MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399128763 · doi:10.1111/epi.18025

Cannabidiol‐enriched oil for adult patients with drug‐resistant epilepsy: Prospective clinical and electrophysiological study

2024· article· en· W4399128763 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sigal Glatt, Sophie Shohat, Mor Yam, Lilach Goldstein, Inbal Maidan, Firas Fahoum

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabidiolMedicineAnxietyEpilepsyHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleProspective cohort studyPopulationInternal medicinePhysical therapyAnesthesiaCannabisPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Cannabidiol-enriched oil (CBDO) is being used increasingly to improve seizure control in adult patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), despite the lack of large-scale studies supporting its efficacy in this patient population. We aimed to assess the effects of add-on CBDO on seizure frequency as well as on gait, cognitive, affective, and sleep-quality metrics, and to explore the electrophysiological changes in responder and non-responder DRE patients treated with add-on CBDO. METHODS: We prospectively recruited adult DRE patients who were treated with add-on CBDO. Patients were evaluated prior to treatment and following 4 weeks of a maintenance daily dose of ≈260 mg CBD and ≈12 mg Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The outcome measures included seizure response to CBDO (defined as ≥50% decrease in seizures compared to pre-CBDO baseline), gait testing, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and sleep-quality questionnaire assessments. Patients underwent electroencephalography (EEG) recording during rest as well as event-related potentials (ERPs) during visual Go/NoGo task while sitting and while walking. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were recruited, of which 16 finished pre- and post-CBDO assessments. Seven patients (43.75%) were responders demonstrating an average reduction of 82.4% in seizures, and nine patients (56.25%) were non-responders with an average seizure increase of 30.1%. No differences in demographics and clinical parameters were found between responders and non-responders at baseline. However, responders demonstrated better performance in the dual-task walking post-treatment (p = .015), and correlation between increase in MoCA and seizure reduction (r = .810, p = .027). Post-CBDO P300 amplitude was lower during No/Go-sitting in non-responders (p = .028) and during No/Go-walking in responders (p = .068). SIGNIFICANCE: CBDO treatment can reduce seizures in a subset of patients with DRE, but could aggravate seizure control in a minority of patients; yet we found no specific baseline clinical or electrophysiological characteristics that are associated with response to CBDO. However, changes in ERPs in response to treatment could be a promising direction to better identify patients who could benefit from CBDO treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.304 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207