Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel and levetiracetam as first add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy: A retrospective single center study

Psychiatric and behavioral concerns of perampanel with concomitant levetiracetam in children with epilepsy

PURPOSE

Perampanel (PER) is expanding the therapeutic scope for pediatric epilepsy owing to its efficacy and favorable safety profile. However, concerns about psychiatric and behavioral adverse events (PBAEs) in combination therapy with levetiracetam (LEV) continue to contribute to hesitation in its prescription. We investigated the risk profiles for PBAEs when adding PER to pediatric epilepsy treatment and analyzed the differences according to the presence of concomitant LEV.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of children aged 4-18 years with epilepsy who were prescribed PER as adjunctive therapy from March 2016 to February 2023. We compared the occurrence and management of PBAEs between the PER without LEV and PER with LEV groups. The risk factors for PBAEs were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients (53 boys and 41 girls) were included in this study. The median age of total patients at the time of adding PER was 14.9 years (12.3-16.4 years), and 53 patients (56.4 %) had concomitant LEV. Forty-seven PBAEs occurred in 34 patients (36.2 %), with no significant differences depending on whether concomitant LEV is present or not. The most common PBAEs were aggression (14.9 %), irritability (9.6 %), affect lability (7.4 %), and acute psychosis (6.4 %). PBAEs occurred at a lower dosage (2-6 mg/day) in 70.6 % of the patients. In addition, 73.5 % of patients with PBAEs continued PER treatment by follow-up observation or by reducing the PER dosage. No risk factors, such as the presence of concomitant LEV or lamotrigine, any comorbid conditions, higher PER dosage (8-12 mg/day), two or more concomitant anti-seizure medications, and younger age (<13 years) at PER add-on, showed significant associations.

CONCLUSION

When expanding the use of anti-seizure medications in pediatric patients, real-world evidence on safety issues is crucial for pediatric epileptologists. We confirmed that combination therapy with PER and LEV did not increase the risk profile of PBAEs.

Acute inhibition of AMPA receptors by perampanel reduces amyloid β-protein levels by suppressing β-cleavage of APP in Alzheimer's disease models

Hippocampal hyperexcitability is a promising therapeutic target to prevent Aβ deposition in AD since enhanced neuronal activity promotes presynaptic Aβ production and release. This article highlights the potential application of perampanel (PER), an AMPA receptor (AMPAR) antagonist approved for partial seizures, as a therapeutic agent for AD. Using transgenic AD mice combined with in vivo brain microdialysis and primary neurons under oligomeric Aβ-evoked neuronal hyperexcitability, the acute effects of PER on Aβ metabolism were investigated. A single oral administration of PER rapidly decreased ISF Aβ40 and Aβ42 levels in the hippocampus of J20, APP transgenic mice, without affecting the Aβ40 /Aβ42 ratio; 5 mg/kg PER resulted in declines of 20% and 31%, respectively. Moreover, PER-treated J20 manifested a marked decrease in hippocampal APP βCTF levels with increased FL-APP levels. Consistently, acute treatment of PER reduced sAPPβ levels, a direct byproduct of β-cleavage of APP, released to the medium in primary neuronal cultures under oligomeric Aβ-induced neuronal hyperexcitability. To further evaluate the effect of PER on ISF Aβ clearance, a γ-secretase inhibitor was administered to J20 1 h after PER treatment. PER did not influence the elimination of ISF Aβ, indicating that the acute effect of PER is predominantly on Aβ production. In conclusion, acute treatment of PER reduces Aβ production by suppressing β-cleavage of amyloid-β precursor protein effectively, indicating a potential effect of PER against Aβ pathology in AD.

Sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness in patients with epilepsy after initiating perampanel as adjunctive therapy

BACKGROUND

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) may affect nocturnal sleep and daytime vigilance. Perampanel (PER), a third-generation ASM, showed to improve nocturnal sleep in patients with epilepsy (PWE). Although ASMs can have beneficial effects on nocturnal sleep and daytime sleepiness, no study investigated the effect of PER on both sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness. Therefore, this study aimed to objectively evaluate the sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness in PWE treated with PER as adjunctive therapy.

METHODS

This prospective study included adult PWE who received PER as add-on treatment. Sleep-wake cycle was assessed through actigraphic monitoring and daytime sleepiness by the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) performed at the end of the actigraphic recording. All patients performed both tests at baseline and at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Ten patients (mean age: 44.50 ± 22.71 years, 50.0% female) were included. The mean monthly seizure frequency was 3.20 ± 5.94. Six of ten patients started PER as a first add-on treatment. The final PER dose was 5.11 ± 2.02 mg/day, and nine of ten patients achieved seizure freedom at follow-up. There was a significant decrease in mean monthly seizure frequency from baseline to follow-up (p = 0.004). No significant changes were found in the sleep-wake cycle parameters. An increase in sleep latency mean was observed at MSLT at 6-month follow-up (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that adjunctive PER is effective on seizures without pathologically change of the sleep-wake cycle in PWE and can even improve daytime sleepiness. This effect can be mediated by the achievement of seizure control. Therefore, PER may be promising in PWE with sleep disturbances and daytime sleepiness.

Perampanel outcomes at different stages of treatment in people with focal and generalized epilepsy treated in clinical practice: Evidence from the PERMIT study

Introduction

The PERMIT study is the largest pooled analysis of perampanel (PER) clinical practice data conducted to date.

Methods

This post-hoc analysis of PERMIT investigated the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of PER when used as early add-on therapy (after failure of one or two previous antiseizure medications) in comparison with late add-on therapy (after failure of three or more previous antiseizure medications). Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months, and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness was assessed by seizure type (total seizures, focal seizures, generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCS]) and assessments included seizure freedom rate and responder rate. Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs.

