Perampanel in Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy: A Systematic Review

Optimizing perampanel monotherapy for surgically resected brain tumors

Perampanel (PER) is an antiseizure medication (ASM) with a unique mechanism of action, which was approved in Japan for use in combination therapy in 2016 and as a monotherapy in 2020. It has exerted antitumor effects against several types of tumors in vitro. However, the efficacy of PER monotherapy for seizure control is not well-established in patients with brain tumor. In the present study, 25 patients with brain tumor treated using PER monotherapy at our institution were analyzed and compared with 45 patients treated using the most commonly prescribed ASM, levetiracetam (LEV). The PER group was younger and had a higher frequency of glioma cases. During drug administration, seizures were observed in two patients from the PER group (8.0%) and five patients from the LEV group (11.1%); however, the difference was not significant. The incidence of adverse effects did not significantly differ between the groups (12.0 and 2.2%, respectively). In the PER group, mild liver dysfunction was observed in two patients and drug rash in one. In the LEV group, a drug-induced rash was observed in one patient. PER monotherapy may be safe and effective for seizure treatment or prophylaxis in patients with brain tumor. Further large-scale clinical studies are warranted.

Perampanel for Treatment of People with a Range of Epilepsy Aetiologies in Clinical Practice: Evidence from the PERMIT Extension Study

INTRODUCTION

It is important to assess the effectiveness of an antiseizure medication in treating different epilepsy aetiologies to optimise individualised therapeutic approaches. Data from the PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) Extension study were used to assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was conducted of PERMIT Extension data from individuals with a known aetiology. Retention was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included responder rate (≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation.

RESULTS

PERMIT Extension included 1945 individuals with structural aetiology, 1012 with genetic aetiology, 93 with an infectious aetiology, and 26 with an immune aetiology. Retention rates at 12 months were 61.1% (structural), 65.9% (genetic), 56.8% (infectious) and 56.5% (immune). At the last visit, responder rates (total seizures) were 43.3% (structural), 68.3% (genetic), 37.0% (infectious) and 20.0% (immune), and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 15.8%, 46.5%, 11.1% and 5.0%, respectively. AE incidence rates were 58.0% (structural), 46.5% (genetic), 51.1% (infectious) and 65.0% (immune), and corresponding rates of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months were 18.9%, 16.4%, 18.5% and 21.7%, respectively. The types of AEs reported were generally consistent across aetiology subgroups, with no idiosyncratic AEs emerging.

CONCLUSION

Although PER was effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice, variability in its effectiveness and tolerability across the subgroups indicates that PER may be particularly useful for individuals with specific epilepsy aetiologies.

Antiepileptic Strategies for Patients with Primary and Metastatic Brain Tumors

OPINION STATEMENT

Seizure activity is common in patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors, affecting more than 50% of cases over the course of their disease. Several mechanisms contribute to brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE), including a pro-inflammatory environment, excessive secretion of glutamate and an increase in neuronal excitatory tone, reduction of GABAergic inhibitory activity, and an increase in 2-hydroxygluturate production in isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant tumors. After a verified seizure in a brain tumor patient, the consensus is that BTRE has developed, and it is necessary to initiate an antiepileptic drug (AED). It is not recommended to initiate AED prophylaxis. Second- and third-generation AEDs are the preferred options for initiation, due to a lack of hepatic enzyme induction and reduced likelihood for drug-drug interactions, especially in regard to neoplastic treatment. The efficacy of appropriate AEDs for patients with BTRE is fairly equivalent, although some data suggests that levetiracetam may be slightly more active in suppressing seizures than other AEDs. The consensus among most Neuro-Oncology providers is to initiate levetiracetam monotherapy after a first seizure in a brain tumor patient, as long as the patient does not have any psychiatric co-morbidities. If levetiracetam is not tolerated well or is ineffective, other appropriate initial AED options for monotherapy or as an add-on anticonvulsant include lacosamide, valproic acid, briviracetam, lamotrigine, and perampanel.

[Glioblastomas exploit neuronal properties: a key to new forms of treatment?]

Recent research indicates that glioblastomas exhibit different neural properties that successfully promote tumor growth, colonize the brain and resist standard treatment. This opens up opportunities for new therapeutic strategies giving rise to the new research field of cancer neuroscience at the interface between oncology and neuroscience. It has been observed that glioblastomas as well as other incurable brain tumor entities, form multicellular tumor networks through long cell projections called tumor microtubes that are molecularly controlled by neuronal developmental mechanisms. These networks provide the tumor with efficient communication and resilience to external perturbations and are tumor-intrinsic continuously activated by pacemaker-like tumor cells. In addition, neuron-tumor networks have been discovered that also exploit direct glutamatergic synaptic contacts between nerve cells and tumor cells. These different neuronal mechanisms of the glioblastoma networks contribute to malignancy and resistance, which is why strategies to separate these multicellular networks were developed and are currently being investigated in initial clinical trials with respect to their therapeutic suitability.

Brain tumor-related epilepsy management: A Society for Neuro-oncology (SNO) consensus review on current management

Tumor-related epilepsy (TRE) is a frequent and major consequence of brain tumors. Management of TRE is required throughout the course of disease and a deep understanding of diagnosis and treatment is key to improving quality of life. Gross total resection is favored from both an oncologic and epilepsy perspective. Shared mechanisms of tumor growth and epilepsy exist, and emerging data will provide better targeted therapy options. Initial treatment with antiseizure medications (ASM) in conjunction with surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy is typical. The first choice of ASM is critical to optimize seizure control and tolerability considering the effects of the tumor itself. These agents carry a potential for drug-drug interactions and therefore knowledge of mechanisms of action and interactions is needed. A review of adverse effects is necessary to guide ASM adjustments and decision-making. This review highlights the essential aspects of diagnosis and treatment of TRE with ASMs, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy while indicating areas of uncertainty. Future studies should consider the use of a standardized method of seizure tracking and incorporating seizure outcomes as a primary endpoint of tumor treatment trials.