Efficacy and serum concentrations of perampanel for treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy in children, adolescents, and young adults: comparison of patients younger and older than 12 years

Effectiveness and safety of mono- and add-on perampanel in pediatric patients with epilepsy: Experience from a single-center retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of perampanel (PER) monotherapy (MT) or add-on therapy (AT) in Chinese children with epilepsy, as well as to evaluate the data from routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of PER for these pediatric patients.

METHODS

This retrospective and observational study was carried out on children with epilepsy (n = 340) from 2020 to 2022 at the Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. Outcome measures were the responder rate (50% or greater seizure reduction), long-term efficacy, and tolerability (number and types of adverse events) in MT and AT groups. Concentrations of plasma PER obtained from these patients, if available, were analyzed too.

RESULTS

A total of 279 patients achieved at least 3 months of therapy, and 58.1% responded to PER therapy. 53 of the responders were seizure-free (32.7%). The retention rate dropped from 88.0% at 3 months to 40.6% at 12 months after treatment. Patients with MT achieved better seizure control than those with AT (P < 0.001). Intriguingly, PER exerted a very weak effect on patients who took more than 2 ASMs or were diagnosed with drug-resistant epilepsy. There were no significant differences in tolerability between the two groups. In addition, 179 patients were routinely monitored for PER, and the trough concentrations (C0 ) for these patients ranged from 30.0 to 992.0 ng/mL. However, no significant difference in C0 was observed between responders and nonresponders (333 ng/mL vs 325.5 ng/mL, P = 0.264).

SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides effectiveness and safety data on Chinese children with epilepsy treated with PER either as MT or as AT. The efficacy of patients receiving MT was much better than cases administered with more than 2 ASMs or diagnosed with drug-resistant epilepsy. In addition, no association was found between the plasma PER concentration and efficacy or safety.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

The study reports the effects of perampanel on seizures and adverse effects in Chinese patients with epilepsy younger than 18 years. Seizures decreased in 58.1% of patients (responders); in a third of these responders, seizures stopped. After treatment was started, 88% of patients were still on perampanel at 3 months and 40.6% at 12 months. People who were treated with perampanel only were more likely to respond than those who received perampanel and other antiseizure treatments, although perampanel was tolerated equally well in these groups. Plasma perampanel concentration did not predict seizure response or adverse effects.

Role of Perampanel in the Management of Pediatric Epilepsies in Asia: Expert Opinion

Management of pediatric epilepsies poses unique challenges around diagnosis, treatment options, comorbidities, and the potential for these factors to interact with processes in the developing brain. In pediatric patients, broad-spectrum antiseizure medications (ASMs) with minimal potential for adverse events (AEs) and limited impact on cognition and behavior are preferred. Perampanel is a first-in-class ASM with broad-spectrum efficacy, a tolerable safety profile, minimal negative impact on cognitive function, and other features that make it a viable treatment option in this patient population. However, evidence and experience of its use in pediatric patients are less extensive than in adult patients. Experts in pediatric epilepsy across the region convened at a series of meetings to discuss the use of perampanel in pediatric patients, including dose optimization, AE prevention and management, and considerations in particular groups. This article summarizes key evidence for perampanel in the pediatric population and consolidates the experts' recommendations for using the ASM in managing pediatric epilepsies.

Initial therapeutic target attainment of perampanel in pediatric patients with epilepsy

Perampanel is a promising option for the treatment of pediatric epilepsy, but its plasma concentration varies among patients. This retrospective study aimed to investigate the initial target attainment of perampanel plasma concentration in pediatric patients with epilepsy in China. Inpatients admitted from January 2020 to December 2021 in a tertiary hospital were retrospectively included according to pre-set criteria. Demographic characteristics of patients and dosing strategies and therapeutic drug monitoring results were collected. A total of 137 pediatric patients (84 females and 53 males, aged from 0.6 to 16.4 years) were include for analysis. The perampanel concentrations varied greatly from 60 to 1,560 mg/L among patients, but 89.8% had suitable perampanel concentrations (100-1,000 ng/mL). The concomitant use of enzyme-inductive antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) was the only identified risk factor associated with target nonattainment (OR = 5.92, 95% confidence interval 1.68-20.9). Initial perampanel target attainment in pediatric patients is satisfactory. Routine therapeutic drug monitoring to achieved the suggested concentration range for these patients may be unnecessary, except for those receiving combined enzyme inductive AEDs.

