Background

Topiramate is a newer broad‐spectrum antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2015, and last updated in 2019.

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in the treatment of JME.

Search methods

For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) on 26 August 2021, and MEDLINE (Ovid 1946 to 26 August 2021). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi‐randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy.

Selection criteria

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events (AEs).

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross‐checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality of the studies.

Main results

We included three studies with a total of 83 participants. For efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or greater reduction in primarily generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (PGTCS), compared with participants in the placebo group (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.08 to 14.75; 1 study, 22 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). There were no significant differences between topiramate and valproate for participants responding with a 50% or greater reduction in myoclonic seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.15; one study, 23 participants; very‐low certainty evidence) or in PGTCS (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.21; one study, 16 participants, very‐low certainty evidence), or participants becoming seizure‐free (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.11; one study, 27 participants; very‐low certainty evidence). Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEs associated with topiramate as moderate to severe, while we ranked 59% of AEs linked to valproate as severe complaints (2 studies, 61 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group.

Overall we judged all three studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and at unclear risk of reporting bias. We judged the studies to be at low to unclear risk of bias for the remaining domains (selection bias, performance bias, detection bias and other bias). We judged the overall certainty of the evidence for the outcomes as very low using the GRADE approach.

Authors’ conclusions

We have found no new studies since the last version of this review was published in 2019. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but has no clear benefits over valproate in terms of efficacy. Well‐designed, double‐blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.