Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (32)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Walker, M. C.
Right arrow Articles by Sander, J. W. A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Walker, M. C.
Right arrow Articles by Sander, J. W. A. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Brain, Vol. 125, No. 9, 1937-1950, September 2002
© 2002 Guarantors of Brain


Review Article

Disease modification in partial epilepsy

M. C. Walker1, H. S. White2 and J. W. A. S. Sander1

1 Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK and 2 Anticonvulsant Screening Project, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Utah, College of Pharmacy, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

Correspondence to: J. Sander, Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, UK E-mail: l.sander{at}ion.ucl.ac.uk

With the growth in antiepileptic drug treatment, the question arises as to what extent we are merely treating the symptom (i.e. the seizures) rather than the underlying disease process (i.e. epileptogenesis). Epilepto genicity can be considered as the process whereby structural and functional changes occur following an insult that in some cases result in epilepsy. Epilepto genicity also describes some of the changes and processes that contribute to the progression observed in some epilepsies. These processes have been modelled in animals mostly by the kindling model of epilepsy, in which repetition of subconvulsive stimuli results in a progressive epileptic state and eventually leads to spontaneous seizures. However, it is not clear that kindling has a human correlate, so models in which an initial insult (status epilepticus, hyperthermia, hypoxia, trauma) is followed by the development of lowered seizure threshold and, in some instances, spontaneous seizures have been used. These models seem to support the ‘second hit’ hypothesis, in which there is an initial insult resulting in lowered seizure threshold, and then a later insult, the ‘second hit’, that results in the expression of epilepsy. These models also support the concept of a latent period during which there could be targeted therapies to prevent the epileptogenic process. Although the occurrence of neuronal damage is one such target, neuronal damage is not necessary for epileptogenesis, and other mechanisms are at play. At the present time, it is not known whether targeted therapies may also affect compensatory processes, such as brain repair. Clearly, this would be a potential risk of such strategies. Epidemiological evidence and trials indicate that our present antiepileptic drugs are not effective in preventing epileptogenesis; antiepileptic drugs were, however, not designed for this purpose. Data from animal experiments suggest that treatment of non-convulsive status epilepticus following specific insults may prevent epileptogenesis. The relevance of this for the human condition remains uncertain, but non-convulsive status epilepticus is probably an under-recognized and probably under-treated condition. Perhaps one of the most salutary findings has been the observation of decreased childhood epilepsy with improved neonatal care. This highlights the importance of medical care at the time of an insult, and of prevention of the insults. This review discusses the data that support the concepts underlying epileptogenesis and the model systems that are presumed to reflect the human condition. Particular attention is paid to the potential for interrupting the processes underlying epileptogenesis.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
BrainHome page
M. Sillanpaa and D. Schmidt
Natural history of treated childhood-onset epilepsy: prospective, long-term population-based study
Brain, March 1, 2006; 129(3): 617 - 624.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br Med BullHome page
A. R. C. Kelso and H. R. Cock
Advances in epilepsy
Br. Med. Bull., April 21, 2005; 72(1): 135 - 148.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NeurologyHome page
M. Mula, M. R. Trimble, A. Yuen, R. S.N. Liu, and J. W.A.S. Sander
Psychiatric adverse events during levetiracetam therapy
Neurology, September 9, 2003; 61(5): 704 - 706.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Mol GenetHome page
Y. Yang, B. J. Beyer, J. F. Otto, T. P. O'Brien, V. A. Letts, H. S. White, and W. N. Frankel
Spontaneous deletion of epilepsy gene orthologs in a mutant mouse with a low electroconvulsive threshold
Hum. Mol. Genet., May 1, 2003; 12(9): 975 - 984.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NeurologyHome page
H. S. White
Animal models of epileptogenesis
Neurology, November 12, 2002; 59(90095): S7 - 14.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.