Efficacy of perampanel in pediatric epilepsy with known and presumed genetic etiology

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of perampanel (PER) in pediatric epilepsy with specific etiologies has not been well established. Here, we investigated outcome and predictors of PER treatment in a pediatric cohort with known and presumed genetic etiology.

METHODS

We included pediatric patients with potential genetic epilepsy who received PER treatment and underwent whole-exome sequencing (WES) from January 2020 to September 2021. All patients were followed up for >12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients were included. Overall response rates were 51.6% and 49.6% at 6 months and 12 months, respectively. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in 27 multiple genes were detected among 58 patients (46.8%) by WES. On performing multivariate logistic regression analysis, only developmental delay (OR = 0.406, P = 0.042) was a negative predictor of treatment response. However, the seizure onset age, positive WES results, and number of ASMs before PER administration were not significantly. Thirteen carriers with variants in the SCN1A gene showed a better response compared to eight patients with other sodium channels (P = 0.007), and to the other 45 patients with positive WES results (OR = 7.124, 95% CI = 1.306-38.860, P = 0.023). Adverse events were only reported in 23 patients, the most common being emotional problems.

INTERPRETATION

PER is safe and efficacious in pediatric patients with known and presumed genetic etiology. The response rate is comparable to that reported in other pediatric populations, and lower among those with developmental delay. A gene-specific response to PER is found along with better efficacy links to pathogenic variants in the SCN1A gene.

Nose-to-brain delivery of perampanel formulated in a self-microemulsifying drug delivery system improves anticonvulsant and anxiolytic activity in mice

Perampanel (PER) is a potent third-generation antiepileptic drug only available for oral administration. Additionally, PER has shown potential in managing epilepsy comorbidities such as anxiety. Previously, we demonstrated that the intranasal (IN) administration of PER, loaded in a self-microemulsifying drug delivery system (SMEDDS), improved brain-targeting and exposure in mice. Herein, we investigated PER brain biodistribution, its anticonvulsant and anxiolytic effects, and its potential olfactory and neuromotor toxicity after IN administration to mice (1 mg/kg). PER showed a rostral-caudal brain biodistribution pattern when administered intranasally. At short times post-nasal dosing, high PER concentrations were found in olfactory bulbs (olfactory bulbs/plasma ratios of 1.266 ± 0.183 and 0.181 ± 0.027 after IN and intravenous administrations, respectively), suggesting that a fraction of the drug directly reaches brain through the olfactory pathway. In maximal electroshock seizure test, IN PER protected 60% of mice against seizure development, a substantially higher value than the 20% protected after receiving oral PER. . PER also demonstrated anxiolytic effects in open field and elevated plus maze tests. Buried food-seeking test showed no signs of olfactory toxicity. Neuromotor impairment was found in rotarod and open field tests at the times of PER maximum concentrations after IN and oral administrations. Nevertheless, neuromotor performance was improved after repeated administrations. Compared with IN vehicle, PER IN administration decreased brain levels of L-glutamate (0.91 ± 0.13 mg/mL vs 0.64 ± 0.12 mg/mL) and nitric oxide (100 ± 15.62% vs 56.62 ± 4.95%), without interfering in GABA levels. Altogether, these results suggest that the IN PER delivery through the developed SMEDDS can be a safe and promising alternative to oral treatment, which support the design of clinical studies to evaluate the IN PER delivery to treat epilepsy and neurological-related conditions as anxiety.

Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel in patients with seizures in real-world clinical practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: The aim of this study was to systematically review the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used as add-on treatment or monotherapy in patients with epilepsy aged 12 years and older in routine clinical practice.

Methods: Electronic and clinical trials databases were searched for observational studies of PER published up to 1 March 2022. The outcomes of interest were responder rates, adverse effects (AEs), and withdrawal rates. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the potential factors that might affect the efficacy and safety of PER usage.

