Clobazam monotherapy for focal or generalized seizures

Ravindra Arya; Nisha Giridharan; Vidhu Anand; Sushil K Garg

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009258.pub3

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Monoterapia con clobazam para las crisis focales o generalizadas

Información

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009258.pub3 Copiar DOI

Base de datos:

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Versión publicada:

11 julio 2018see what's new

Tipo:

Intervention

Etapa:

Review

Grupo Editorial Cochrane:

Grupo Cochrane de Epilepsia

Copyright:

Copyright © 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

Ravindra Arya

Correspondencia a: Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Division of Neurology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, USA

[email protected]

[email protected]
Nisha Giridharan

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, USA
Vidhu Anand

Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
Sushil K Garg

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, USA

Contributions of authors

The review was conceived by RA and SKG. Data were extracted by VA, SKG, NG, and analyzed by SKG, RA and VA. RA and VA wrote the manuscript, which was reviewed by SKG and NG. All review authors have reviewed and approved the final version.

Sources of support

Internal sources

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, USA.

Library, Biostatistics

External sources

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK.

This review update was supported by the National Institute for Health Research, via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Epilepsy Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.

Declarations of interest

Ravindra Arya receives research support (total 5% effort) from Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation, which is unrelated to the present work
Vidhu Anand: none known
Nisha Giridharan: none known
Sushil K Garg: none known

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Cochrane Epilepsy for their support. Also, thanks to Ms. Rachael Kelly for assistance, Mr. Graham Chan and Ms. Alison Beamond for providing the search results, Dr. Yasuko Yamatogi for completing the data extraction form for their study in Japanese, and to Drs. Carol and Peter Camfield for offering their help to find the original participant data. Dr. Benedict Michael was a co‐author for the previous version of this systematic review and we acknowledge his input.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2018 Jul 11

Clobazam monotherapy for focal or generalized seizures

Review

Ravindra Arya, Nisha Giridharan, Vidhu Anand, Sushil K Garg

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009258.pub3

2014 Oct 04

Clobazam monotherapy for partial‐onset or generalized‐onset seizures

Review

Ravindra Arya, Vidhu Anand, Sushil K Garg, Benedict D Michael

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009258.pub2

2011 Aug 10

Clobazam monotherapy for partial onset or generalized onset seizures

Protocol

Ravindra Arya, Sushil Kumar, Benedict Michael, Vidhu Anand

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009258

Differences between protocol and review

In 'Types of interventions', we decided to include studies with clobazam monotherapy given continuously for at least three months.

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) Keywords

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Adolescent; Adult; Child; Humans;

PICO

Population

Intervention

Comparison

Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Figure 1

Study flow diagram (results from updated searches)

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 2 clobazam vs carbamazepine, outcome: 2.1 retention at 12 months

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 1 clobazam versus phenytoin, outcome: 1.1 retention at 6 months

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: 1 clobazam versus carbamazepine, outcome: 1.4 terminal remission at 9 months (seizure free for last 9 months)

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 1 Retention at 12 months.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 2 Seizure freedom at 4 weeks.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 3 Seizure freedom between weeks 4 and 40.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 4 Terminal remission at 9 months (seizure free for last 9 months).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 5 50% responder rate at 4 weeks.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 6 Reported adverse effects (number of participants).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Clobazam versus carbamazepine, Outcome 7 Discontinued study medication due to adverse effects (number of participants).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Clobazam versus phenytoin, Outcome 1 Retention at 6 months.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Clobazam versus phenytoin, Outcome 2 Breakthrough seizure(s) during study period.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Clobazam versus phenytoin, Outcome 3 Discontinued study medication due to adverse effects.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Clobazam versus phenytoin, Outcome 4 Reported adverse effects.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Clobazam versus carbamazepine for focal or generalized seizures

Clobazam versus carbamazepine for focal or generalized seizures
Patient or population: people with focal or generalized seizures Settings: 15 Canadian pediatric epilepsy centers (Canadian Study Group 1998); single center, outpatient clinic from Cuba (Andrade 2009) Intervention: clobazam versus carbamazepine
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Carbamazepine	Clobazam
Time on allocated treatment (retention time)	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
Retention at 12 months Follow‐up: mean 12 months	Study population		RR 0.83 (0.61 to 1.12)	115 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2,3
	654 per 1000	543 per 1000 (399 to 732)


