The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patterns of treatment response in newly diagnosed epilepsy
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To delineate the temporal patterns of outcome and to determine the probability of seizure freedom with successive antiepileptic drug regimens in newly diagnosed epilepsy. METHODS: Patients in whom epilepsy was diagnosed and the first antiepileptic drug prescribed between July 1, 1982, and April 1, 2006, were followed up until March 31, 2008. Outcomes were categorized into 4 patterns: (A) early and sustained seizure freedom; (B) delayed but sustained seizure freedom; (C) fluctuation between periods of seizure freedom and relapse; and (D) seizure freedom never attained. Probability of seizure freedom with successive drug regimens was compared. Seizure freedom was defined as no seizures for ≥1 year. RESULTS: A total of 1,098 patients were included (median age 32 years, range 9-93). At the last clinic visit, 749 (68%) patients were seizure-free, 678 (62%) on monotherapy. Outcome pattern A was observed in 408 (37%), pattern B in 246 (22%), pattern C in 172 (16%), and pattern D in 272 (25%) patients. There was a higher probability of seizure freedom in patients receiving 1 compared to 2 drug regimens, and 2 compared to 3 regimens (p < 0.001). The difference was greater among patients with symptomatic or cryptogenic than with idiopathic epilepsy. Less than 2% of patients became seizure-free on subsequent regimens but a few did so on their sixth or seventh regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy had a constant course which could usually be predicted early. The chance of seizure freedom declined with successive drug regimens, most markedly from the first to the third and among patients with localization-related epilepsies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Early Identification of Refractory Epilepsy
Kwan, P., & Brodie, M. J. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200002033420503 · Cited by 5,204
Self-citation
Cited by
Beghi, E. (2020) · Neuroepidemiology · doi:10.1159/000503831 · Cited by 1,452
Drug development in the era of precision medicine
Dugger, S. A., Platt, A., & Goldstein, D. B. (2018) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd.2017.226 · Cited by 493
Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Multiple Hypotheses, Few Answers
Tang, F., Hartz, A. M. S., & Bauer, B. (2017) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2017.00301 · Cited by 482
Drug treatment of epilepsy in adults
Schmidt, D., & Schachter, S. C. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g254 · Cited by 323
Antisense Reduction of Tau in Adult Mice Protects against Seizures
DeVos, S. L., Goncharoff, D. K., Chen, G., Kebodeaux, C. S., Yamada, K., Stewart, F. R., Schuler, D. R., Maloney, S. E., Wozniak, D. F., Rigo, F., et al. (2013) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2107-13.2013 · Cited by 311
Metadata
- Authors
- Brodie, M. J., Barry, S. J. E., Bamagous, G. A., Norrie, J. D., & Kwan, P.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2012-05-15
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 1548-1554
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2090276138
- Cited by
- 931
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 32.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patterns of treatment response in newly diagnosed epilepsy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182563b19
- The paper
- Brodie, M. J., Barry, S. J. E., Bamagous, G. A., Norrie, J. D., & Kwan, P. (2012). Patterns of treatment response in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3182563b19
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.