Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 289

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Topiramate placebo-controlled dose-ranging trial in refractory partial epilepsy using 200-, 400-, and 600-mg daily dosages

Faught, E., Wilder, B. J., Ramsay, R. E., Reife, R. A., Kramer, L. D., Pledger, G. W., Karim, R. M.·1996·Neurology

Abstract

We conducted a randomized double-blind comparison of three doses of the novel antiepileptic drug (AED) topiramate (200, 400, and 600 mg/day) and placebo as adjunctive therapy in patients with refractory partial onset epilepsy receiving one or two other AEDs at therapeutic concentrations. A total of 181 patients completed the 12-week baseline phase and were randomized to double-blind therapy. Median percent reductions from baseline in average monthly seizure rate, the principal efficacy evaluation, were 13% for placebo, 30% for topiramate 200 mg/day, 48% for topiramate 400 mg/day, and 45% for topiramate 600 mg/day. For the seizure rate comparison of active drug to placebo p values were: topiramate 200 mg/day, p = 0.051; topiramate 400 mg/day, p = 0.007; topiramate 600 mg/day, p < 0.001. Percent responders (>or=to50% reduction in seizure rates) were 18% for placebo, 27% for topiramate 200 mg/day, 47% for topiramate 400 mg/day (p = 0.013), and 46% for topiramate 600 mg/day (p = 0.027). A significant (p = 0.003) reduction in secondarily generalized seizures compared with placebo treatment was also documented with topiramate. Topiramate plasma concentrations were closely related to dosage, and there were no significant interactions between topiramate and other AEDs. The minimal effective dose of topiramate in this study population was approximately 200 mg/day. Mild or moderate CNS symptoms were the primary treatment-emergent adverse events, but treatment-limiting adverse events occurred in only 9% of patients given topiramate compared with 7% given placebo. Results of this initial well-controlled study in patients indicate that topiramate is a very promising new AED. NEUROLOGY 1996;46: 1684-1690

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/wnl.46.6.1684

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 289

Metadata

Authors
Faught, E., Wilder, B. J., Ramsay, R. E., Reife, R. A., Kramer, L. D., Pledger, G. W., & Karim, R. M.
Venue
Neurology
Published
1996-06
Volume
46
Issue
6
Pages
1684-1690
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W4253837878
Cited by
289
References
0
FWCI
16.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Topiramate placebo-controlled dose-ranging trial in refractory partial epilepsy using 200-, 400-, and 600-mg daily dosages. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.46.6.1684
The paper
Faught, E., Wilder, B. J., Ramsay, R. E., Reife, R. A., Kramer, L. D., Pledger, G. W., & Karim, R. M. (1996). Topiramate placebo-controlled dose-ranging trial in refractory partial epilepsy using 200-, 400-, and 600-mg daily dosages. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.46.6.1684

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.