Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Feb 28;2013(2):CD003277.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003277.pub3.

Treatment of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome

Eleanor C Hancock  1 , J Helen Cross
Affiliations

Treatment of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome

Eleanor C Hancock et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

Abstract

Background: The Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is an age-specific disorder, characterised by epileptic seizures, a characteristic electroencephalogram (EEG), psychomotor delay and behavioural disorder. It occurs more frequently in males and onset is usually before the age of eight years, with a peak between three and five years of age. Late cases occurring in adolescence and early adulthood have rarely been reported. Language is frequently affected, with both slowness in ideation and expression in addition to difficulties of motor dysfunction. Severe behavioural disorders (e.g. hyperactivity, aggressiveness and autistic tendencies) and personality disorders are nearly always present. There is also a tendency for psychosis to develop with time. The long-term prognosis is poor; although the epilepsy often improves, complete seizure freedom is rare and conversely the mental and psychiatric disorders tend to worsen with time.

Objectives: To compare the effects of pharmaceutical therapies used to treat LGS in terms of control of seizures and adverse effects. Many people who suffer from this syndrome will already be receiving other antiepileptic medications at the time of their entry into a trial. However, for the purpose of this review we will only consider the effect of the single therapeutic agent being trialled (often as add-on therapy).

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialized Register (18 October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library Issue 10 of 12, 2012) and MEDLINE (1946 to October week 2, 2012). We also searched EMBASE (1980 to March 2003). We imposed no language restrictions. We searched the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) register (18 October 2012) for ongoing trials and in addition, we contacted pharmaceutical companies and colleagues in the field to seek any unpublished or ongoing studies.

Selection criteria: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the administration of drug therapy to patients with LGS.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data. Analysis included assessing study quality, as well as statistical analysis of the effects on overall seizure rates and effects on specific seizure types (e.g. drop attacks), adverse effects and mortality.

Main results: We found nine RCTs, but were unable to perform any meta-analysis, because each trial looked at different populations, different therapies and considered different outcomes.