Results

The Full Analysis Set included 1184 and 2861 PWE treated with PER as early and late add-on therapy, respectively. Compared to the late add-on subgroup, the early add-on subgroup was characterized by later mean age at epilepsy onset, shorter mean duration of epilepsy, lower rates of intellectual disability and psychiatric comorbidity, and lower frequency of seizures per month, suggesting a less severe form of epilepsy in this subgroup. After 12 months, retention was significantly higher in the early versus late add-on subgroup (67.7% vs. 62.4%; p = 0.004). At the last visit, responder rates in the early versus late add-on subgroup were significantly higher for total seizures (68.2% vs. 39.3%; p &lt; 0.001), focal seizures (65.0% vs. 36.8%; p &lt; 0.001) and GTCS (83.7% vs. 67.2%; p &lt; 0.001), as were seizure freedom rates (total seizures, 35.9% vs. 11.9% [p &lt; 0.001]; focal seizures, 29.4% vs. 8.7% [p &lt; 0.001]; GTCS, 69.0% vs. 48.1% [p &lt; 0.001]). Incidence of AEs was significantly lower in the early versus late add-on subgroup (42.1% vs. 54.7%; p &lt; 0.001), as was the rate of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months (15.0% vs. 18.1%; p = 0.031).

Discussion

This study demonstrated that PER was effective and generally well tolerated when initiated as early or late add-on therapy, but it was significantly more effective and better tolerated when initiated early. These findings support PER's use as a broad-spectrum, early add-on therapy for use in PWE with focal and generalized seizures.

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.

Twelve-Month Efficacy of Lacosamide Monotherapy at Maximal Dose and Tolerability for Epilepsy Treatment in Pediatric Patients: Real-World Clinical Experience

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of lacosamide (LCM) monotherapy in Chinese pediatric patients with epilepsy have not been established. Therefore, this real-world retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy of 12 months after achievement the maximal dose and tolerability of LCM as monotherapy for epilepsy treatment in pediatric patients.

METHODS

Pediatric patients were administered LCM monotherapy in two ways: primary or conversion monotherapy. Seizure frequency was recorded as an average per month for the preceding three months at baseline and then at each follow-up period for three, six, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Primary monotherapy with LCM was administered to 37 (33.0%) pediatric patients, whereas conversion to monotherapy was achieved in 75 (67.0%) pediatric patients. The responder rates of pediatric patients receiving primary monotherapy with LCM at three, six, and 12 months were 75.7% (28 of 37), 67.6% (23 of 34), and 58.6% (17 of 29), respectively. The responder rates of pediatric patients receiving conversion to monotherapy with LCM at three, six, and 12 months were 80.0% (60 of 75), 74.3% (55 of 74), and 68.1% (49 of 72), respectively. The incidence of adverse reactions with conversion to LCM monotherapy and primary monotherapy was 32.0% (24 of 75) and 40.5% (15 of 37), respectively.

CONCLUSION

LCM is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option as monotherapy for the treatment of epilepsy.

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.

The real-world effectiveness and safety of perampanel in Europe: A scoping review

In order to characterize the real-world effectiveness and safety of perampanel during clinical use in Europe, we conducted a structured literature search and scoping review of real-world studies conducted in Europe in adolescents (aged ≥ 12 years) or adults who were prescribed perampanel for focal epilepsy or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in the context of idiopathic generalized epilepsy, published between January 2016 and July 2021. We identified 29 relevant studies (20 retrospective and 9 prospective) in 3608 patients; median study duration was 12 months. Most patients (76.1%) were receiving two or more antiseizure drugs (ASDs) when perampanel was initiated. The maintenance perampanel dose ranged from 2 to 16 mg/day (most commonly 6 mg/day). Retention rate at 12 months ranged from 46% to 90.5% (median 71.1%). The proportion of patients who were free of seizures during perampanel ranged from 1.8% to 84.6%, but were consistently below 20% in studies where patients had received an average of ≥5 prior ASDs and above 20% where patients had received an average of <5 prior ASDs. The proportion of patients who achieved ≥50% reduction in seizures during perampanel ranged from 20.0% to 85.7%. Across all studies, the incidence of adverse events (AEs) ranged from 18.2% to 67.4% (median 37.1%) and discontinuation due to AEs from 6.2% to 56% (median 12.5%). Discontinuation rates tended to be higher in UK studies than in studies from Italy or Spain. The most commonly reported individual AEs were dizziness/vertigo (median incidence 13.7%), somnolence (median 11.9%), aggression (median 9.8%), irritability (median 9.1%), and cognitive deficits (median 7.0%). There was no relationship between the overall rate of AEs and perampanel dose, perampanel plasma levels, or number of concomitant medications. Our global overview of European observational studies with perampanel provides evidence that this agent is effective and safe in clinical practice in a range of countries, patients, and settings.

Effects of Levetiracetam on the Serum C-Reactive Protein in Children With Epilepsy: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of levetiracetam on serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in children with epilepsy. Articles published up to April 15, 2021 were searched from Google Scholar databases, PubMed, Science Direct, Springer, Wiely, NIH and Baidu Scholar databases to analyzed the difference of serum CRP in epilepsy children compared to healthy controls, and the effect of levetiracetam on serum CRP in children with epilepsy was also assessed. All the included studies met the inclusion criteria. 103 publications were selected and eight articles were included in this study with sample size n = 246. The serum CRP level in childhood epilepsy was significantly higher than the healthy controls (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD): 6.930, 95% CI: 2.716–11.143, z = 3.22, p < 0.01). A significant level of between-study heterogeneity was found (τ² = 17.911, Chi² = 148.67, df = 3, p < 0.01, I² = 98.0%). Besides, serum CRP level was significantly decreased by the treatment of levetiracetam in childhood epilepsy (pooled SMD: 3.505, 95% CI: 1.638–5.373, z = 3.68, p < 0.01). A significant level of between-study heterogeneity was found (τ² = 4.346, Chi² = 97.17, df = 4, p < 0.01, I² = 95.9%). The funnel plot showed there was no significant publication bias in the meta-analysis. Serum CRP levels are upregulated in childhood epilepsy and reduced by levetiracetam in children with epilepsy.

Evaluation of one-year effectiveness of clobazam as an add-on therapy to anticonvulsant monotherapy in participants with epilepsy having uncontrolled seizure episodes: An Indian experience

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively study the effectiveness and safety of clobazam as an add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy whose seizures are not adequately controlled with antiseizure medicine (ASM) monotherapy.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, observational study at 28 neurology outpatient clinics in India from June 2017 to October 2019. Consecutive patients with epilepsy (older than 3 years) with inadequate seizure control with ASM monotherapy were initiated on clobazam. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Seizure control and adverse events were assessed through personal interviews and seizure diaries.

