4.5 Article

Issues related to development of new antiseizure treatments

Journal

EPILEPSIA
Volume 54, Issue -, Pages 24-34

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/epi.12296

Keywords

Antiseizure drug; Pharmacoresistant epilepsy; Animal models of epilepsy

Funding

  1. NIH (NINDS) [271201100029C]
  2. Desitin
  3. Eisai Ltd
  4. GlaxoSmithKline
  5. UCB Pharma
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  7. Epilepsy Research UK
  8. European Commission
  9. National Institute of Health Research
  10. Wellcome Trust
  11. UCB
  12. Bial
  13. Eisai Inc.
  14. V(sic)astraG(sic)otaland Region
  15. NIH [NICHD F32HD070836-01, NINDS NS-20253, NS-43209, NS-45911, NS-78333]
  16. Department of Defense
  17. CURE
  18. Heffer Family Medical Foundation
  19. Segal Family Foundation
  20. FDA
  21. American Epilepsy Society
  22. Epilepsy Foundation
  23. Neuren Pharmaceuticals
  24. Eisai
  25. NINDS [NS072094, NS079202, NS077582]
  26. Epilepsy Therapy Project
  27. Gilead Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This report represents a summary of the discussions led by the antiseizure treatment working group of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE)/American Epilepsy Society (AES) Working Groups joint meeting in London (London Meeting). Wereview here what is currently known about the pharmacologic characteristics of current models of refractory seizures, both for adult and pediatric epilepsy. In addition, we address how the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)-funded Anticonvulsant Screening Program (ASP) is evolving to incorporate appropriate animal models in the search for molecules that might be sufficiently novel to warrant further pharmacologic development. Wealso briefly address what we believe is necessary, going forward, to achieve the goal of stopping seizures in all patients, with a call to arms for funding agencies, the pharmaceutical industry, and basic researchers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available