Results: A total of 56 studies, which included 10,688 patients, were enrolled. The results showed that after 3, 6, and 12 months of PER treatment, the pooled 50% responder rates in patients with epilepsy were 50.0% (95% CI: 0.41–0.60), 44.0% (95% CI: 0.38–0.50), and 39.0% (95% CI: 0.31–0.48), respectively, and the pooled seizure-free rates were 24.0% (95% CI: 0.17–0.32), 21.0% (95% CI: 0.17–0.25), and 20.0% (95% CI: 0.16–0.24), respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed that the efficacy of PER could be affected by the way in which PER is administrated. Patients in the groups where PER was used as the first add-on, primary monotherapy, or combined with non–enzyme-inducing AEDs (non-EIAEDs) displayed a high 50% responder rate and seizure-free rate when compared with those in the late add-on, conversion therapy, or combined with the EIAEDs groups, respectively. Furthermore, the incidences of AEs at 3, 6, and 12 months of PER treatment were 46% (95% CI: 0.38–0.55), 52.0% (95% CI: 0.43–0.60), and 46.0% (95% CI: 0.40–0.52), respectively. The withdrawal rates due to AEs were 8.0% (95% CI: 0.06–0.11), 16.0% (95% CI: 0.13–0.20), and 16% (95% CI: 0.11–0.21) at 3, 6, and 12 months of PER treatment, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed a higher withdrawal rate in the rapid (30%, 95% CI: 0.22–0.38) than in the slow (12%, 95% CI: 0.06–0.18) titration group.

Conclusion: Altogether, PER was effective and could be fairly tolerated in both short-term and long-term usage in patients with epilepsy in routine clinical practice. Furthermore, PER appeared to be more effective when PER was used as the first add-on, monotherapy, or concomitant with non-EIAEDs.

Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022384532.

Effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients (aged 4-12 years) with refractory epilepsy: An observational study

Information on the effects of perampanel in Chinese children ≤12 years of age with refractory epilepsy is limited; thus, we conducted an observational study to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in this pediatric population. In this study, we reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients aged 4 to 12 years with refractory epilepsy who were admitted to Children's Hospital of Soochow University and prescribed perampanel between January 2020 and January 2021. Effectiveness of perampanel was measured by 50% responder rates, seizure-freedom rates, and retention rates for up to 48 weeks. Adverse events were monitored and recorded throughout the study. A total of 34 patients (male, n = 15) who exhibited refractory epilepsy were included in this study, and 64.71% of patients had focal-onset seizures combined with generalized epilepsy. The mean (± standard deviation) age of patients was 7.21 (± 2.12) years, with a mean (± standard deviation) age at seizure onset of 4.57 (± 2.59) years. After the addition of perampanel, the 50% responder rates at 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks were 37.50% (12/32), 43.75% (14/32), 53.13% (17/32), 59.38% (19/32), 59.38% (19/32), and 62.07% (18/29). Two patients withdrew from perampanel treatment due to adverse events in the first 2 weeks. Adverse events were reported by 44.12% (15/34) of patients, and the retention rates at 36 and 48 weeks were 94.12% (32/34) and 85.29% (29/34), respectively. Overall, perampanel exhibited good effectiveness, safety, and tolerability in the treatment of pediatric patients (aged 4-12 years) with refractory epilepsy. These findings suggest that personalized treatment and better baseline seizure control may increase the responder rate and retention rate of perampanel.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of perampanel in children diagnosed with epilepsy: Focus on influencing factors on the plasma concentration-to-dose ratio

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) therapy and to optimize a specific plasma reference range for PER in children. Another major aim was to evaluate the potential determinators of PER concentration.

METHODS

Concentrations obtained from 80 children were analyzed for routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) between 2021 and 2022. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of these patients and assessed the efficacy at 3 months after treatment initiation. Trough concentration-to-dose ratio (C₀ /Dose ratio) of PER was compared among patients on various potential influencing factors.

RESULTS

A 3-month PER therapy produced a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency in 58.8% of patients. Twelve patients reported at least one adverse effect (AE), mainly dizziness. The monitoring data showed that the median C₀ was 325.5 ng/mL. Under maintenance dosages, approximately 75% of the C₀ values were 180.0-610.0 ng/mL. The C₀ /Dose ratio in patients aged 1 to <4 was significantly lower by twofold than in those aged 4 to ≤12 years (P = 0.001). Enzyme-inducing ASMs (EIASMs) decreased the C₀ /Dose ratio of PER by 25.9% (P = 0.165). In addition, seizure frequency reduction in responders was achieved at a median PER C₀ value of 357 ng/mL, which was similar to the value of 314 ng/mL found in nonresponders (P = 0.288). No significant difference was found in PER C₀ values between patients with and without AEs (P = 0.082).