RESULTS

Out of 475 eligible patients, data of 429 patients (men: 65.5%) were evaluated (46 excluded due to protocol deviations). The median age was 25 (range, 3-80 years) years and the median duration of epilepsy was 3 (0.1-30) years. The majority of patients had focal epilepsy (55.0%) and genetic generalized epilepsy (40.1%). The one-year follow-up was completed by 380 (88.5%) patients. At one-year follow-up, 317 (83.4%; N = 380) patients in the study remained seizure free. These 317 patients who were seizure free at 12 months comprised 73.9% of the evaluable population (N = 429). In 98.8% of patients, the primary reason for adding clobazam was inadequate control of seizures with treatment. During one-year follow-up, a total of 113 (22.6%) patients experienced at least one adverse event which included 103 (20.6%) patients who experienced 386 episodes of seizures.

CONCLUSION

The study provides preliminary evidence that clobazam is effective and well-tolerated as add-on therapy for a period of one year among patients with epilepsy inadequately stabilized with monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTRI/2017/12/010906.

Differences in aggression as psychiatric side effect of levetiracetam and perampanel in patients with epilepsy

PURPOSE

Aggression is the most commonly encountered antiepileptic-drug (AED)-induced psychiatric adverse effects. Levetiracetam (LEV) is well known to be associated with increased rates of aggression, while perampanel (PER) is also recognized as a potentially aggression-promoting agent, though opinions vary. However, few studies have addressed questions regarding whether the nature of irritability-aggression differs between those drugs. The present study used a standardized rating scale to examine aggression among patient with epilepsy who received LEV or PER using specific measures to confirm the effects of the drugs.

METHODS

We enrolled 144 consecutive outpatients receiving treatment for epilepsy with LEV (n = 103) or PER (n = 41), and determined their effects regarding aggression using the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BAQ). For analysis, total BAQ scores for the LEV and PER subjects were compared to determine whether the aggression-promoting effects of the agents differed, and which BAQ subdomains (physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger, hostility) were related to production of aggression in patients taking either LEV or PER. As a subsidiary analysis, clinical variables inclusive of administered AED type that showed a significant impact on BAQ scores were determined.

RESULTS

The LEV group had a significantly higher hostility score (19.4 ± 5.8) as compared to the PER group (17.2 ± 6.3) in subscale analysis (p < 0.05). In multiple regression analysis, LEV had a significant association with higher hostility score (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that while easily visible outward-directed aggression tends to be dominant in patients given PER, aggression provoked by LEV may be felt more subjectively or in an inward-directed manner, which can lead to more diverse expression and misrecognition.

Perampanel may represent an effective treatment for the prevention of migraine comorbid with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a common comorbidity in patients with epilepsy. Considering the proven associations and the common pathophysiological features linking epilepsy and migraine, some anti-seizure medications (ASMs) have been considered as a treatment for both disorders. This study aimed at assessing both the effectiveness of perampanel (PER) on epileptic seizures and migraine attacks in patients with epilepsy and comorbid migraine, as well as the reduction in the monthly mean rate usage of rescue migraine medications.

METHODS

This observational, multi-centre study included adult patients with epilepsy and comorbid migraine who started PER to better control epileptic seizures and who were followed up for 12 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included (mean age 40.13 ± 13.13 years; 67.0% female). At the 12-month follow-up visit, 27 patients were continuing PER concomitantly with 1 (45.2%) or 2 ASMs (54.8%). A significant reduction in epileptic seizures, migraine attacks, and the monthly use of rescue migraine medications between baseline and both 6- and 12-month follow-up visits was documented.

CONCLUSION

PER demonstrated good effectiveness in reducing both epileptic seizures and migraine attacks in patients with comorbid epilepsy and migraine. Future studies with possibly larger samples are needed to evaluate the efficacy of PER in migraine other than epilepsy.

Long-term efficacy and safety of perampanel as a first add-on therapy in patients with focal epilepsy: Three-year extension study

PURPOSE

We investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of perampanel as a first add-on therapy in patients with focal epilepsy.

METHODS

This retrospective study represented the 3-year extension phase of a multicenter, open-label, phase 4, prospective study of perampanel as a first add-on therapy in patients with focal epilepsy. Seizure and safety outcomes were assessed annually from the start of the extension study, and the retention rate was calculated from the start of perampanel exposure in the original study.

RESULTS

The 50% responder and seizure freedom rates were 84.8% and 58.7%, respectively, during the third year and 71.7% and 32.6%, respectively, during the entire 3-year period of the extension study. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year retention rates were 62.5%, 53.1%, and 52.1%, respectively. Efficacies were higher in patients that were aged >55 years, male, and receiving ≤4 mg of perampanel. Perampanel was generally well tolerated; 47.3% of patients experienced at least one adverse event during the 3 years of extension (46 adverse events (AEs) in 35 patients). The most common AEs were dizziness (33.8%), somnolence (5.4%), anger (4.1%), and irritability (4.1%). AEs were resolved with perampanel dose reduction or discontinuation in 10 (13.5%) and 12 (16.2%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Long-term treatment with perampanel as a first add-on therapy did not raise new safety signals in patients with focal epilepsy. Especially at low perampanel doses (≤4 mg/day), sustained improvement in seizure control was achieved, which could potentially avoid adverse drug reactions.

Antiseizure medication for brain metastasis-related epilepsy: Findings of optimal choice from a retrospective cohort

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the prevalence of antiseizure medication (ASM) in patients with brain metastasis-related epilepsy (BMRE) treated with radiosurgery and the relationship between ASM and psychiatric comorbidity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional observational design study with retrospective review of medical records of all patients with brain metastases treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy radiosurgery (VMAT-RS) between 2012 and 2018 in a tertiary oncology center. We included those patients with BMRE, analyzing the clinical and demographic data, with special attention to psychiatric comorbidities and the use of ASM.

