Cargando…

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a tool for individualized prediction of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk, we reanalyzed data from 1 cohort and 3 case–control studies undertaken from 1980 through 2005. METHODS: We entered 1,273 epilepsy cases (287 SUDEP, 986 controls) and 22 clinic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jha, Ashwani, Oh, Cheongeun, Hesdorffer, Dale, Diehl, Beate, Devore, Sasha, Brodie, Martin J., Tomson, Torbjörn, Sander, Josemir W., Walczak, Thaddeus S., Devinsky, Orrin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33910939
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000011849
_version_ 1783708510981193728
author Jha, Ashwani
Oh, Cheongeun
Hesdorffer, Dale
Diehl, Beate
Devore, Sasha
Brodie, Martin J.
Tomson, Torbjörn
Sander, Josemir W.
Walczak, Thaddeus S.
Devinsky, Orrin
author_facet Jha, Ashwani
Oh, Cheongeun
Hesdorffer, Dale
Diehl, Beate
Devore, Sasha
Brodie, Martin J.
Tomson, Torbjörn
Sander, Josemir W.
Walczak, Thaddeus S.
Devinsky, Orrin
author_sort Jha, Ashwani
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a tool for individualized prediction of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk, we reanalyzed data from 1 cohort and 3 case–control studies undertaken from 1980 through 2005. METHODS: We entered 1,273 epilepsy cases (287 SUDEP, 986 controls) and 22 clinical predictor variables into a Bayesian logistic regression model. RESULTS: Cross-validated individualized model predictions were superior to baseline models developed from only average population risk or from generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency (pairwise difference in leave-one-subject-out expected log posterior density = 35.9, SEM ± 12.5, and 22.9, SEM ± 11.0, respectively). The mean cross-validated (95% bootstrap confidence interval) area under the receiver operating curve was 0.71 (0.68–0.74) for our model vs 0.38 (0.33–0.42) and 0.63 (0.59–0.67) for the baseline average and generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency models, respectively. Model performance was weaker when applied to nonrepresented populations. Prognostic factors included generalized tonic-clonic and focal-onset seizure frequency, alcohol excess, younger age at epilepsy onset, and family history of epilepsy. Antiseizure medication adherence was associated with lower risk. CONCLUSIONS: Even when generalized to unseen data, model predictions are more accurate than population-based estimates of SUDEP. Our tool can enable risk-based stratification for biomarker discovery and interventional trials. With further validation in unrepresented populations, it may be suitable for routine individualized clinical decision-making. Clinicians should consider assessment of multiple risk factors, and not focus only on the frequency of convulsions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8205449
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82054492021-06-16 Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool Jha, Ashwani Oh, Cheongeun Hesdorffer, Dale Diehl, Beate Devore, Sasha Brodie, Martin J. Tomson, Torbjörn Sander, Josemir W. Walczak, Thaddeus S. Devinsky, Orrin Neurology Article OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a tool for individualized prediction of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk, we reanalyzed data from 1 cohort and 3 case–control studies undertaken from 1980 through 2005. METHODS: We entered 1,273 epilepsy cases (287 SUDEP, 986 controls) and 22 clinical predictor variables into a Bayesian logistic regression model. RESULTS: Cross-validated individualized model predictions were superior to baseline models developed from only average population risk or from generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency (pairwise difference in leave-one-subject-out expected log posterior density = 35.9, SEM ± 12.5, and 22.9, SEM ± 11.0, respectively). The mean cross-validated (95% bootstrap confidence interval) area under the receiver operating curve was 0.71 (0.68–0.74) for our model vs 0.38 (0.33–0.42) and 0.63 (0.59–0.67) for the baseline average and generalized tonic-clonic seizure frequency models, respectively. Model performance was weaker when applied to nonrepresented populations. Prognostic factors included generalized tonic-clonic and focal-onset seizure frequency, alcohol excess, younger age at epilepsy onset, and family history of epilepsy. Antiseizure medication adherence was associated with lower risk. CONCLUSIONS: Even when generalized to unseen data, model predictions are more accurate than population-based estimates of SUDEP. Our tool can enable risk-based stratification for biomarker discovery and interventional trials. With further validation in unrepresented populations, it may be suitable for routine individualized clinical decision-making. Clinicians should consider assessment of multiple risk factors, and not focus only on the frequency of convulsions. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8205449/ /pubmed/33910939 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000011849 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Article
Jha, Ashwani
Oh, Cheongeun
Hesdorffer, Dale
Diehl, Beate
Devore, Sasha
Brodie, Martin J.
Tomson, Torbjörn
Sander, Josemir W.
Walczak, Thaddeus S.
Devinsky, Orrin
Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title_full Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title_fullStr Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title_full_unstemmed Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title_short Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy: A Personalized Prediction Tool
title_sort sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: a personalized prediction tool
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33910939
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000011849
work_keys_str_mv AT jhaashwani suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT ohcheongeun suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT hesdorfferdale suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT diehlbeate suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT devoresasha suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT brodiemartinj suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT tomsontorbjorn suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT sanderjosemirw suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT walczakthaddeuss suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool
AT devinskyorrin suddenunexpecteddeathinepilepsyapersonalizedpredictiontool