Authors' conclusions: The optimum treatment for LGS remains uncertain and no study to date has shown any one drug to be highly efficacious; rufinamide, lamotrigine, topiramate and felbamate may be helpful as add-on therapy, clobazam may be helpful for drop seizures. Until further research has been undertaken, clinicians will need to continue to consider each patient individually, taking into account the potential benefit of each therapy weighed against the risk of adverse effects.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Cinromide versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of participants in whom there was complete cessation of seizures.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Cinromide versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of participants in whom there was 75% to 100% reduction in total number of seizures.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Cinromide versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number of participants in whom there was 50% to 74% reduction in total number of seizures.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Cinromide versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number of participants in whom there was 25% to 49% reduction in total number of seizures.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Cinromide versus placebo, Outcome 5 Number of participants in whom there was 0% to 24% reduction in total number of seizures.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Felbamate versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of participants in whom there was complete cessation of all seizures.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Felbamate versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of participants in whom there was complete cessation of atonic seizures.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Felbamate versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number of participants in whom there was complete cessation of tonic‐clonic seizures.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 1 Number of participants in whom there was 75% to 100% reduction in absence seizures.
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 2 Number of participants in whom there was 50% to 74% reduction in absence seizures.
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 3 Number of participants in whom there was 25% to 49% reduction in absence seizures.
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 4 Number of participants in whom there was 0% to 24% reduction in absence seizures.
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 5 Number of participants in whom there was 75% to 100% reduction in tonic seizures.
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 6 Number of participants in whom there was 50% to 74% reduction in tonic seizures.
3.7
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 7 Number of participants in whom there was 25% to 49% reduction in tonic seizures.
3.8
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 8 Number of participants in whom there was 0% to 24% reduction in tonic seizures.
3.9
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 9 Number of participants in whom there was 75% to 100% reduction in atonic seizures.
3.10
3.10. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 10 Number of participants in whom there was 50% to 74% reduction in atonic seizures.
3.11
3.11. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 11 Number of participants in whom there was 25% to 49% reduction in atonic seizures.
3.12
3.12. Analysis
Comparison 3 Low‐dose TRH DN‐1417 versus high‐dose TRH DN‐1417, Outcome 12 Number of participants in whom there was 0% to 24% reduction in atonic seizures.
4.1
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of participants in whom there was more than a 50% reduction in drop attacks.
4.2
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of participants in whom there was a 26% to 49% reduction in drop attacks.
4.3
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number of participants in whom there was either less than 25% reduction or an increase in the number of drop attacks.
4.4
4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number of participants in whom there was more than a 50% reduction in tonic‐clonic seizures.
4.5
4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 5 Number of participants in whom there was a 26% to 49% reduction in tonic‐clonic seizures.
4.6
4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 6 Number of participants in whom there was either less than 25% reduction or an increase in the number of tonic‐clonic seizures.
4.7
4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 7 Number of participants in whom there was more than a 50% reduction in all seizures.
4.8
4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 8 Number of participants in whom there was a 26% to 49% reduction in all seizures.
4.9
4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4 Lamotrigine versus placebo, Outcome 9 No of patients in whom there was either less than 25% reduction or an increase in all seizures.
5.1
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 Topiramate versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of participants who had complete cessation of drop attacks.
5.2
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5 Topiramate versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of participants in whom there was a 75% to 100% reduction in the number of drop attacks.
5.3
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5 Topiramate versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number of participants in whom there was a 50% to 74% reduction in the number of drop attacks.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Anonymous 1989 {published data only}
    1. Anonymous. Double‐blind, placebo‐controlled evaluation of cinromide in patients with the Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. The Group for the Evaluation of Cinromide in the Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. Epilepsia 1989;30(4):422‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Anonymous 1993 {published data only}
    1. Anonymous. Efficacy of felbamate in childhood epileptic encephalopathy (Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome). The Felbamate Study Group in Lennox Gastaut syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 1993;328(1):29‐33. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Conry 2009 {published data only}
    1. Conry J, Ng Y, Paolicchi JM, Kernitsky L, Mitchell WG, Ritter FJ, et al. Clobazam in the treatment of Lennox Gastaut syndrome. Epilepsia 2009;50(5):1158‐66. - PubMed
Conry 2010 {published data only}
    1. Conry J, Ng Y, Drummond R, Stolle J, Sagar S. Efficacy and safety of clobazam in the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox Gastaut syndrome: results of a phase III trial (abstract no: 1.283). Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. December 3‐7, 2010, San Antonio, TX. www.aesnet.org/go/publications/aes‐abstracts/abstract‐search/mode/displa... (accessed 28 April 2012).
Eriksson 1998 {published data only}
    1. Eriksson AS, Nergardh A, Hoppu K. The efficacy of lamotrigine in children and adolescents with refractory generalised epilepsy: a randomised, double blind, crossover study. Epilepsia 1998;39(5):495‐501. - PubMed
Glauser 2008 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Glauser T, Kluger G, Sachdeo R, Krauss G, Perdomo C, Arroyo S. Rufinamide for generalized seizures associated with Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. Neurology 2008;70(21):1950‐8. - PubMed
Glauser 2009 {published data only}
    1. Glauser T, Santana B V, Wang W, Narurkar M. Early and sustained response to rufinamide as adjunctive therapy for seizures associated with Lennox Gastaut syndrome. Epilepsia 2009;50 (suppl 11):261.
Inanaga 1989 {published data only}
    1. Inanaga K, Kumashiro H, Fukyama Y, Ohtahara S, Shirouzu M. Clinical study of oral administration of DN‐1417, a TRH analog, in patients with intractable epilepsy. Epilepsia 1989;30(4):438‐45. [MEDLINE: ; 1989194763] - PubMed
Motte 1997 {published data only}
    1. Motte J, Trevathan E, Arvidsson JF, Barrera MN, Mullens EL, Manasco P. Lamotrigine for generalised seizures associated with the Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. Lamictal Lennox‐Gastaut Study Group. New England Journal of Medicine 1997;337(25):1807‐12. [MEDLINE: ; 1998002039] - PubMed
Sachdeo 1999 {published data only}
    1. Sachdeo RC, Glauser TA, Ritter F, Reife R, Lim P, Pledger G. A double‐blind, randomized trial of topiramate in Kennox‐Gastaut syndrome. Topiramate YL Study Group. Neurology 1999;52(9):1882‐7. [MEDLINE: ; 1999198021] - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Jensen 1994 {published data only}
    1. Jensen PK. Felbamate in the treatment of Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. Epilepsia 1994;35 (suppl)(5):S54‐7. [MEDLINE: ; 1994265566] - PubMed
Vajda 1985 {published data only}
    1. Vajda FJ, Bladin PF, Parsons BJ. Clinical experience with clobazam: a new 1,5 benzodiazepine in the treatment of refractory epilepsy. Clinical and Experimental Neurology 1985;21:177‐82. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Vassella 1978 {published data only}
    1. Vassella F, Rudeberg A, Silva V, Pavlincova E. Double‐blind study on the anticonvulsive effect of phenobarbital and valproate in the Lennox syndrome [Doppletblind‐Untersuchung uber die antikonvulsive Wirkung von Phenobarbital und Valproat beim Lennox‐Syndrom]. Schweizerische Medizinische Wochenschrift 1978;108(19):713‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed

Additional references

Aicardi 1996
    1. Aicardi J. Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. In: Wallace editor(s). Epilepsy in Children. First Edition. London: Chapman & Hall Medical, 1996:249‐62.
Arzimanoglou 2009
    1. Arzimanoglou A, French J, Blume WT, Cross J, Ernst JP, Feucht M, et al. Lennox Gastaut Syndrome: a consensus approach on diagnosis, assessment, management and trial methodology. Lancet Neurology 2009;8(1):82‐93. - PubMed
Beaumanoir 2005
    1. Beaumanoir A, Blume W. The Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome. In: Roger J, Bureau M, Dravet C, Tassinari C, Wolf P editor(s). Epileptic Syndromes in Infancy, Childhood and Adolescence. 4th Edition. London: John Libby Eurotext, 2005:125‐48.
Berg 2011
    1. Berg A, Scheffer I. New concepts in classification of the epilepsies: entering the 21st century. Epilepsia 2011;52(6):1058‐61. - PubMed
European Union 2006
    1. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Council and of the Council of 12th December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92, Directive 2001/20/EC, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. www.emea.europa.eu/htms/human/paediatrics/regulation.htm 2006.
Lefebvre 2009
    1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 (updated September 2009). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Patwardhan 2000
    1. Patwardhan RV, Strong B, Bebin EM, Mathisen J, Grabb PA. Efficacy of vagal nerve stimulation in children with medically refractory epilepsy. Neurosurgery 2000;47:1353‐7. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

Supplementary concepts