RESULTS

Of the 121 patients with brain metastases included for treatment with VMAT-RS, a total of 38 presented BMRE. The most widely used ASM as first-line treatment was levetiracetam (89%). Only 8% of the patients received sodium channel blockers. The most common psychiatric comorbidity was depression (42.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Levetiracetam is the most widely used ASM in patients with BMRE treated with VMAT-RS. Nevertheless, common psychiatric comorbidities in this population might change the decision-making of ASM choice.

Perampanel Increases Cortical EEG Fast Activity in Child and Adult Patients Affected by Epilepsy: A Quantitative EEG Study

OBJECTIVE

Quantitative EEG (qEEG) is an established technique used as objective measure for evaluating the effect of antiseizure medications (ASMs) on EEG background activity and monitoring cognitive effects of ASMs. Perampanel (PER) has been associated with relatively more tolerable cognitive effects in patients with epilepsy. The primary aim of the present study was to verify the effect of PER as first add-on ASM on qEEG in child and adult patients affected by epilepsy. The secondary aim of this study was to verify the effectiveness of the drug as first add-on treatment in both child and adult patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

We collected data from 17 adults and 10 children treated with PER as first add-on treatment, who underwent qEEG analysis before starting PER and at 3-month follow-up under stable treatment.

RESULTS

PER resulted with significant effectiveness in reducing seizures in both children and adults. Considering qEEG analysis, we observed at follow-up the significant increase in beta1 and beta total bands both in children and adult patients. In particular, children showed the significant increase of beta band frequencies predominantly in the occipital regions, whereas adults showed a widespread increase of beta activity. Moreover, we documented in both child and adult patients the global reduction of delta bands activity.

CONCLUSIONS

This qEEG study documented the relative increase of cortical EEG fast activity in both children and adult patients affected by epilepsy and treated by PER. This result may suggest a potential less negative impact of PER on cognition in patients affected by epilepsy, other than demonstrating effectiveness of the drug when used as first add-on treatment in both children and adult patients.

PERMIT study: a global pooled analysis study of the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in routine clinical practice

The PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) study was a pooled analysis of data from 44 real-world studies from 17 countries, in which people with epilepsy (PWE; focal and generalized) were treated with perampanel (PER). Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months, and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included 50% responder rate (≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency from baseline) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit); in PWE with status epilepticus, response was defined as seizures under control. Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs. The Full Analysis Set included 5193 PWE. Retention, effectiveness and safety/tolerability were assessed in 4721, 4392 and 4617, respectively. Retention on PER treatment at 3, 6, and 12 months was 90.5%, 79.8%, and 64.2%, respectively. Mean retention time on PER treatment was 10.8 months. The 50% responder rate was 58.3% at 12 months and 50.0% at the last visit, and the corresponding seizure freedom rates were 23.2% and 20.5%, respectively; 52.7% of PWE with status epilepticus responded to PER treatment. Overall, 49.9% of PWE reported AEs and the most frequently reported AEs (≥ 5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (15.2%), somnolence (10.6%), irritability (8.4%), and behavioral disorders (5.4%). At 12 months, 17.6% of PWEs had discontinued due to AEs. PERMIT demonstrated that PER is effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat people with focal and/or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice.

Perampanel effectiveness and tolerability in patients with epilepsy at long-term follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The main of the present study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) in association with 1 or 2 concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) in patients with epilepsy throughout a follow-up period of 24 months or longer in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, multi-center study collected data from both underage (<18 years old) and adult patients who had started PER in association with 1 or 2 ASMs. Only patients who had started PER and were followed up for at least 24 months were included. Response to treatment was analyzed at the 24-, 36-, and 48-month visits by considering the last visit undergone by patients. Subgroup analyses were performed according to age, gender, and epilepsy type and patients were categorized following PER treatment in concomitance with 1 or 2 ASMs to evaluate the factors affecting the achievement of seizure freedom (SF) at the 24-month FU.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients were included (mean age 36.89 years; 51.1% female). At the 24-month follow-up visit, 90 (95.74%) patients were still receiving PER concomitantly with 1 or 2 ASMs. The mean PER dose was 6.02 mg/day and SF was achieved by 33 (35.1%) patients. A significantly higher SF rate was found in patients who had started PER with only 1 ASM when compared to those who had started PER with 2 concomitant ASMs. Effectiveness was maintained also in the subgroups of patients with a 36- or 48-month follow-up visit. Adult patients had a higher final daily dosage of PER than underage patients. Logistic regression found that the lowest number of previously failed ASMs was associated with a higher SF rate (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Perampanel demonstrated a good effectiveness in association with 1 or 2 ASMs in both pediatric and adult patients, without having to use a high dose of the drug. The possibility to present SF was higher when PER was added early. Finally, the maintenance of effectiveness was observed also in the subgroups of patients with a follow-up of 36 and 48 months.

Anti-seizure Medication Prescription in Adult Outpatients With Epilepsy in China, 2013-2018

This study aimed to assess the national trends in anti-seizure medication (ASM) prescription in Chinese adult outpatients with epilepsy over a 6-year period from 2013 to 2018. Prescriptions for adult outpatients with epilepsy from hospitals in six major cities were extracted from the database of the Hospital Prescription Analysis Cooperative Project. Trends in the annual prescriptions and expenditure of ASM were analyzed. Prescription patterns (monotherapy or combination therapy) were also assessed. A total of 225,767 prescriptions from 60 hospitals were eligible and extracted for analysis. The number of ASM prescriptions increased from 28,360 in 2013 to 44,110 in 2018, and the corresponding cost increased from 9,452,990 Chinese Yuan (CNY) in 2013 to 14,627,865 CNY in 2018. The share of newer ASM use increased continuously, accounting for 56.75% of prescriptions and 85.03% of expenditure in 2018. The most frequently prescribed ASMs were sodium valproate and levetiracetam. The proportion of sodium valproate use decreased, while the proportion of levetiracetam use increased dramatically in terms of both ASM prescriptions and expenditure. Monotherapy was more frequent than combination therapy. The three most common combination therapies were sodium valproate/lamotrigine, levetiracetam/oxcarbazepine, and sodium valproate/levetiracetam. In summary, ASM use increased rapidly in terms of the number of ASM prescriptions and cost during the 6-year period, which raises concern regarding the rational use and pharma-economic profiles of ASMs. In place of valproate, levetiracetam became the most frequently used ASM. The development of ASM prescription is in line with therapy guidelines and reflects the current state of research in China.

