IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting seizures in pregnant women with epilepsy: Development and external validation of a prognostic model

Author

Listed:
  • John Allotey
  • Borja M Fernandez-Felix
  • Javier Zamora
  • Ngawai Moss
  • Manny Bagary
  • Andrew Kelso
  • Rehan Khan
  • Joris A M van der Post
  • Ben W Mol
  • Alexander M Pirie
  • Dougall McCorry
  • Khalid S Khan
  • Shakila Thangaratinam

Abstract

Background: Seizures are the main cause of maternal death in women with epilepsy, but there are no tools for predicting seizures in pregnancy. We set out to develop and validate a prognostic model, using information collected during the antenatal booking visit, to predict seizure risk at any time in pregnancy and until 6 weeks postpartum in women with epilepsy on antiepileptic drugs. Methods and findings: We used datasets of a prospective cohort study (EMPiRE) of 527 pregnant women with epilepsy on medication recruited from 50 hospitals in the UK (4 November 2011–17 August 2014). The model development cohort comprised 399 women whose antiepileptic drug doses were adjusted based on clinical features only; the validation cohort comprised 128 women whose drug dose adjustments were informed by serum drug levels. The outcome was epileptic (non-eclamptic) seizure captured using diary records. We fitted the model using LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) regression, and reported the performance using C-statistic (scale 0–1, values > 0.5 show discrimination) and calibration slope (scale 0–1, values near 1 show accuracy) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We determined the net benefit (a weighted sum of true positive and false positive classifications) of using the model, with various probability thresholds, to aid clinicians in making individualised decisions regarding, for example, referral to tertiary care, frequency and intensity of monitoring, and changes in antiepileptic medication. Seizures occurred in 183 women (46%, 183/399) in the model development cohort and in 57 women (45%, 57/128) in the validation cohort. The model included age at first seizure, baseline seizure classification, history of mental health disorder or learning difficulty, occurrence of tonic-clonic and non-tonic-clonic seizures in the 3 months before pregnancy, previous admission to hospital for seizures during pregnancy, and baseline dose of lamotrigine and levetiracetam. The C-statistic was 0.79 (95% CI 0.75, 0.84). On external validation, the model showed good performance (C-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.66, 0.85; calibration slope 0.93, 95% CI 0.44, 1.41) but with imprecise estimates. The EMPiRE model showed the highest net proportional benefit for predicted probability thresholds between 12% and 99%. Limitations of this study include the varied gestational ages of women at recruitment, retrospective patient recall of seizure history, potential variations in seizure classification, the small number of events in the validation cohort, and the clinical utility restricted to decision-making thresholds above 12%. The model findings may not be generalisable to low- and middle-income countries, or when information on all predictors is not available. Conclusions: The EMPiRE model showed good performance in predicting the risk of seizures in pregnant women with epilepsy who are prescribed antiepileptic drugs. Integration of the tool within the antenatal booking visit, deployed as a simple nomogram, can help to optimise care in women with epilepsy. John Allotey and colleagues describe their model for predicting seizures in pregnant women with epilepsy.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • John Allotey & Borja M Fernandez-Felix & Javier Zamora & Ngawai Moss & Manny Bagary & Andrew Kelso & Rehan Khan & Joris A M van der Post & Ben W Mol & Alexander M Pirie & Dougall McCorry & Khalid S Kh, 2019. "Predicting seizures in pregnant women with epilepsy: Development and external validation of a prognostic model," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002802
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002802
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002802&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002802?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002802. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.