Seizure freedom at 4 weeks	720 per 1000	611 per 1000 (396 to 950)	RR 0.85 (0.55 to 1.32)	43 (1 study)	low^2,3,4
Seizure freedom 4‐40 weeks	760 per 1000	722 per 1000 (502 to 1034)	RR 0.95 (0.66 to 1.36)	43 (1 study)	low^2,3,4
50% responder rate	800 per 1000	944 per 1000 (752 to 1184)	RR 1.18 (0.94 to 1.48)	43 (1 study)	low^2,3,4
Adverse effects requiring withdrawal/discontinuation of study medication	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
¹Blinding of participants and personnel was not done in this open‐label study. This can potentially affect assessment of this outcome. Downgraded by 1. ²Only 1 study, hence no 'inconsistency' and no 'publication bias'. ³Wide CI, downgraded by 1. ⁴Allocation concealment not stated, which could potentially introduce selection bias. Blinding of participants and personnel was not done in this open‐label study.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Clobazam versus carbamazepine for focal or generalized seizures

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Summary of findings 2. Clobazam versus phenytoin for focal or generalized seizures

Clobazam versus phenytoin for focal or generalized seizures
Patient or population: drug‐naïve people with focal or generalized seizures with solitary cysticercus granuloma Settings: single Indian teaching hospital Intervention: clobazam Comparison: phenytoin
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control	Clobazam versus phenytoin
Time on allocated treatment (retention time)	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
Retention at 6 months (measured by the number of treatment failures in each group, which was defined as either breakthrough seizure or adverse effects requiring discontinuation or dose modification of study medication) Follow‐up: mean 6 months	Study population		RR 1.43 (1.08 to 1.9)	48 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2,3

	667 per 1000	953 per 1000 (720 to 1267)


Seizure freedom at 4 weeks	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
Seizure freedom 4‐40 weeks	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
50% responder rate	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported	Outcome not reported
Adverse effects requiring withdrawal/discontinuation of study medication	Study population		RR 0.10 (0.01 to 1.65)	48 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2,3
	222 per 1000	22 per 1000 (2 to 367)


The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
¹Allocation concealment not stated, which could potentially introduce selection bias. Blinding of participants and personnel was not done in this open‐label study. This can potentially affect assessment of 'adverse effects requiring withdrawal' and hence 'retention time'. Downgraded by 1. ²Only 1 study, thus no 'inconsistency' and no 'publication bias'. ³Wide confidence interval and small sample size. Downgraded by 1.

Summary of findings 2. Clobazam versus phenytoin for focal or generalized seizures

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 1. Clobazam versus carbamazepine

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Retention at 12 months Show forest plot	1	115	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.83 [0.61, 1.12]

2 Seizure freedom at 4 weeks Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.85 [0.55, 1.32]

3 Seizure freedom between weeks 4 and 40 Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.95 [0.66, 1.36]

4 Terminal remission at 9 months (seizure free for last 9 months) Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.23 [0.87, 1.72]

5 50% responder rate at 4 weeks Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.18 [0.94, 1.48]

6 Reported adverse effects (number of participants) Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.52 [0.16, 1.70]

7 Discontinued study medication due to adverse effects (number of participants) Show forest plot	1	43	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.46 [0.02, 10.60]

Comparison 1. Clobazam versus carbamazepine

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 2. Clobazam versus phenytoin

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Retention at 6 months Show forest plot	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.43 [1.08, 1.90]

2 Breakthrough seizure(s) during study period Show forest plot	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.43 [0.05, 3.83]

3 Discontinued study medication due to adverse effects Show forest plot	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.10 [0.01, 1.65]

4 Reported adverse effects Show forest plot	1	288	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.82 [0.32, 2.14]

4.1 Sedation	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.96 [0.40, 2.35]
4.2 Skin problems including allergic rash	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.18 [0.02, 1.38]
4.3 Tiredness	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.43 [0.10, 1.91]
4.4 Oral or gingival problems	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.21 [0.03, 1.65]
4.5 Headache	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	2.57 [0.73, 9.09]
4.6 Weight gain	1	48	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	11.45 [0.65, 201.60]

Comparison 2. Clobazam versus phenytoin

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Monoterapia con clobazam para las crisis focales o generalizadas

Información