The randomness of seizure occurrence is conventionally a hallmark characteristic and often
ranked one of the most debilitating features of epilepsy.[1] This unpredictability necessitates a standing, chronic use of anti-seizure
medications (ASM). However, often we come across people with epilepsy (PWE) who claim that
they more often have seizures at a specific time of the day, or month and even a particular
month of the year. Currently, seizure diaries are the gold standard for monitoring seizure
frequency in clinical practice and clinical trials. Seizure diaries maintained meticulously
over a long time can potentially reveal seizure patterns, that is, seizure cycles, which
would otherwise go unnoticed. The ease of use and accessibility to smartphones and
internet-based diaries recently allowed a big data analysis of more than a million
self-reported seizures in over 10,000 individuals. A circadian pattern with higher seizure
frequency between 7 am and 10 am and an increased reportage during the
weekdays compared to the weekend was noted during a median reporting period of approximately
3 months.[2] However, self-reporting of seizures in PWE is suboptimal. Less than half of PWE
provide a precise seizure burden, and they miss a majority of objectively detected seizures.[3] Therefore, accurate analysis of seizure variations over time requires objectively
measured data, ideally collected over the years to avoid missing risk cycles that span
several days to months. In the absence of seizure forecasting devices, evidence for the
existence of seizure cycles would provide PWE a sense of seizure predictability, which
significantly reduces the epilepsy burden.[4]Technological advances in continuous intracranial EEG (ciEEG) acquisition by the NeuroVista
and responsive neurostimulation (RNS) System (NeuroPace Inc) have helped overcome the above
limitations of seizure diaries.[5,6] These 2
devices have tremendously advanced our knowledge about the temporal variations in interictal
epileptiform activity (IEA), their interplay with seizures, and the potential for seizure
forecasting. Now, Leguia et al have retrospectively analyzed ciEEG data from 222 PWE with
drug-resistant focal epilepsy, a majority (57.2%) being mesial temporal in origin, who
participated in the RNS clinical trial with the explicit goal of mapping out discrete
patterns of seizure cycles.[7] They analyzed seizures at 3 distinct time scales and measured the strength of seizure
clustering (effect size) by phase-locking value (PLV; ranging from 0 to 1 with PLV >0.4
suggesting strong phase clustering). The seizure data were accrued over a median of 5.9
years, with some PWE monitored for as long as 9.5 years. Circannual (around 1 year; also
known as “seasonal epilepsy”) seizure cycles were infrequent (24/194; 12%) and had weak
phase clustering (mean PLV of 0.17). In contrast, the circadian and multidien (ranging from
>2 days to several weeks) seizure cycles were highly prevalent and had similar, moderate
strength of phase clustering (mean PLV of 0.34). Circadian seizure cycles were noted in 89%
(76/85) PWE, similar to the prevalence reported in studies from NeuroVista and
SeizureTracker, a self-reported seizure diary.[8] Multidien seizure cycles were noted in 60% (112/186) of PWE. The multidien cycles did
not align with fixed period lengths such as the day of the week, month, or lunar phase,
highlighting the unlikely influence of external or environmental cues and their likely
governance by endogenous factors. It is tempting to consider the role of hormonal cycles in
modulating the multidien seizure cycles, like in catamenial epilepsy. However, the
prevalence of multidien seizure cycle is equal in men and women in the current and another
recent study.[8] Although hormones such as testosterone, cortisol, and aldosterone have multidien
fluctuations, we are far from understanding their interactions with the multidien seizure
cycles. In contrast, moving from systemic influences on seizure cycles to inherent brain
mechanisms provides tempting and concrete evidence for drivers of the multidien seizure
cycles in the form of interaction of IEAs and seizures.Prior studies that relied on short timescale EEG recordings have found an inconsistent
relationship between IEA and seizures. In contrast, a previous analysis of 37 PWE with RNS,
a subset of the current study population from the same research group, found that IEA show
clear circadian and multidien clustering in an individual PWE.[9] Extending these results, Leguia et al found that most multidien chronotype PWE had
electrographic and self-reported seizures clustered around the peak periodicities of the
IEA. These multidien seizure cycles could be divided into 5 distinct patterns occurring at
7, 15, 20, and 30-day periods with one group exhibiting irregular periodicity. A given PWE
could have one or more such multidien periodicity, independent of sex, or seizure focus. In
contrast, the circadian cycles of electrographic seizures peaked around 00:00, 03:00, 09:00,
14:00, and 18:00 hours but lacked phase association with IEA because the latter consistently
peaked during the night on a circadian timescale. Combined, this suggests that while the
sleep–wake cycle is the primary modulator of hourly IEA, an interplay between the sleep–wake
cycle and endogenous circadian rhythms modulate the circadian seizure chronotypes. The
current study relies on data from PWE undergoing neurostimulation. But similar seizure risk
cycles are noted using nonstimulation intracranial devices in PWE and animals, with the
latter showing that such seizure cycles are independent of ASM usage.[10]The most significant contribution of the study by Leguia et al is its validation of the
decades and centuries of clinical observation of the presence of seizure cycles, which turns
out is much more frequent than previously appreciated, especially at multidien timescale.
