Objective: This study investigated early, real‐world outcomes with cenobamate (CNB) in a large series of patients with highly drug‐resistant epilepsy within a Spanish Expanded Access Program (EAP).Method: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study in 14 hospitals. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, focal seizures, and EAP authorization. Data were sourced from patient clinical records. Primary effectiveness endpoints included reductions (100%, ≥90%, ≥75%, and ≥50%) or worsening in seizure frequency at 3‐, 6‐, and 12‐month visits and at the last visit. Safety endpoints included rates of adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation.Results: The study included 170 patients. At baseline, median epilepsy duration was 26 years and median number of seizures/month was 11.3. The median number of prior antiseizure medications (ASMs) and concomitant ASMs were 12 and 3, respectively. Mean CNB dosages/day were 176 mg, 200 mg, and 250 mg at 3, 6, and 12 months. Retention rates were 98.2%, 94.5%, and 87% at 3, 6, and 12 months. At last available visit, the rate of seizure freedom was 13.3%; ≥90%, ≥75%, and ≥50% responder rates were 27.9%, 45.5%, and 63%, respectively. There was a significant reduction in the number of seizures per month (mean: 44.6%; median: 66.7%) between baseline and the last visit (P < 0.001). Responses were maintained regardless of the number of prior or concomitant ASMs. The number of concomitant ASMs was reduced in 44.7% of patients. The cumulative percentage of patients with AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were 68.2% and 3.5% at 3 months, 74.1% and 4.1% at 6 months, and 74.1% and 4.1% at 12 months. The most frequent AEs were somnolence and dizziness.Significance: In this highly refractory population, CNB showed a high response regardless of prior and concomitant ASMs. AEs were frequent but mostly mild‐to‐moderate, and few led to discontinuation.

Objective This article estimates the incidence and fatality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and identifies potential risk factors for fatality in patients with active epilepsy. Methods This is a cross-sectional observational study of patients with active epilepsy and COVID-19. A control group was used to compare the cumulative incidence and case-fatality rate (CFR). The main outcomes of the study were cumulative incidence, defined as number of patients with active epilepsy and COVID-19 admitted to an emergency department divided by the total number of patients with epilepsy at risk, and CFR based on the number of deaths during the enrollment period. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate risk factors for fatality in patients with active epilepsy. Results Of the 1,537 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 21 (1.3%) had active epilepsy. The cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of COVID-19 in patients with epilepsy was higher (1.2% [0.6–2.4]) compared to the population without epilepsy (0.5% [0.5–0.5]). In reverse transcription PCR–positive patients, there were no significant differences in CFR in patients with active epilepsy compared to patients without epilepsy (33.3% vs 8.3%; p = 0.266). Of the 21 patients with active epilepsy, 5 (23%) died. In multivariate analysis, the factor associated with fatality in patients with active epilepsy was hypertension (odds ratio [OR] 2.8 [95% CI 1.3–21.6]). In another model, age (OR 1.0 [95% CI 1.0–1.1]) and epilepsy (OR 5.1 [95% CI 1.3–24.0]) were associated with fatality during hospitalization. Conclusion COVID-19 cumulative incidence was higher in patients with active epilepsy. Epilepsy was associated with fatality during hospitalization. Hypertension was associated with fatality in patients with epilepsy.

The discovery of biomarkers in rare diseases is of paramount importance to allow a better diagnosis, improve predictions of outcomes, and prompt the development of new treatments. Anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis is a rare autoimmune disorder associated with the presence of antibodies targeting the GluN1 subunit of the NMDAR. Since it was discovered in 2007, large efforts have been made towards the identification of clinical, paraclinical, and molecular biomarkers to better understand the immune mechanisms that govern the course of the disease as well as to define predictors of treatment response and long-term outcomes. However, most of these biomarkers are still in an exploratory phase, with only a few candidates reaching the final phases of the always-complex process of biomarker development, mainly due to the low incidence of the disease and its recent description. Clinical and paraclinical markers are probably the most widely explored in anti-NMDAR encephalitis, five of them combined in a clinical score to predict 1 year outcome. On the contrary, soluble molecules, such as persistent antibody positivity, antibody titers, cytokines, and other inflammatory mediators, have been proposed as biomarkers of clinical activity, inflammation, prognosis, and treatment response, but further studies are required for their clinical validation including larger and more homogenous cohorts of patients. Similarly, genetic susceptibility biomarkers are still in the exploratory phase and, therefore, weak conclusions can for now only be achieved. Thus, further studies are warranted to define biomarkers and unravel the underlying mechanisms driving rare diseases such as anti-NMDAR encephalitis. Future international collaborative studies with prospective designs that enable the enrollment of large cohorts will allow for the identification and validation of novel biomarkers for clinical decision-making.

A central role for neuroinflammation in epileptogenesis has recently been suggested by several investigations. This systematic review explores the role of inflammatory mediators in epileptogenesis, its association with seizure severity, and its correlation with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). The study analysed articles published in JCR journals from 2019 to 2024. The search strategy comprised the MESH, free terms of “Neuroinflammation”, and selective searches for the following single biomarkers that had previously been selected from the relevant literature: “High mobility group box 1/HMGB1”, “Toll-Like-Receptor 4/TLR-4”, “Interleukin-1/IL-1”, “Interleukin-6/IL-6”, “Transforming growth factor beta/TGF-β”, and “Tumour necrosis factor-alpha/TNF-α”. These queries were all combined with the MESH terms “Epileptogenesis” and “Epilepsy”. We found 243 articles related to epileptogenesis and neuroinflammation, with 356 articles from selective searches by biomarker type. After eliminating duplicates, 324 articles were evaluated, with 272 excluded and 55 evaluated by the authors. A total of 21 articles were included in the qualitative evaluation, including 18 case–control studies, 2 case series, and 1 prospective study. As conclusion, this systematic review provides acceptable support for five biomarkers, including TNF-α and some of its soluble receptors (sTNFr2), HMGB1, TLR-4, CCL2 and IL-33. Certain receptors, cytokines, and chemokines are examples of neuroinflammation-related biomarkers that may be crucial for the early diagnosis of refractory epilepsy or may be connected to the control of epileptic seizures. Their value will be better defined by future studies.