Comparison of efficacy of low glycemic index treatment and modified Atkins diet among children with drug-resistant epilepsy: A randomized non-inferiority trial.

IF 6.6 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Epilepsia Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1111/epi.18292
Vaishakh Anand, Sheffali Gulati, Anuja Agarwala, Gautam Kamila, Aakash Mahesan, Vishal Sondhi, Kanak L Gupta, Biswaroop Chakrabarty, Prashant Jauhari, Prateek Kumar Panda, Ravindra Mohan Pandey
{"title":"Comparison of efficacy of low glycemic index treatment and modified Atkins diet among children with drug-resistant epilepsy: A randomized non-inferiority trial.","authors":"Vaishakh Anand, Sheffali Gulati, Anuja Agarwala, Gautam Kamila, Aakash Mahesan, Vishal Sondhi, Kanak L Gupta, Biswaroop Chakrabarty, Prashant Jauhari, Prateek Kumar Panda, Ravindra Mohan Pandey","doi":"10.1111/epi.18292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The ketogenic diet has been the mainstay of treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). No comparative trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of the two less strict ketogenic diets: modified Atkins diet (MAD) and low glycemic index treatment (LGIT). This study assesses the non-inferiority of LGIT compared with MAD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an open-label randomized non-inferiority trial. Children with DRE were randomized to receive either MAD or LGIT as an add-on to anti-seizure medications. The primary endpoint was percentage seizure reduction at the end of 24 weeks of therapy compared to the baseline. The non-inferiority margin of -15% was predefined to calculate the sample size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-one children were enrolled and randomized to receive either MAD (n = 45) or LGIT (n = 46). Intention-to-treat analysis done at the end of 24 weeks of therapy showed a mean (±standard deviation [SD]) percentage seizure reduction of 60.7% (±41.3) in the MAD sub-group and 57% (±39.4) in the LGIT sub-group (p = 0.664). The absolute difference between the means of percentage seizure reduction was -3.7 (-20.5 to 13.2) and crossed the non-inferiority margin. Ten children in the MAD group and nine children in the LGIT group did not complete 24 weeks of therapy. Adverse effects were comparable between the arms (MAD, 66.6%; LGIT, 50%), although serious adverse effects were higher in the MAD arm. The most common adverse effect was decreased acceptance (24.2%) followed by decreased satiety (9.9%), vomiting (9.9%), weight loss (5.5%), constipation (5.5%), and diarrhea (3.3%). Dyslipidemia was more commonly seen in the MAD group (MAD, six; LGIT, one). One death in the LGIT arm was unrelated to therapy. Although there was no statistically significant difference in improvement in cognition, behavior, and quality of life scales, improvement was noted from baseline scores.</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>LGIT may be non-inferior to MAD in the treatment of children with DRE with the advantage of increased acceptance and fewer adverse effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":11768,"journal":{"name":"Epilepsia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epilepsia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epi.18292","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The ketogenic diet has been the mainstay of treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). No comparative trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of the two less strict ketogenic diets: modified Atkins diet (MAD) and low glycemic index treatment (LGIT). This study assesses the non-inferiority of LGIT compared with MAD.

Methods: This was an open-label randomized non-inferiority trial. Children with DRE were randomized to receive either MAD or LGIT as an add-on to anti-seizure medications. The primary endpoint was percentage seizure reduction at the end of 24 weeks of therapy compared to the baseline. The non-inferiority margin of -15% was predefined to calculate the sample size.

Results: Ninety-one children were enrolled and randomized to receive either MAD (n = 45) or LGIT (n = 46). Intention-to-treat analysis done at the end of 24 weeks of therapy showed a mean (±standard deviation [SD]) percentage seizure reduction of 60.7% (±41.3) in the MAD sub-group and 57% (±39.4) in the LGIT sub-group (p = 0.664). The absolute difference between the means of percentage seizure reduction was -3.7 (-20.5 to 13.2) and crossed the non-inferiority margin. Ten children in the MAD group and nine children in the LGIT group did not complete 24 weeks of therapy. Adverse effects were comparable between the arms (MAD, 66.6%; LGIT, 50%), although serious adverse effects were higher in the MAD arm. The most common adverse effect was decreased acceptance (24.2%) followed by decreased satiety (9.9%), vomiting (9.9%), weight loss (5.5%), constipation (5.5%), and diarrhea (3.3%). Dyslipidemia was more commonly seen in the MAD group (MAD, six; LGIT, one). One death in the LGIT arm was unrelated to therapy. Although there was no statistically significant difference in improvement in cognition, behavior, and quality of life scales, improvement was noted from baseline scores.

Significance: LGIT may be non-inferior to MAD in the treatment of children with DRE with the advantage of increased acceptance and fewer adverse effects.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Epilepsia
Epilepsia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
10.70%
发文量
319
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Epilepsia is the leading, authoritative source for innovative clinical and basic science research for all aspects of epilepsy and seizures. In addition, Epilepsia publishes critical reviews, opinion pieces, and guidelines that foster understanding and aim to improve the diagnosis and treatment of people with seizures and epilepsy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信