Systematic review of clobazam use in patients with status epilepticus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clobazam (CLB) is a commonly used oral antiepileptic drug (AED) that has been shown to be effective in various forms of epilepsy. Given its distinct 1,5-benzodiazepine structure, rapid absorption, minimal drug interactions, and favorable safety profile, CLB displays unique properties when compared to other commonly used benzodiazepines. Recent evidence has shown that CLB may demonstrate therapeutic efficacy in status epilepticus (SE). The objective of this systematic review was to summarize the available evidence pertaining to the efficacy of CLB use in SE. An electronic literature search of Medline (1946 to November 6, 2017), Embase (1974 to November 6, 2017), and the Cochrane Library (1999 to November 6, 2017) databases was performed to identify reports of CLB use in SE. After screening and full text review, a total of 15 articles were included: 8 retrospective studies, 2 case series, and 5 case reports. Efficacy rates for CLB have varied among reports. Overall, based on the retrospective studies, a total of 76 patients with SE have been reported. CLB was introduced within 2-4 days from SE onset and has been reported to contribute to remission in 36 patients (47%). CLB maintenance dose ranged from 10 to 60 mg/day. However, the results need to be interpreted carefully because SE patients are a heterogeneous group with different etiologies and disease severities, and the response to CLB might vary in different patient population or seizure types. In conclusion, there is not sufficient evidence to determine the safety and efficacy of clobazam in the setting of SE. However, the current limited evidence combined with the unique characteristics of CLB suggest that the drug might be considered as an add-on option in SE patients, with a suggested dosage range of 10-60 mg/day. Prospective studies are needed to fully establish the role of CLB in the management of SE.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".