Aggression as psychiatric side effect of newer AEDs in patients with epilepsy: Cross-sectional study based on Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire

PURPOSE

Aggression-irritability is the most commonly encountered antiepileptic-drug-induced psychiatric adverse effects. In this cross-sectional study, we tried to assess antiepileptic-drug-induced aggression in patients with epilepsy (PWE) with a standardized rating scale.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-six consecutive outpatients receiving treatment for epilepsy with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were initially examined, and the effects of the investigated drugs in regard to aggression were investigated using the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BAQ). We compared BAQ scores as a function of a specific class of AEDs, levetiracetam (LEV), lacosamaide (LCM), perampanel (PER), and carbamazepine (CBZ), and determined whether AED type had a relationship with aggression. Additionally, the association of BAQ score with other clinico-demographic variables was also assessed.

RESULTS

One-way ANOVA revealed that the LEV group had a significantly higher mean BAQ score as compared to the CBZ (P = 0.001) and LCM (P = 0.029) groups for total score. In subscale analysis, the LEV group had higher scores than the CBZ group for the physical aggression (p = 0.01), verbal aggression (p = 0.02) and hostility (p = 0.01) subscales, while the LEV group had a significantly higher mean score than the LCM group for hostility (p = 0.025). In multiple regression analysis, LEV had a statistically significant impact on increased total BAQ score (B = 0.119, p = 0.049). In contrast, CBZ (B = -0.191, p = 0.002), older age at epilepsy onset (B = -0.269, p = 0.000) and female gender (B = -0.210, p = 0.000) had a significant association with lower total BAQ score.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that LEV is associated with increased aggression, while CBZ and LCM showed effects to reduce aggression.

What has been the impact of new drug treatments on epilepsy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nearly two dozen antiseizure medications (ASMs) with different mechanisms of action have been introduced over the past three decades with the aim of providing better efficacy or safety profile than the previous drugs. Several new ASMs with improvement on a classic drug family or have novel mechanisms of action have been recently approved for epilepsy. The present review explored recent studies or guidelines on new agents and discussed the potential impact of these novel treatments on epilepsy management and future directions of research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Long-term cohort studies showed that, collectively, the second-generation did not improve the overall prognosis of epilepsy. Individual monotherapy studies showed similar efficacy of second-generation (levetiracetam and zonisamide) and third-generation (eslicarbazepine acetate and lacosamide) ASMs compared to controlled-release carbamazepine for the treatment of focal epilepsy. However, there appears to be no evidence to support any second-generation or third-generation ASMs to be as efficacious as valproate monotherapy for generalized and unclassified epilepsies. Cannabidiol adjunctive treatments were found to be efficacious for Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Although most newer generation ASMs are less prone to drug-drug interactions, stiripentol and cannabidiol can elevate the plasma concentration of N-desmethylclobazam, the active metabolite of clobazam. Generally speaking, the second-generation ASMs have lower teratogenic risk than the older drugs but there is scant study on neurodevelopmental effect of third-generation ASMs.

SUMMARY

Although the newer generation ASMs may not have improved the overall seizure control they have advantages in terms of drug-drug interactions and teratogenicity, and thus offer valuable individualized options in the treatment of epilepsy.

Intraoperative seizure outcome of levetiracetam combined with perampanel therapy in patients with glioma undergoing awake brain surgery

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of levetiracetam (LEV) combined with perampanel (PER) therapy for intraoperative seizure treatment to determine whether a combination of LEV and PER can aid in the prevention of intraoperative intractable seizures during awake surgery.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective cohort study in 78 consecutive patients with glioma who underwent awake surgery using intraoperative direct electrical stimulation mapping. To prevent intraoperative seizures, 50 patients were treated with the antiepileptic drug LEV only (LEV group) from January 2017 to January 2019, while the remaining 28 patients were treated with LEV plus PER (LEV + PER group) between March 2019 and January 2020. LEV (1000-3000 mg) and/or PER (2-4 mg) were administered before the surgery.

RESULTS

Preoperative seizures with International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) class II-VI occurred in 44% of the patients in the LEV group and in 35.7% of patients in the LEV + PER group, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.319). Total intraoperative seizures occurred in 18 patients (36.0%) in the LEV therapy group and in 2 patients (7.1%) in the LEV + PER group (p = 0.009). Of these, there were no patients (0%) with intractable seizures in the LEV + PER group. Regarding factors that influence intraoperative seizures in glioma patients during awake brain surgery, multivariate logistic regression models revealed that the occurrence of intraoperative seizures was significantly related to the involvement of motor-related regions (positive vs negative, HR 6.98, 95% CI 1.71-28.56, p = 0.007), preoperative seizure (ILAE class II-VI vs ILAE class I, HR 4.44, 95% CI 1.22-16.11, p = 0.024), and LEV + PER group (positive vs negative, HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.44, p = 0.005). Treatment-related adverse effects were rare and mild, including sleepiness, tiredness, and dizziness in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that LEV + PER therapy is significantly associated with a lower risk of intraoperative seizures compared with LEV therapy alone in patients with glioma during awake brain mapping. These findings will help neurosurgeons conduct safe and reliable awake surgeries and reduce the rate of intraoperative intractable seizures during such procedures.

The Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO) Guideline for Antiepileptic Drug Usage of Brain Tumor: Version 2021.1

Background

To date, there has been no practical guidelines for the prescription of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in brain tumor patients in Korea. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, had begun preparing guidelines for AED usage in brain tumors since 2019.

Methods

The Working Group was composed of 27 multidisciplinary medical experts in Korea. References were identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL using specific and sensitive keywords as well as combinations of the keywords.

