MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2412074442 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001417

Topiramate add-on for drug-resistant partial epilepsy

2002· review· en· W2412074442 on OpenAlexaff
Nathalie Jetté, Karla Hemming, JL Hutton, Anthony G Marson

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreOttawa HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopiramateMedicineEpilepsyPlaceboCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialRelative riskMeta-analysisConfidence intervalAdverse effectInternal medicinePediatricsPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The majority of people with epilepsy have a good prognosis and their seizures are controlled by a single antiepileptic drug. However, up to 30 per cent develop drug-resistant epilepsy, especially those with partial onset seizures. In this review we summarize the current evidence regarding a new antiepileptic drug, topiramate, when used as an add-on treatment for drug resistant partial epilepsy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of topiramate when used as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant partial epilepsy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's specialized register (28 March 2002); the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2002). In addition, we contacted Johnson and Johnson (makers of topiramate) and experts in the field to seek any ongoing or unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized placebo controlled add-on trials of topiramate recruiting people with drug-resistant partial epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. The following outcomes were assessed: (a) 50 per cent or greater reduction in seizure frequency; (b) treatment withdrawal (any reason); (c) side effects. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat. Summary relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are presented. Dose response was evaluated in regression models. MAIN RESULTS: Nine trials were included representing 1049 randomized participants. The RR for a 50 per cent or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo was 3.32(95% CI 2.52 to 4.39). Dose regression analysis shows increasing effect with increasing dose, but found no advantage for doses over 300 mg per day. The RR for treatment withdrawal compared to placebo was 2.06(95% CI 1.38 to 3.08). The RR for the following side effects indicate that they are significantly associated with topiramate: 1.95(99% CI 1.04 to 3.65), dizziness 1.55(99% CI 1.07 to 2.24); fatigue 2.21(99% CI 1.42 to 3.45); nausea 2.75(99% CI 1.36 to 5.57); somnolence 2.26(99% CI 1.48 to 3.46) and 'thinking abnormally' 5.54(99% CI 2.34 to 13.12). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate has efficacy as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant partial epilepsy. However, trials reviewed were of relatively short duration, and provide no evidence for the long term efficacy of topiramate. Results cannot be extrapolated to monotherapy or treating other epilepsy types.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.021

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.190
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207