Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease

Jia Liu, Lu-Ning Wang, Jia Liu, Lu-Ning Wang

Abstract

Background: Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease. Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with Alzheimer's disease. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, however there are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments. This review aims to investigate these different modalities. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2018.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease (including sporadic Alzheimer's disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease).

Search methods: For the latest update, on 3 August 2020 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 31 July 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings; we also contacted trial authors and pharmaceutical companies.

Selection criteria: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, with the primary outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to there being limited available data.

Main results: We included one randomized controlled trial (RCT) on pharmacological interventions; the trial included 95 participants. No studies were found for non-pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam versus lamotrigine (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.71; 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence), levetiracetam versus phenobarbital (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19; 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or lamotrigine versus phenobarbital (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02; 57 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It seemed that levetiracetam could improve cognition and lamotrigine could relieve depression, while phenobarbital and lamotrigine could worsen cognition, and levetiracetam and phenobarbital could worsen mood. The risk of bias relating to allocation, blinding and selective reporting was unclear. We judged the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to be very low.

Authors' conclusions: This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support levetiracetam, phenobarbital or lamotrigine for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between levetiracetam, phenobarbital and lamotrigine. Large RCTs with a double-blind, parallel-group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02002819 NCT03489044.

Conflict of interest statement

JL: none known. L‐NW: none known.

Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Levetiracetam versus lamotrigine, Outcome 1: Proportion with seizure freedom
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1: Levetiracetam versus lamotrigine, Outcome 2: Reduction in seizure frequency of 50% or more
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1: Levetiracetam versus lamotrigine, Outcome 3: Proportion with adverse events
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Levetiracetam versus phenobarbital, Outcome 1: Proportion with seizure freedom
2.2. Analysis
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: Levetiracetam versus phenobarbital, Outcome 2: Reduction in seizure frequency of 50% or more
2.3. Analysis
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2: Levetiracetam versus phenobarbital, Outcome 3: Proportion with adverse events
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Lamotrigine versus phenobarbital, Outcome 1: Proportion with seizure freedom
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Lamotrigine versus phenobarbital, Outcome 2: Reduction in seizure frequency of 50% or more
3.3. Analysis
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Lamotrigine versus phenobarbital, Outcome 3: Proportion with adverse events

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe