Efficacy and tolerability of intravenous brivaracetam for status epilepticus: A systematic review

Real-life evidence about the use of intravenous brivaracetam in urgent seizures: The BRIV-IV study

PURPOSE

Urgent seizures are a medical emergency for which new therapies are still needed. This study evaluated the use of intravenous brivaracetam (IV-BRV) in an emergency setting in clinical practice.

METHODS

BRIV-IV was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study. It included patients ≥18 years old who were diagnosed with urgent seizures (including status epilepticus (SE), acute repetitive seizures, and high-risk seizures) and who were treated with IV-BRV according to clinical practice in 14 hospital centers. Information was extracted from clinical charts and included in an electronic database. Primary effectiveness endpoints included the rate of IV-BRV responder patients, the rate of patients with a sustained response without seizure relapse in 12 h, and the time between IV-BRV administration and clinical response. Primary safety endpoints were comprised the percentage of patients with adverse events and those with adverse events leading to discontinuation.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 57.7 ± 21.5 years old with a prior diagnosis of epilepsy for 57.1% of patients. The most frequent etiologies were brain tumor-related (18.1%) and vascular (11.2%) epilepsy. SE was diagnosed in 55.3% of patients. The median time from urgent seizure onset to IV treatment administration was 60.0 min (range: 15.0-360.0), and the median time from IV treatment to IV-BRV was 90.0 min (range: 30.0-2400.0). Regarding dosage, the mean bolus infusion was 163.0 ± 73.0 mg and the mean daily dosage was 195.0 ± 87.0 mg. A total of 77.6% of patients responded to IV-BRV (66.3% with SE vs. 91% other urgent seizures) with a median response time of 30.0 min (range: 10.0-60.0). A sustained response was achieved in 62.8% of patients. However, adverse events were reported in 14.7%, which were predominantly somnolence and fatigue, with 4.5% leading to discontinuation. Eighty-six percent of patients were discharged with oral brivaracetam.

CONCLUSION

IV-BRV in emergency settings was effective, and tolerability was good for most patients. However, a larger series is needed to confirm the outcomes.

Safe and effective implantation and use of vagal nerve stimulation in new-onset refractory status epilepticus in early pregnancy: a case report

Introduction

The management of new-onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE) in pregnancy may be complicated by anti-seizure medication (ASM) polytherapy-associated teratogenicity. We aim to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) in a pregnant patient presenting with NORSE.

Case description

A 30-year old female, at 5-weeks' gestation presented with drug-refractory myoclonic status epilepticus, responsive only to high levels of anesthetic agents. The severity of seizures did not allow extubation, and the patient remained ventilated and sedated. VNS was implanted 26 days after seizure onset. The immediate post-operative output was 0.25 mA, which was rapidly titrated up to 0.5 mA the next morning, and to 0.75 mA that afternoon. This was further increased to 1.0 mA on 3rd day post-operation, and to 1.25 mA 7 days post-op. Myoclonic jerks diminished significantly 7 days post-op, allowing extubation. Twenty days after VNS implantation, no myoclonic jerks were observed. There was also a notable neurological improvement including increased alertness and mobility, and ability to obey commands. Drug overdose was subsequently found to be the most likely etiology of her NORSE. An early pregnancy assessment 17 days after VNS implantation showed a normally sited pregnancy, normal fetal heart activity and crown-rump length. The patient remained seizure free, gained functional independence and delivered a premature but otherwise healthy baby at 33 weeks' gestation.

Conclusion

NORSE is challenging to manage, further compounded in pregnancy due to the teratogenicity of ASMs and ASM polytherapy. This is the first case-study to report the safe implantation and use of VNS during the first trimester of pregnancy for the management of NORSE.

Rapid intravenous loading of brivaracetam during invasive and non-invasive video-EEG monitoring

PURPOSE

The pharmacokinetics of Brivaracetam (BRV) and its ability to penetrate the blood-brain barrier quickly make it a suitable drug for emergencies. In this study, our aim was to investigate the tolerability, safety, and acute efficacy of rapid intravenous (IV) loading of BRV during invasive and non-invasive video-EEG monitoring in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy (DRFE).

METHODS

Eleven adult patients, six during stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) and five in scalp video-EEG evaluation, received a 10-minute IV infusion of BRV 100 mg after a period of total withdrawal from antiseizure medications (ASMs). The ictal and interictal EEG activity was assessed through visual and spectrographic analysis before and after intravenous BRV administration. Patients completed the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile (LAEP) scale to evaluate tolerability and adverse events.