Results

The core contents are as follows. Prophylactic AED administration is not recommended in newly diagnosed brain tumor patients without previous seizure history. When AEDs are administered during peri/postoperative period, it may be tapered off according to the following recommendations. In seizure-naïve patients with no postoperative seizure, it is recommended to stop or reduce AED 1 week after surgery. In seizure-naïve patients with one early postoperative seizure (<1 week after surgery), it is advisable to maintain AED for at least 3 months before tapering. In seizure-naïve patients with ≥2 postoperative seizures or in patients with preoperative seizure history, it is recommended to maintain AEDs for more than 1 year. The possibility of drug interactions should be considered when selecting AEDs in brain tumor patients. Driving can be allowed in brain tumor patients when proven to be seizure-free for more than 1 year.

Conclusion

The KSNO suggests prescribing AEDs in patients with brain tumor based on the current guideline. This guideline will contribute to spreading evidence-based prescription of AEDs in brain tumor patients in Korea.

Sleep-wake cycle dysregulation in idiopathic REM sleep behaviour disorder

Alteration of the circadian sleep-wake rhythm has been suggested in patients affected by idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder. Because actigraphy is the validated instrument to monitor the sleep-wake cycle, the aim of the present study was to investigate the circadian sleep-wake rhythm in patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder compared with healthy aged controls. Fourteen-day actigraphic recording, a comprehensive sleep interview, and cognitive and behavioural domains were investigated in patients affected by idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder, and compared with controls similar for age, sex and cognitive performances. Patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder showed reduced relative amplitude and alteration of both sleep and wake compared with controls. Patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder also showed subjective sleep and wake complaints, and higher scores at the Beck Depression Inventory, compared with controls. Beck Depression Inventory scores correlated with sleep actigraphic parameters, such as sleep latency, sleep efficiency, time in bed, and relative amplitude. Therefore, the present study showed the dysregulation of the sleep-wake cycle in patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement behaviour disorder. Moreover, depressive symptoms documented in patients with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder correlated with the sleep-wake rhythm dysregulation.

Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel as a first add-on therapy with different anti-seizure drugs

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) when administered as a first add-on therapy to patients with focal epilepsy or idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) taking one other antiseizure drug (ASD).

METHODS

This multicentre, retrospective, one-year observational study collected data from patients (≥12 years) who initiated treatment with PER as first add-on therapy. Patients had to be experiencing inadequate seizure control on ASD monotherapy and tried ≤3 ASD monotherapies before initiating PER. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed, adjusted for the number and type of previous seizures, duration and aetiology of epilepsy.

RESULTS

Of the 149 patients included in the study (mean age 41 years; 54.4 % male), 118 (79.2 %) were still receiving PER as first add-on treatment after 12 months. Mean PER dose was 6.2 mg/day. At 12 months, 45.6 % were seizure-free and 84.6 % responders. A significant difference in seizure freedom rate was found between patients with IGE and patients with focal epilepsy, but not in responders. Reduced seizure control was observed when PER was administered with strong enzyme-inducing ASDs; conversely, increased seizure control was seen when the same dose of PER was combined with enzyme-inhibiting ASDs. The most frequent adverse events were dizziness (15.4 %), irritability (14.1 %) and drowsiness (14.1 %); no differences in tolerance were observed among different combinations.

CONCLUSION

PER demonstrated a good efficacy and safety profile when used as a first add-on therapy in patients who did not respond to monotherapy. PER dose adjustments may optimize seizure control when combined with strong enzyme-inducing or enzyme-inhibiting ASDs.

Perampanel tolerability in children and adolescents with focal epilepsy: Effects on behavior and executive functions

OBJECTIVES

Perampanel (PER) is a noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) glutamate receptor antagonist recently approved for focal and generalized epilepsies as an add-on therapy. It is well tolerated and effective as treatment of various pediatric epilepsy syndromes; PER does not seem to negatively affect the cognitive profile of children and adolescents, but its influence on executive functions is still to be assessed.

METHODS

Our sample included 37 children aged 12-18 years, with focal pharmacoresistant epilepsy already in therapy with 2 or 3 antiepileptic drug (AED); PER was added with 1 mg/week increments up to a dose of 2-4 mg/day. Changes in executive functions were assessed by the EpiTrack Junior test. Emotional and behavioral aspects were evaluated through the interview for parents Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Both tests were performed before taking PER and after 6 and 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

After 12 months of PER in 22/30 patients, global score of the EpiTrack Junior test remained almost unchanged; in 7/30 patients, this score improved. The CBCL did not show significant changes in emotional or behavioral problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive treatment with PER did not negatively affect executive functions that could also be improved. No emotional/behavioral negative effects have been reported, and this suggests a good tolerability in the middle/long term.

Cognitive performances in patients affected by late-onset epilepsy with unknown etiology: A 12-month follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy has a growing frequency, particularly in the elderly. Several triggers may cause late-onset epilepsy; however, more than 20% of epilepsies, manifesting in the elderly, has an unknown etiology. Although cognition is frequently altered in patients affected by epilepsy, there is a paucity of studies specifically evaluating cognition in patients affected by late-onset epilepsy. The aim of the present study was to assess the cognitive profile of patients affected by late-onset epilepsy with an unknown etiology and followed for 12 months.

METHODS

Patients affected by diagnosed late-onset epilepsy with unknown etiology were included in this observation. All patients were evaluated at the time of diagnosis (baseline) and at follow-up (12 months later). We distributed patients in subgroups based on seizure type (focal seizures [FS], secondarily generalized seizures [SGS], primarily generalized seizures [GS]) and antiepileptic drug (AED) regimen (mono- vs. polytherapy). Cognition was evaluated through standardized neuropsychological testing.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were included in this observation and distributed in three groups: 29 affected by FS, 14 affected by SGS, 15 affected by GS. Forty-five patients were in monotherapy, and 13 in polytherapy. The most frequent treatments were levetiracetam (n = 12), valproic acid (VPA) (n = 9), carbamazepine (n = 9), and oxcarbazepine (n = 7). We documented a significant decrease of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and memory scores at follow-up in the whole group. Verbal learning decreased exclusively in VPA users.

CONCLUSION

Patients affected by late-onset epilepsy with unknown etiology showed a significant decline of cognition at follow-up, independently from number and efficacy of AEDs received. These results deserve verification in larger longitudinal cohorts.

