10. Pairwise and network meta‐analysis results ‐ Time to 12‐month remission of seizures for individuals with partial seizures.
| Comparisiona | Direct evidence (pairwise meta‐analysis) | Direct plus indirect evidence (network meta‐analysis) | ||||
| Number of studies | Number of participants | HR (95% CI)b,c | I² statisticd | Direct evidence (%)e | HR (95% CI)b,c | |
| CBZ vs PHB | 4 | 525 | 1.41 (1.04 to 1.91) | 0% | 56.1% | 1.02 (0.76 to 1.35) |
| CBZ vs PHT | 3 | 430 | 1.00 (0.76 to 1.32) | 54.8% | 18.6% | 1.03 (0.85 to 1.25) |
| CBZ vs VPS | 5 | 816 | 1.03 (0.85 to 1.25) | 46.4% | 27.6% | 1.05 (0.89 to 1.25) |
| CBZ vs LTG | 2 | 891 | 1.02 (0.69 to 1.50) | 0% | 17.5% | 1.16 (0.98 to 1.37) |
| CBZ vs OXC | 2 | 555 | 1.13 (0.62 to 2.05) | 0% | 21% | 0.98 (0.78 to 1.25) |
| CBZ vs TPM | 2 | 925 | 0.94 (0.48 to 1.83) | 0% | 7.2% | 1.08 (0.92 to 1.27) |
| CBZ vs GBP | 1 | 651 | 0.61 (0.06 to 5.82) | NA | 10.5% | 1.20 (0.99 to 1.47) |
| CBZ vs LEV | 3 | 1567 | 1.08 (0.81 to 1.42) | 60.8% | 14.2% | 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69) |
| CBZ vs ZNS | 1 | 582 | 1.05 (0.85 to 1.30) | NA | 100% | 1.05 (0.81 to 1.35) |
| PHB vs PHT | 4 | 465 | 0.80 (0.59 to 1.10) | 0% | 0.2% | 1.01 (0.75 to 1.37) |
| PHB vs VPS | 2 | 80 | 0.85 (0.51 to 1.40) | 4.4% | 15.6% | 1.04 (0.75 to 1.43) |
| PHB vs LTG | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.14 (0.82 to 1.59) | |||
| PHB vs OXC | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.96 (0.67 to 1.41) | |||
| PHB vs TPM | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.06 (0.76 to 1.47) | |||
| PHB vs GBP | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.19 (0.83 to 1.69) | |||
| PHB vs LEV | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.33 (0.93 to 1.92) | |||
| PHB vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.03 (0.70 to 1.52) | |||
| PHT vs VPS | 4 | 245 | 1.04 (0.78 to 1.40) | 0% | 41.6% | 1.03 (0.80 to 1.32) |
| PHT vs LTG | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.12 (0.88 to 1.45) | |||
| PHT vs OXC | 2 | 318 | 1.21 (0.73 to 2.03) | 0% | 29.9% | 0.95 (0.70 to 1.30) |
| PHT vs TPM | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.05 (0.81 to 1.35) | |||
| PHT vs GBP | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.18 (0.88 to 1.56) | |||
| PHT vs LEV | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.32 (0.98 to 1.75) | |||
| PHT vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.02 (0.74 to 1.41) | |||
| VPS vs LTG | 3 | 221 | 1.37 (1.07 to 1.77) | 0% | 39.9% | 1.10 (0.88 to 1.37) |
| VPS vs OXC | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.93 (0.70 to 1.23) | |||
| VPS vs TPM | 2 | 111 | 1.11 (0.87 to 1.40) | 0% | 67.8% | 1.02 (0.80 to 1.30) |
| VPS vs GBP | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.14 (0.88 to 1.47) | |||
| VPS vs LEV | 1 | 190 | 1.14 (0.84 to 1.55) | NA | 34.7% | 1.28 (0.97 to 1.67) |
| VPS vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.99 (0.74 to 1.35) | |||
| LTG vs OXC | 1 | 499 | 1.49 (0.33 to 6.67) | NA | 2.8% | 0.85 (0.66 to 1.09) |
| LTG vs TPM | 1 | 636 | 0.98 (0.29 to 3.25) | NA | 2.5% | 0.93 (0.75 to 1.15) |
| LTG vs GBP | 1 | 647 | 0.74 (0.08 to 6.58) | NA | 10.1% | 1.04 (0.84 to 1.30) |
| LTG vs LEV | 1 | 240 | 1.02 (0.70 to 1.49) | NA | 26.6% | 1.16 (0.93 to 1.47) |
| LTG vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.91 (0.67 to 1.22) | |||
| OXC vs TPM | 1 | 487 | 0.66 (0.17 to 2.47) | NA | 3.7% | 1.10 (0.83 to 1.45) |
| OXC vs GBP | 1 | 498 | 0.49 (0.05 to 4.74) | NA | 9.8% | 1.23 (0.95 to 1.59) |
| OXC vs LEV | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.37 (1.05 to 1.79) | |||
| OXC vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.06 (0.76 to 1.52) | |||
| TPM vs GBP | 1 | 635 | 0.75 (0.09 to 6.00) | NA | 11.2% | 1.12 (0.87 to 1.45) |
| TPM vs LEV | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.25 (0.96 to 1.64) | |||
| TPM vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.97 (0.72 to 1.32) | |||
| GBP vs LEV | No direct evidence | 0% | 1.12 (0.88 to 1.43) | |||
| GBP vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.87 (0.63 to 1.20) | |||
| LEV vs ZNS | No direct evidence | 0% | 0.78 (0.56 to 1.09) | |||
CBZ: carbamazepine; CI: confidence interval; GBP: gabapentin; HR: hazard ratio; LEV: levetiracetam; LTG: lamotrigine; OXC: oxcarbazepine; PHB: phenobarbitone; PHT: phenytoin; TPM: topiramate; VPS: sodium valproate; ZNS: zonisamide
aOrder of drugs in the table: most commonly used drug first (carbamazepine), then drugs are ordered approximately by the date they were licenced as a monotherapy treatment (oldest first). bHRs and 95% CIs are calculated from fixed‐effect analyses (pairwise and network meta‐analysis); where substantial heterogeneity was present (I2 > 50%), random‐effects meta‐analysis was also conducted, see Effects of interventions for further details. cNote that HR < 1 indicates an advantage to the second drug in the comparison; results highlighted in bold are statistically significant. dNA ‐ heterogeneity is not applicable as only one study contributed direct evidence. eDirect evidence (%) ‐ proportion of the estimate contributed by direct evidence.