RESULTS

Rapid BRV IV infusion was well tolerated in all patients. The mean LAEP values showed no significant differences (p = 0.40). Loading BRV resulted in a reduction in interictal activity in six patients. The mean seizure frequency significantly decreased five hours after BRV administration (a 79.2 % reduction across the entire group, p = 0.027). A significant change in spectral band analysis was observed ten minutes after BRV administration.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that rapid BRV IV infusion has a favorable safety profile and is effective in controlling seizure series in the short term. The electrophysiological changes observed ten minutes after the BRV load correlate with its effects on brain dynamics after blood-brain barrier diffusion.

Management of convulsive status epilepticus: recent updates

Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) is a medical emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, clinical trials and meta-analyses investigating medical treatment of SE have been published. Benzodiazepine is well known as the first-line treatment for SE. Recent evidence suggests the equivalence of intravenous fosphenytoin, valproate, and levetiracetam for treatment of established SE. There is lack of evidence regarding treatment for refractory SE. Intravenous midazolam is commonly used, and recent evidence supports the use of ketamine. Additional studies are needed to improve the management of convulsive SE.

Perampanel in achieving status epilepticus cessation: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency necessitating rapid seizure control to prevent long-term consequences. Perampanel (PER) is a novel selective, noncompetitive alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic (AMPA) receptor antagonist that demonstrated efficacy and safety in lithium-pilocarpine models of SE; however, data in humans are limited. This systematic review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of PER in patients with SE, RSE, and SRSE.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (accessed through PubMed), Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until May 30, 2021 to identify all human studies on PER for the treatment of SE of any type and etiology. An additional search was performed on DANS Easy Archive, in which OpenGrey data were stored, from inception until January 10, 2022 and conference proceedings by the International League Against Epilepsy from 2011 onward. The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the overall certainty of the body of evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (7 case reports, 9 case series, and 5 retrospective cohort studies) were included with a total of 369 cases of SE in 368 patients aged 11 months to 99 years, of which 56.2% were female. Seizures of the majority were refractory (n = 220), super refractory SE (n = 70), or either (n = 81) with prominent motor symptoms (n = 284) and are associated with a structural etiology (n = 218). The number of antiseizure medications and/or anesthetics used prior to PER ranged from 1 to 13. PER was administered in 324 cases and was initiated at a dose of 2-36 mg between 30 min to 59 days from SE onset. SE cessation ranged from 1 h to 4 weeks from PER initiation. A total of 119 cases (36.6%) were considered PER responders. According to the GRADE approach, there is very low certainty of evidence for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The real-world data of PER as a possible therapeutic option in SE of any type are increasing. However, there is very low certainty of evidence for its use and this requires further clinical studies to establish the appropriate timing, dosing, and titration that are efficacious and safe for SE cessation.

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Intravenous Brivaracetam Compared With Levetiracetam for the Treatment of Seizures in United States Hospitals

Background: Seizures are common among hospitalized patients. Levetiracetam (LEV), a synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligand, is a common intravenous (IV) anti-seizure medication option in hospitals. Brivaracetam (BRV), a selective SV2A ligand for treatment of focal seizures in patients ≥16 years, has greater binding affinity, higher lipophilicity, and faster brain entry than IV LEV. Differences in clinical outcomes and associated costs between IV BRV and IV LEV in treating hospitalized patients with seizure remain unknown.

Objectives: To compare the clinical outcomes, costs, and healthcare resource utilization between patients with seizure treated with IV BRV and those with IV LEV within hospital setting.

Design/Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using chargemaster data from 210 United States hospitals in Premier Healthcare Database. Adult patients (age ≥18 years) treated intravenously with LEV or BRV (with or without BZD) and a seizure discharge diagnosis between July 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019 were included. The cohorts were propensity score-matched 4:1 on baseline characteristics. Outcomes included intubation rates, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of stay (LOS), all-cause and seizure-related readmission, total hospitalization cost, and in-hospital mortality. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine the association between treatment and main outcomes adjusting for unbalanced confounders.