Experience of Low Dose Perampanel to Add-on in Glioma Patients with Levetiracetam-uncontrollable Epilepsy

After introduction of levetiracetam (LEV), treatment of seizures in patients with malignant brain tumors has prominently improved. On the other hand, we still experience some cases with LEV-uncontrollable epilepsy. Perampanel (PER) is a noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoaxazolepropionate acid receptor antagonist that has recently been approved for treating focal epilepsy as a secondary drug of choice. Available literature reporting PER medication in patients with gliomas is still sparse. Here, we report our initial experience with glioma patients and report efficacy of adding low dose 2–4 mg PER to LEV in patients whose seizure were uncontrollable with LEV monotherapy. Clinical outcome data of 18 consecutive patients were reviewed. This included nine males and nine females aged 24–76 years (median, 48.5 years), treated for glioma between June 2009 to December 2018. We added PER to patients with LEV-uncontrollable epilepsy. Adverse effects, irritability occurred in two patients, but continuous administration was possible in all cases. Though epileptic seizures occurred in four cases receiving 2 mg PER, 17 cases achieved seizure freedom by dose increments; final dose, 2–4 mg PER added to LEV 500–3000 mg. Our study revealed anti-epileptic efficacy of low dose PER 2–4 mg as first add-on therapy to LEV in glioma patients who have failed or intolerable to LEV monotherapy. Low dose PER added on to LEV may have favorable efficacy with tolerable adverse effects in glioma patients with LEV-uncontrollable epilepsy.

Effectiveness of perampanel as a first add-on antiepileptic drug for the treatment of partial epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Perampanel (PER) is a newly introduced antiepileptic drug (AED) and is used in over 50 countries. In the current study, we analyzed the efficacy of PER for patients with partial epilepsy who were recruited from two hospitals that had both an epilepsy center and a general neurosurgical unit over a 1-year period.

METHODS

The present study was a retrospective observational study that evaluated the effects of PER for the treatment of partial epilepsy in 51 patients. We analyzed the effects of PER at two checkpoints, i.e., 6 and 12 months after starting adjunctive PER treatment. Following this, we analyzed the effects of PER as a first add-on (only one prior AED) and late add-on (≥2 prior AEDs) therapy, and focused on the characteristics of the patients who achieved seizure freedom.

RESULTS

Of the initial 51 patients, 45 and 39 patients were evaluated at the 6- and 12-month checkpoints, respectively. Overall, after starting treatment with PER, 29% (13/45) and 28% (11/39) of patients were seizure-free at 6 and 12 months, respectively. The tolerance rate of PER was 67% (30/45) at 6 months and 53.8% (21/39) at 12 months following treatment. The seizure-free rate of the 30 patients who were continuously treated with PER for 6 months was significantly higher in the patients who used PER as a first add-on treatment (75.0%, 6/8) than it was in the patients who used PER as a late add-on treatment (31.8%, 7/22) (p = 0.049). The seizure-free rate of the 21 patients who were continuously treated with PER for 12 months was significantly higher in the patients who used PER as a first add-on treatment (100%, 5/5) than it was in the patients who used PER as a late add-on treatment (37.5%, 6/16) (p = 0.035). Among the patients who achieved seizure freedom, the most frequently administered dose of PER was 2 mg at 6 (62%, 8/13) and 12 months (64%, 7/11). Levetiracetam was the most frequently administered concomitant AED at both 6 (92%, 12/13) and 12 months (91%, 10/11).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective observational study provides evidence supporting the effectiveness of PER as a first add-on therapy in patients with partial epilepsy. Importantly, the seizure-free rate was better when PER was used as a first, rather than a second or later, add-on treatment.

The impact of perampanel treatment on quality of life and psychiatric symptoms in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy: An observational study in Italy

An observational, prospective study has been conducted to evaluate the effects of adjunctive treatment with perampanel (PER) on psychological functioning and quality of life (QoL) in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Fifty-six adult patients treated with PER in addition to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were recruited in 2 Italian Epilepsy Centers. Irritability in Adult Patients with Epilepsy (I-EPI), Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-31), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Y-1 and Y-2 (STAI) questionnaires were administered at baseline and 3 and 6 months after the treatment onset. Adverse events (AEs) were collected during the observational 6 months period. Retention rate of treatment with PER was 82.1% at 3 months and 64.3% at 6 months. Thirteen patients reported a significant seizure frequency reduction, and one seizure freedom case was observed after 4 months of PER treatment. Perampanel was stopped because of inefficacy or paradoxical effects in 28.6% of cases and because of AEs in 7.1%. The peak dose was not associated with discontinuation probability. Irritability, QoL, depression, trait, and state anxiety did not change significantly during the PER therapy. A tendency of association between higher level of irritability at baseline and PER discontinuation was found. The results of this observational study have shown that the addition of PER to AEDs may improve seizure control, does not increase levels of irritability, depression, and anxiety, and does not reduce patients' QoL. This study also confirms the importance of a comprehensive clinical assessment, including psychiatric symptoms evaluation before offering a new treatment, to improve therapy compliance.

Nose-to-brain delivery of levetiracetam after intranasal administration to mice

Despite being one of the most commonly prescribed antiepileptic drugs, levetiracetam is marketed in oral and intravenous dosage forms, which are associated to drug-drug interactions and drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). The purpose of the present study was to assess the potential of the intranasal route to deliver levetiracetam into the brain, due to the particular anatomical features of the nasal cavity. After development and characterization of the drug formulation, a thermoreversible gel loaded with levetiracetam was administered to CD-1 male mice by intranasal route and its pharmacokinetics compared to those observed after intravenous administration. Similar plasma pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained and the intranasal absolute bioavailability was 107.44%, underscoring that a high drug fraction was systemically absorbed. In brain tissue, maximum drug concentrations were 4.48 and 4.02 μg/g (intranasal vs intravenous) and the mean cerebral concentrations were significantly higher after intranasal administration. The percentage of drug targeting efficiency was 182.35% while direct transport percentage was 46.38%, suggesting that almost 50% of levetiracetam undergoes direct nose-to-brain delivery. Complementarily, an in vivo intranasal repeated dose toxicity study was performed and no relevant histopathological alterations were observed. The herein proposed non-invasive and safe intranasal administration route allowed a direct nose-to-brain delivery of levetiracetam and is a promising strategy for the treatment of DRE.

