Editors' Note: Effectiveness of Antiseizure Medication Duotherapies in Patients With Glioma: A Multicenter Observational Cohort Study
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
In a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 1,435 patients with glioma followed up to 36 months, Dr. van der Meer et al. examined whether levetiracetam combined with valproic acid (LEV + VPA), a commonly prescribed duotherapy for uncontrolled seizures, is more effective than other duotherapy combinations that included either LEV or VPA. Of 355 patients receiving duotherapy, 66% received LEV + VPA, and patients receiving other duotherapy had a higher risk of treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures but not due to adverse effects. The authors concluded that LEV + VPA had better efficacy than other antiseizure medication combinations in their patient population. In response, Dr. Zhao et al. suggest reclassifying the patients' glioma grades according to the updated 2021 World Health Organization guidelines instead of the 2016 guidelines that they had used, given the potentially different implications for treatment and epilepsy risk. They also argue that differences in the use of corticosteroids and surgical resection between the LEV + VPA group and the comparison group may have influenced the severity of epilepsy. Responding to these comments, the authors note that their patients were treated between 2004 and 2018 when the 2016 WHO criteria were in use, and they contend that reclassifying the patients would not change their results, pointing to the absence of evidence that antiseizure medications would have different efficacies in low-grade vs high-grade glioma. They acknowledge the lack of data on corticosteroid use for their cohort, but point to complexities in incorporating such data into analyses even if they were available. They note that they did adjust for surgical resection as a potential confounder in their Cox proportional hazards model but acknowledge the need for validation of their findings in a randomized controlled trial. This exchange demonstrates important confounders that can arise in observational studies of epilepsy treatment in patients with brain tumors such as gliomas.
In a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 1,435 patients with glioma followed up to 36 months, Dr. van der Meer et al. examined whether levetiracetam combined with valproic acid (LEV + VPA), a commonly prescribed duotherapy for uncontrolled seizures, is more effective than other duotherapy combinations that included either LEV or VPA. Of 355 patients receiving duotherapy, 66% received LEV + VPA, and patients receiving other duotherapy had a higher risk of treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures but not due to adverse effects. The authors concluded that LEV + VPA had better efficacy than other antiseizure medication combinations in their patient population. In response, Dr. Zhao et al. suggest reclassifying the patients' glioma grades according to the updated 2021 World Health Organization guidelines instead of the 2016 guidelines that they had used, given the potentially different implications for treatment and epilepsy risk. They also argue that differences in the use of corticosteroids and surgical resection between the LEV + VPA group and the comparison group may have influenced the severity of epilepsy. Responding to these comments, the authors note that their patients were treated between 2004 and 2018 when the 2016 WHO criteria were in use, and they contend that reclassifying the patients would not change their results, pointing to the absence of evidence that antiseizure medications would have different efficacies in low-grade vs high-grade glioma. They acknowledge the lack of data on corticosteroid use for their cohort, but point to complexities in incorporating such data into analyses even if they were available. They note that they did adjust for surgical resection as a potential confounder in their Cox proportional hazards model but acknowledge the need for validation of their findings in a randomized controlled trial. This exchange demonstrates important confounders that can arise in observational studies of epilepsy treatment in patients with brain tumors such as gliomas.
Footnotes
Author disclosures are available upon request (journal{at}neurology.org).
- Received November 8, 2022.
- Accepted in final form November 8, 2022.
- © 2023 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
For assistance, please contact:
AAN Members (800) 879-1960 or (612) 928-6000 (International)
Non-AAN Member subscribers (800) 638-3030 or (301) 223-2300 option 3, select 1 (international)
Sign Up
Information on how to subscribe to Neurology and Neurology: Clinical Practice can be found here
Purchase
Individual access to articles is available through the Add to Cart option on the article page. Access for 1 day (from the computer you are currently using) is US$ 39.00. Pay-per-view content is for the use of the payee only, and content may not be further distributed by print or electronic means. The payee may view, download, and/or print the article for his/her personal, scholarly, research, and educational use. Distributing copies (electronic or otherwise) of the article is not allowed.
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Dr. Steven Greenberg and Dr. Erika Williams