Results: A total of 450 patients were analyzed (IV LEV, n = 360 vs. IV BRV, n = 90). Patients treated with IV BRV had lower crude prevalence of ICU admission (14.4 vs. 24.2%, P < 0.05), 30-day all-cause readmission (1.1 vs. 6.4%, P = 0.06), seizure-related 30-day readmission (0 vs. 4.2%, P < 0.05), similar mean total hospitalization costs ($13,715 vs. $13,419, P = 0.91), intubation (0 vs. 1.1%, P = 0.59), and in-hospital mortality (4.4 vs. 3.9%, P = 0.77). The adjusted odds for ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [_aOR] = 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.31, 1.16; P = 0.13), 30-day all-cause readmission (_aOR = 0.17; 95% CI:0.02, 1.24; P = 0.08), and in-hospital mortality (_aOR = 1.15; 95% CI:0.37, 3.58, P = 0.81) were statistically similar between comparison groups.

Conclusion: The use of IV BRV may provide an alternative to IV LEV for management of seizures in hospital setting due to lower or comparable prevalence of ICU admission, intubation, and 30-day seizure-related readmission. Additional studies with greater statistical power are needed to confirm these findings.

The Integrated Effects of Brivaracetam, a Selective Analog of Levetiracetam, on Ionic Currents and Neuronal Excitability

Brivaracetam (BRV) is recognized as a novel third-generation antiepileptic drug approved for the treatment of epilepsy. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that it has potentially better efficacy and tolerability than its analog, Levetiracetam (LEV). This, however, cannot be explained by their common synaptic vesicle-binding mechanism. Whether BRV can affect different ionic currents and concert these effects to alter neuronal excitability remains unclear. With the aid of patch clamp technology, we found that BRV concentration dependently inhibited the depolarization-induced M-type K⁺ current (I_K(M)), decreased the delayed-rectifier K⁺ current (I_K(DR)), and decreased the hyperpolarization-activated cation current in GH3 neurons. However, it had a concentration-dependent inhibition on voltage-gated Na⁺ current (I_Na). Under an inside-out patch configuration, a bath application of BRV increased the open probability of large-conductance Ca²⁺-activated K⁺ channels. Furthermore, in mHippoE-14 hippocampal neurons, the whole-cell I_Na was effectively depressed by BRV. In simulated modeling of hippocampal neurons, BRV was observed to reduce the firing of the action potentials (APs) concurrently with decreases in the AP amplitude. In animal models, BRV ameliorated acute seizures in both OD-1 and lithium-pilocarpine epilepsy models. However, LEV had effects in the latter only. Collectively, our study demonstrated BRV’s multiple ionic mechanism in electrically excitable cells and a potential concerted effect on neuronal excitability and hyperexcitability disorders.

Insights into neurological dysfunction of critically ill COVID-19 patients

Novel coronavirus spread rapidly around the world infecting millions of people. It was thus declared a pandemic. This new virus damages the lungs. In the most severe cases, it leads to acute respiratory failure that requires intensive care treatment. However, many clinical reports have listed different neurological symptoms, leading to increased interest in the neurological involvement of COVID-19. Various pathophysiological mechanisms have been proposed to explain these neurological aspects. Direct viral invasion of the nervous system, systemic cytokine storm and severe hypoxemia are key factors in the development of symptoms. Critically ill patients present several additional risk factors for nervous system damage. Reasons for these include deep sedation and extended muscular paralysis, bed rest for several days, and the inability to receive proper physical rehabilitation. After ICU treatment, COVID-19 patients generally require an extensive rehabilitation program. However, distancing restrictions mean that in many cases physiotherapists are unable to enter ICUs, delaying the process of rehabilitation. The role of telemedicine should be considered as an adjunctive tool in the rehabilitation of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

A novel lipase from Aspergillus oryzae WZ007 catalyzed synthesis of brivaracetam intermediate and its enzymatic characterization

Brivaracetam is a structural derivative of the chiral drug levetiracetam and has been approved for the adjuvant treatment of partial epilepsy. As a new antiepileptic drug, it is widely used in a variety of epilepsy models. In this study, a novel lipase M16 derived from Aspergillus oryzae WZ007 was cloned, expressed, and used for chiral resolution. Lipase M16 has a high enantioselectivity to the racemic substrate (R,S)-methyl 2-propylsuccinate 4-tert-butyl ester, and the intermediate (R)-2-propylsuccinic acid 4-tert-butyl ester of brivaracetam was obtained efficiently. Under optimal conditions, the enantiomeric excess of substrate was up to 99.26%, and the e.e._p was 96.23%. The conversion and apparent E value were 50.63% and 342.48, respectively. This study suggests a new biocatalytic resolution via lipase M16 for preparing the brivaracetam chiral intermediate and its potential application in the pharmaceutical industry.