SIGNIFICANCE

In this study, PER treatment showed acceptable efficacy and tolerance in Chinese children with epilepsy. Contributing factors like age to variable C₀ /Dose ratios were identified, and complex PER-ASMs interactions were observed. Notably, the reference range, that is, 180.0-610.0 ng/mL, for routine PER monitoring may be more applicable for them. Routine TDM should be considered a positive attempt to manage the effectiveness and safety of PER.

Intranasal delivery of lipid-based nanosystems as a promising approach for brain targeting of the new-generation antiepileptic drug perampanel

Perampanel (PER), a new-generation antiepileptic drug effective against different types of seizures, has already demonstrated a potential in status epilepticus therapy. Considering the growing interest of intranasal (IN) administration for nose-to-brain delivery, PER could be envisioned as a good candidate for this route, especially if formulated in a lipid-based nanosystem. With that purpose, a hydrophobic formulation (FO1.2) and a self-microemulsifying drug delivery system (SMEDDS) (FH5) loaded with PER were developed and characterized. Following PER IN administration (1 mg/kg) to mice, its pharmacokinetics was characterized and compared with intravenous and oral routes. Histopathological toxicity was also examined after a 7-day repeated dose study. FH5 homogeneously formed nanodroplets upon dispersion (20.07 ± 0.03 nm), showing a sustained in vitro PER release profile up to 4 h. By IN route, PER brain delivery was more extensive with FH5 (C_max and AUC of 52.32 ng/g and 190.35 ng.h/g for FO1.2; 93.87 ng/g and 257.75 ng.h/g for FH5). Maximum brain concentration and total brain exposure were higher than those obtained after oral dosage, with maximum PER concentrations reached significantly faster than post-oral administration (15 min vs 2 h). An improvement in PER plasmatic concentration was also obtained, demonstrated by high relative bioavailability values (134.1% for FH5 and 107.8% for FO1.2). PER absolute plasma bioavailability after IN delivery was 55.5% for FH5 and 44.6% for FO1.2, ensuring a somewhat improved targeting of PER to the brain by the IN route compared to the IV route. No signs of toxicity were found by histopathologic evaluation. Results suggest that IN administration of PER might be a feasible and safe approach for acute and chronic epilepsy management, especially using delivery systems as SMEDDS.

Young children with multidrug-resistant epilepsy and vagus nerve stimulation responding to perampanel: A case report

BACKGROUND

Perampanel (PER), a third-generation antiepileptic drug, is a selective and noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor antagonist, and has been approved for the treatment of adults and adolescents with focal epilepsy. However, there are only a few studies about the efficacy and tolerability of PER in young children with multidrug-resistant epilepsy. In this case, we aimed to share our clinical experience in this group.

CASE SUMMARY

A 4-year-old boy without perinatal asphyxia and familial history of epilepsy began to have ictal seizures from age 14 mo, with jerky movement of four limbs and head nodding. Abnormal multifocal discharge and background activity were recorded through electroencephalography, and no pathogenic mutation was found in the whole exome sequencing for the patient and his parents. He had received valproate, levetiracetam, topiramate, oxcarbazepine, clonazepam and lacosamide sequentially at different times, but he still had frequent seizures even after vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) implantation. He was diagnosed with idiopathic multidrug-resistant epilepsy. However, his seizure frequency was significantly reduced after PER administration in a dose-dependent manner, and better cognitive behavior was observed. In addition, the adverse reactions of anger and aggression also appeared.

CONCLUSION

PER is effective as add-on therapy for young children with multidrug-resistant epilepsy who have previously undergone VNS implantation.

Vagus Nerve Stimulation and Seizure Outcomes in Pediatric Refractory Epilepsy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We synthesized evidence for effectiveness of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) as adjuvant therapy in pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) by obtaining pooled estimates for seizure outcomes and analyzing their determinants.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2019 for original research on VNS in pediatric (≤18 years of age) epilepsy. The primary outcome was 50% responder rate (50% RR), the proportion of patients with ≥50% seizure reduction, at the last reported follow-up. Other outcomes included a 50% RR and proportion of seizure-free patients at additional reported time points. A random-effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood estimation was performed to obtain pooled effect estimates. Meta-regression using multiple linear models was performed to obtain determinants of seizure outcomes and sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 101 studies were included. The pooled prevalence estimates for a 50% RR and seizure freedom at last follow-up (mean 2.54 years) were 56.4% (95% confidence intervals [CIs] 52.4, 60.4) and 11.6% (95% CI 9.6, 13.9), respectively. Fewer antiseizure medications (ASMs) tried before VNS and later age at onset of seizures were associated with better seizure outcomes following VNS implantation. An effect of sex distribution of studies on long-term outcomes and a potential publication bias for short-term outcomes were also observed.

