary:Purpose: To review the current state of knowledge of the treatment of primary (idiopathic) generalized epilepsy syndromes based on the efficacy results of clinical trials, to highlight obstacles in the design of these trials, and to suggest solutions for future research.Methods: Published reports of controlled clinical trials, as well as large or significant uncontrolled trials of treatments for these syndromes, were reviewed. Trials were selected for discussion based on their importance or their illustration of design issues.Results: Only a few randomized, controlled trials of therapy for these syndromes exist. Conclusions based on this Class I data include efficacy in absence epilepsies for ethosuximide, valproate, and lamotrigine, and for eight drugs for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Many commonly accepted therapeutic strategies are not based on formal data. No controlled data exist for uncommon syndromes.Conclusions: More clinical trials of therapies for primary generalized epilepsies are needed. To overcome design obstacles, better funding, multicenter cooperation, inclusion of children, study designs requiring fewer patients, equivalent-control designs, use of EEG and video seizure counting, and better syndrome identification will be required. Key Words: Clinical trials-Generalized seizures-Primary generalized epilepsiesIdiopathic epilepsies-Antiepilepsy drugs.The design and interpretation of clinical trials for primary (idiopathic, genetic) generalized epilepsies involves consideration of several problems that differ from those encountered in clinical trials for localization-related epilepsies. Research in this area encounters some unique difficulties; consequently, data from well-controlled trials of therapies for these syndromes are sparse. There are fewer trials enrolling fewer patients, and very few data from Class I studies (randomized, controlled, blinded clinical trials) are available. We will review the problems associated with this endeavor, examine selected clinical trials for illustrative purposes, assign a quality level to therapeutic conclusions in the literature, then suggest possible solutions that may lead to better data and more confident therapeutic plans. This discussion is not a comprehensive review to support evidence-based guidelines. It includes only selected studies to illustrate problems and solutions, but includes most of those containing Class I evidence for efficacy. Choice of drug based on adverse effect profiles, ease of use, cost, and other variables is important, but this review focuses only on efficacy data.