Abstract
Objective The periodicity of seizures, ranging from circadian to circannual cycles, is increasingly recognized as a significant opportunity to advance epilepsy management. Current methods for detecting seizure cycles rely on intrusive techniques or specialised biomarkers, limiting their accessibility.
Approach This study evaluates a non-invasive seizure cycle detection method using seizure diaries and compares its accuracy with cycles identified from intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) seizures and interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs). Using data from a previously published first in-human iEEG device trial (n=10), we analysed seizure cycles identified through diary reports, iEEG seizures and IEDs. Cycle similarities across diary reports, iEEG seizures and iEDs were evaluated at periods of 1 to 45 days using spectral coherence, accuracy, precision and recall scores.
Main results Spectral coherence of the raw signals averaged over frequencies and participants indicated moderately similar frequency components between diary seizures/day and iEEG seizures/day (Mean=0.62, SD=0.61,95% CI [0.59, 0.95]). In contrast, there was low coherence between diary seizures/day and IEDs/day (Mean=0.17, SD=0.17, 95% CI [0.18, 0.18]) and iEEG seizures/day and IEDs/day (Mean=0.18, SD=0.18, 95% CI [0.17, 0.19]). Mean accuracy, precision and recall of iEEG seizure cycles from diary seizure cycles was significantly higher than chance across all participants (Accuracy: Mean=0.95, SD=0.02; Precision: Mean=0.56, SD=0.19; Recall: Mean=0.56, SD=0.19). Accuracy, precision and recall scores between seizures cycles using diary or iEEG compared to IED cycles did not perform above chance, on average. Recall scores were compared across good diary reporters, under-reporters and over-reporters, with recall scores generally performing better in good reporters and under-reporters compared to over-reporters.
Significance These findings suggest that iEEG seizure cycles can be accurately identified with diary reports, even in both under- and over-reporters. This approach offers a practical, accessible alternative for monitoring seizure cycles compared to more invasive methods.
Key point
Seizure cycles identified from seizure diaries can identify the same cycle periods to those detected by intracranial electroencephalography with high accuracy.
Seizure under and overreporting reduces the accuracy of seizure cycle detection from diaries, which is dependent on the frequency of seizure self-reporting inaccuracies.
Competing Interest Statement
M.J.C. is an employee and has financial interests in Epi-Minder a company that is developing a sub-scalp EEG device and Seer Medical a company that undertakes ambulatory EEG monitoring and launched an epilepsy health management mobile application. E.N. is an employee and has financial interest in Seer Medical. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interests.
Funding Statement
A.R. receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship from the University of Melbourne.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Human Research Ethics Committees of Austin Health, the Royal Melbourne Hospital and St. Vincent's Hospital gave ethical approval for the original study and subsequent analysis, which includes this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Co-author(s) details: Rachel E. Stirling: rachel.stirling{at}unimelb.edu.au, Samuel Håkansson: samuel.haakansson{at}hest.ethz.ch, Philippa Karoly: karoly.p{at}unimelb.edu.au, Ewan Nurse: ewan{at}seermedical.com, Alan Lai: alan.lai{at}unimelb.edu.au, David B. Grayden: grayden{at}unimelb.edu.au, Mark J. Cook: markcook{at}unimelb.edu.au, Andre Peterson: peterson{at}unimelb.edu.au