CONCLUSION

Pooled evidence supports possible effectiveness of VNS in pediatric DRE, although complete seizure freedom is less common. Early referral (fewer trials of ASMs) may be a modifiable factor for desirable seizure outcomes with VNS from a clinical perspective.

Exploring the Evidence for Broad-Spectrum Effectiveness of Perampanel: A Systematic Review of Clinical Data in Generalised Seizures

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of adjunctive perampanel has not been systematically assessed in seizure types other than its approved indications of focal seizures and primary generalised tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) in idiopathic generalised epilepsies (IGEs).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify and review available evidence on outcomes with perampanel in generalised seizures and epilepsies to examine its potential as a broad-spectrum anti-seizure medication.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases of publications, clinical trials, and conference abstracts were searched up to August 2020 to identify studies reporting seizure or safety outcomes in patients of any age, with any type of epilepsy-associated generalised seizures treated with perampanel. Data extracted from selected records were tabulated by seizure type and syndrome, and analysed qualitatively (PROSPERO protocol CRD42020201564).

RESULTS

Ninety-one reports met inclusion criteria and were selected: 15 reports of 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), 8 reports of 4 non-randomised interventional studies, 37 reports of observational studies, 21 case reports and 10 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Extracted data included 359 patients with PGTCS of any aetiology, 251 with myoclonic seizures, 112 with absence seizures, 50 with tonic seizures and 32 children with epileptic spasms. The most commonly reported epilepsy type was IGE (N = 378) and the most common syndromes were juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (N = 92), progressive myoclonic epilepsies (N = 59) and absence epilepsies (N = 43). The RCT provided Class I evidence of the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel for PGTCS in patients aged ≥ 12 years with IGE. Data from other studies provides weaker (observational) evidence of its effectiveness in multiple generalised seizure types, including myoclonic, absence and tonic seizures. There were no patterns suggesting seizure worsening or aggravation in any seizure or epilepsy type.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies suggest the potential of perampanel as a broad-spectrum antiseizure medication. Much of the available data, however, come from non-randomised, non-controlled studies and are open to high risk of bias. Further studies are warranted to provide more robust evidence.

Pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and clinical effectiveness of perampanel in Japanese patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the influence of concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on serum perampanel concentration and to correlate the concentration with clinical response and tolerability.

METHODS

A total of 4224 serum samples were obtained from 763 pediatric, adolescent, and adult patients for routine therapeutic drug monitoring. We compared the extent of enzyme induction between cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) inducer regimens and built a statistical model to estimate the serum perampanel concentration that considered use of CYP3A4 inducers and inhibitors. To assess the tolerability and clinical effectiveness of perampanel therapy, we used the nested case-control approach. The case group was matched with the control group for age, sex, epilepsy type, and perampanel exposure periods.

RESULTS

Concomitant use of the inducers phenytoin, carbamazepine, and phenobarbital dose-dependently reduced the perampanel concentration by 51 %, 67 %, and 37 %, respectively. The estimate model showed a good correlation between the predicted and measured concentrations (r² = 0.62, p < 0.001). In 206 patients, the seizure reduction from baseline was > 50 % and the median perampanel concentration was 351 ng/mL (interquartile range, 191-603 ng/mL). Adverse events, such as somnolence, dizziness, and irritability, were experienced by 185 patients. The responder odds ratio was 5.1-fold higher in patients with a serum concentration > 600 ng/mL than in those with a serum concentration < 200 ng/mL; however, the former group had a 7.9-fold higher incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic drug monitoring is clinically useful to assess drug interactions between perampanel and CYP3A4 inducers and inhibitors. We recommend that the target concentration of perampanel is initially set at 200-600 ng/mL. Serum concentrations > 600 ng/mL were associated with greater anti-seizure effects but had an increased risk of adverse events.