Preliminary evidence about irritability in patients with epilepsy treated by perampanel as first add-on therapy compared to levetiracetam and valproic acid

Aims

Irritability has been described as a frequent adverse event in patients affected by epilepsy and treated with perampanel (PER), levetiracetam (LEV), and less frequently with valproic acid (VPA). Since the questionnaire for irritability (I‐EPI) is a validated instrument to measure this psychiatric manifestation in patients affected by epilepsy, in this study we aimed at investigating the effect of PER as first add‐on therapy on I‐EPI. Moreover, we compared the effectiveness and I‐EPI scores obtained at 12‐month follow‐up visits in patients treated by PER, LEV, or VPA in order to measure irritability as a consequence of these treatments.

Methods

We collected data from 17 patients treated by PER, 16 patients treated by LEV, and 16 patients under VPA treatment followed for 12 months.

Results

We did not document significant changes of I‐EPI questionnaire between baseline and follow‐up in the PER group. As concerning the comparison of I‐EPI among PER, LEV, and VPA groups, we documented lower global scores in PER than both LEV (P < 0.05) and VPA (P < 0.05) groups. Moreover, patients under PER treatment showed lower scores than LEV and VPA (P < 0.05) in I‐EPI items measuring the gentle personality, anxiety of having epileptic seizures in front of others, and irritability in thinking that they can have an epileptic seizure.

Conclusions

This retrospective study described a stable and possibly lower degree of irritability in patients starting PER than LEV and VPA treatments, although we documented the comparable effectiveness of PER, LEV, and VPA as first add‐on treatments in patients affected by uncontrolled epileptic seizures. However, the small sample of patients included in this study and the absence of I‐EPI scores obtained at baseline visits in LEV and VPA groups require further investigations to confirm this preliminary evidence.

Perampanel in routine clinical use in idiopathic generalized epilepsy: The 12-month GENERAL study

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel across different seizure types in routine clinical care of patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE).

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective, 1-year observational study collected data from patient records at 21 specialist epilepsy units in Spain. All patients who were aged ≥12 years, prescribed perampanel before December 2016, and had a confirmed diagnosis of IGE were included.

RESULTS

The population comprised 149 patients with IGE (60 with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, 51 generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCS] only, 21 juvenile absence epilepsy, 10 childhood absence epilepsy, 6 adulthood absence epilepsy, and one Jeavons syndrome). Mean age was 36 years. The retention rate at 12 months was 83% (124/149), and 4 mg was the most common dose. At 12 months, the seizure-free rate was 59% for all seizures (88/149); 63% for GTCS (72/115), 65% for myoclonic seizures (31/48), and 51% for absence seizures (24/47). Seizure frequency was reduced significantly at 12 months relative to baseline for GTCS (78%), myoclonic (65%), and absence seizures (48%). Increase from baseline seizure frequency was seen in 5.2% of patients with GTCS seizures, 6.3% with myoclonic, and 4.3% with absence seizures. Perampanel was effective regardless of epilepsy syndrome, concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), and prior AEDs, but retention and seizure freedom were significantly higher when used as early add-on (after ≤2 prior AEDs) than late (≥3 prior AEDs). Adverse events were reported in 50% of patients over 12 months, mostly mild or moderate, and irritability (23%), somnolence (15%), and dizziness (14%) were most frequent.

SIGNIFICANCE

In routine clinical care of patients with IGE, perampanel improved seizure outcomes for GTCS, myoclonic seizures, and absence seizures, with few discontinuations due to adverse events. This is the first real-world evidence with perampanel across different seizure types in IGE.

Evaluating the longer-term cognitive effects of adjunctive perampanel compared to lacosamide in a naturalistic outpatient setting

PURPOSE

This retrospective longitudinal study aims to compare the longer-term cognitive and behavioral side effects of adjunctive antiepileptic treatment with perampanel (PER) and lacosamide (LCM), two third generation antiepileptic drugs with suggested favorable cognitive profiles. The two drugs were monitored according to a previously established routine diagnostic protocol (Helmstaedter et al. E&B 2013;26:182-7) which facilitates the retrospective comparison of antiepileptic drug tolerability in a naturalistic outpatient setting.

METHODS

Records from 94 patients were evaluated who underwent neuropsychological assessment before and under adjunctive treatment with either PER (n = 57) or LCM (n = 37). Cognition was assessed using the EpiTrack screening for executive functions and a VLMT short form for verbal memory. Subjective assessments included a German QOLIE-10 adaptation (quality of life) and an extended Adverse Events Profile (AEP). The median follow-up interval was 36 weeks.

RESULTS

Multivariate repeated measures statistics revealed a non-significant trend towards an interaction effect "time - treatment arm" on both executive function and memory. When analyzed separately executive functions and memory scores significantly improved under LCM (t = -2.76 p < 0.01 and t = -2.44 p < 0.05 respectively). Subjectively, PER was associated with improvements in 2/18 physiological domains and in the LCM group 1/9 cognitive domains deteriorated. Seizure freedom was achieved for five patients treated with LCM (14%) and 15 treated with PER (26%, χ² = 2.2, n.s.).

CONCLUSION

In a naturalistic outpatient setting, chronic adjunctive treatment with PER and LCM did not negatively affect cognition and LCM may even improve cognition. Neither drug increased self-reported irritability or aggression. This suggests favorable longer-term tolerability.

Lacosamide may improve cognition in patients with focal epilepsy: EpiTrack to compare cognitive side effects of lacosamide and carbamazepine

Carbamazepine (CBZ) is a first generation anti-seizure drug, considered as first choice therapy in focal epilepsy but associated with cognitive side effects. Lacosamide (LCM) is a third-generation anti-seizure drug approved for treating focal epilepsy. This case series documented the comparable efficacy of LCM and CBZ as first add on treatments in patients affected by uncontrolled focal seizures. LCM showed an increase in EpiTrack scores, which measure cognitive abilities, at follow-up compared to CBZ. This preliminary data may represent the basis for future prospective studies aimed at comparing the long-term cognitive side effects of LCM and CBZ.