This information may advance the use of chronotherapy, that is, adjusting ASMs based on
temporal changes in seizure risk, currently used in nocturnal and catamenial epilepsies. The
results of the current study behoove us to consider chronotherapy for well-recognized,
individualized multidien cycles. Additionally, the yield of epilepsy monitoring unit
evaluation for diagnostics and presurgical evaluation can be improved by timing admissions
based on seizure risk cycles.As most PWE seem to have a relatively strong phase clustering of seizures at circadian and
multidien timescales, it is only logical and expected to question the predictability of an
upcoming seizure. The science of accurate seizure prediction has advanced by leaps and
bounds in the last decade. Researchers have already achieved above-chance accuracy in
warning of an imminent seizure in a majority of PWE analyzed using intracranial devices such
as NeuroVista and self-reported seizure diaries.[5,11] Incorporating information of
individualized seizure cycles promises to refine prediction accuracy further. The
forecasting of seizures by NeuroVista device improved significantly after accounting for
circadian chronotypes in PWE.[12] Now, the new found knowledge of the existence of multidien IEA and seizure cycles has
helped the research team led by Vikram Rao and Maxime Baud, the senior authors of the
currently discussed paper, to push the envelope in seizure prediction further. They recently
reported that predictive models that used multidien IEA information could forecast seizure
risk, better than chance, a day in advance in two-thirds of the validation cohort. In a few
PWE, the forecasting could be performed 3 days in advance.[13]Continued advancement in the field of seizure forecasting could herald the era of
individualized, dynamic ASM management. Although the current study provides a critical blow
to the idea of seizures being a random phenomenon, the ultimate benefit of these findings to
the wide epilepsy community cannot be realized until the discovery of noninvasive biomarkers
of the IEA and seizure cycles. Nonetheless, the current study in the era of breakneck
technological advances raises the hope of wearable technology in the near future that
monitors the dynamic and measurable biomarkers of the seizure cycle to provide actionable
seizure forecasting.
Authors: Philippa J Karoly; Daniel M Goldenholz; Dean R Freestone; Robert E Moss; David B Grayden; William H Theodore; Mark J Cook Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Daniel M Goldenholz; Shira R Goldenholz; Juan Romero; Rob Moss; Haoqi Sun; Brandon Westover Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Timothée Proix; Wilson Truccolo; Marc G Leguia; Thomas K Tcheng; David King-Stephens; Vikram R Rao; Maxime O Baud Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Mark J Cook; Terence J O'Brien; Samuel F Berkovic; Michael Murphy; Andrew Morokoff; Gavin Fabinyi; Wendyl D'Souza; Raju Yerra; John Archer; Lucas Litewka; Sean Hosking; Paul Lightfoot; Vanessa Ruedebusch; W Douglas Sheffield; David Snyder; Kent Leyde; David Himes Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Maxime O Baud; Jonathan K Kleen; Emily A Mirro; Jason C Andrechak; David King-Stephens; Edward F Chang; Vikram R Rao Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Victor Ferastraoaru; Daniel M Goldenholz; Sharon Chiang; Robert Moss; William H Theodore; Sheryl R Haut Journal: Epilepsia Open Date: 2018-07-04
Authors: Dileep R Nair; Kenneth D Laxer; Peter B Weber; Anthony M Murro; Yong D Park; Gregory L Barkley; Brien J Smith; Ryder P Gwinn; Michael J Doherty; Katherine H Noe; Richard S Zimmerman; Gregory K Bergey; William S Anderson; Christianne Heck; Charles Y Liu; Ricky W Lee; Toni Sadler; Robert B Duckrow; Lawrence J Hirsch; Robert E Wharen; William Tatum; Shraddha Srinivasan; Guy M McKhann; Mark A Agostini; Andreas V Alexopoulos; Barbara C Jobst; David W Roberts; Vicenta Salanova; Thomas C Witt; Sydney S Cash; Andrew J Cole; Gregory A Worrell; Brian N Lundstrom; Jonathan C Edwards; Jonathan J Halford; David C Spencer; Lia Ernst; Christopher T Skidmore; Michael R Sperling; Ian Miller; Eric B Geller; Michel J Berg; A James Fessler; Paul Rutecki; Alica M Goldman; Eli M Mizrahi; Robert E Gross; Donald C Shields; Theodore H Schwartz; Douglas R Labar; Nathan B Fountain; W Jeff Elias; Piotr W Olejniczak; Nicole R Villemarette-Pittman; Stephan Eisenschenk; Steven N Roper; Jane G Boggs; Tracy A Courtney; Felice T Sun; Cairn G Seale; Kathy L Miller; Tara L Skarpaas; Martha J Morrell Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 9.910