Perampanel for focal epilepsy: insights from early clinical experience

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

Perampanel (PER) is a third generation antiepileptic drug (AED), recently approved as add-on therapy in both focal and generalized seizures. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a second generation AED, widely used in patients with epilepsy because of its favorable safety and efficacy profiles. Perampanel and LEV treatments have been associated with the occurrence of similar adverse events (AEs) (sleepiness, irritability, depression, anxiety, aggressiveness). The aim of the present retrospective single center study was to verify the efficacy and tolerability of PER and LEV used as first add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy affected by secondarily generalized seizures. We collected data from 15 patients treated with PER and 26 patients treated with LEV and followed at our site with follow-up visits at 3, 6, and 12months. This retrospective study documented the comparable efficacy of PER and LEV as first add-on treatments in patients affected by uncontrolled secondarily generalized seizures. However, more patients withdrawn LEV because of AEs compared with PER at the 3- and 12-month follow-up visits. The better tolerability of PER observed in this study could be related to the low therapeutic dose of PER prescribed when it is used as first adjunctive treatment for better controlling secondarily generalized seizures.

Brivaracetam in the Treatment of Patients with Epilepsy-First Clinical Experiences

Objectives

To assess first clinical experiences with brivaracetam (BRV) in the treatment of epilepsies.

Methods

Data on patients treated with BRV from February to December 2016 and with at least one clinical follow-up were collected from electronic patient records. Data on safety and efficacy were evaluated retrospectively.

Results

In total, 93 patients were analyzed; 12 (12.9%) received BRV in monotherapy. The mean duration to follow-up was 4.85 months (MD = 4 months; SD = 3.63). Fifty-seven patients had more than one seizure per month at baseline and had a follow-up of more than 4 weeks; the rate of ≥50% responders was 35.1% (n = 20) in this group, of which five (8.8%) patients were newly seizure-free. In 50.5% (47/93), patients were switched from levetiracetam (LEV) to BRV, of which 43 (46.2%) were switched immediately. Adverse events (AE) occurred in 39.8%, with 22.6% experiencing behavioral and 25.8% experiencing non-behavioral AE. LEV-related AE (LEV-AE) were significantly reduced by switching to BRV. The discontinuation of BRV was reported in 26/93 patients (28%); 10 of those were switched back to LEV with an observed reduction of AE in 70%. For clinical reasons, 12 patients received BRV in monotherapy, 75% were seizure–free, and previous LEV-AE improved in 6/9 patients. BRV-related AE occurred in 5/12 cases, and five patients discontinued BRV.

Conclusion

BRV seems to be a safe, easy, and effective option in the treatment of patients with epilepsy, especially in the treatment of patients who have psychiatric comorbidities and might not be good candidates for LEV treatment. BRV broadens the therapeutic spectrum and facilitates personalized treatment.

Preliminary Asian experience of using perampanel in clinical practice

Background

To analyze the efficacy and safety of perampanel over a 3-month period in a sample of Asian people with epilepsy.

Methods

The efficacy and safety of perampanel as an adjunctive therapy for patients with epilepsy were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. Patients were categorized according to seizure type, concomitant antiepileptic drug usage, and perampanel dosage.

Results

A total of 210 patients were included in the study and 131 patients completed 3 months of perampanel treatment. The average dosage of perampanel was 5.31 mg/day, and the 50% responder rate (≥50% seizure frequency reduction) in all patients was 45.8%, with a 27.5% seizure-free rate. For focal seizures, focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, and primary generalized seizures, the 50% responder rates were respectively 29.4%, 49.5%, and 36.4%. In total, 39.5% of patients experienced adverse events within 3 months of observation period, and the rate of drug withdrawal due to adverse events was 8.6%. Dizziness, ataxia, irritability/aggression were the most common adverse events.

Conclusions

The efficacy and safety of perampanel in a real-world setting with Asian patients is comparable to that in clinical trials that have included fewer Asian patients.

Adverse Events During Perampanel Adjunctive Therapy in Intractable Epilepsy

Background and Purpose

Perampanel is the first α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionic acid (AMPA)-receptor antagonist developed to treat epilepsy. The effects of either rapid or slow dose titration on adverse events remain to be elucidated.

Methods

Eighty-five patients received perampanel between March 2016 and August 2016. Patients were divided into two groups according to their dosing schedule: rapid dose titration (2-mg increments at intervals of 1 to 2 weeks) and slow dose titration (2-mg increments at intervals of at least 3 weeks). Seizure frequency and adverse events were analyzed over 3 months.

Results

Adverse events were reported by 47 (58%) of the 81 patients analyzed, with 12 (15%) patients discontinuing perampanel due to adverse events. Common adverse events included dizziness (n=30, 37%), aggressive mood and behavior (n=19, 24%), gait disturbance (n=16, 20%), and sleep problems (n=10, 12.4%). The overall adverse events were similar in the slow-titration group (38 of 61 patients) and the rapid-titration group (8 of 20 patients, p=0.081). However, none of the 20 patients in the slow-titration group experienced gait disturbance, compared with 16 of the 61 patients in the rapid-titration group (p=0.009), while appetite change was experienced by 4 patients in the slow-titration group but only 1 in the rapid-titration group (p=0.003). No relationship was noted between adverse events and the maximum dose of perampanel (p=0.116). Sex differences were observed, with the response to perampanel being better and the rate of adverse events being higher in females (p=0.015 and p=0.046, respectively).

Conclusions

Slow titration of perampanel may reduce perampanel-related adverse events.

Synaptic Changes in AMPA Receptor Subunit Expression in Cortical Parvalbumin Interneurons in the Stargazer Model of Absence Epilepsy

Feedforward inhibition is essential to prevent run away excitation within the brain. Recent evidence suggests that a loss of feed-forward inhibition in the corticothalamocortical circuitry may underlie some absence seizures. However, it is unclear if this aberration is specifically linked to loss of synaptic excitation onto local fast-spiking parvalbumin-containing (PV⁺) inhibitory interneurons, which are responsible for mediating feedforward inhibition within cortical networks. We recently reported a global tissue loss of AMPA receptors (AMPARs), and a specific mistrafficking of these AMPARs in PV⁺ interneurons in the stargazer somatosensory cortex. The current study was aimed at investigating if cellular changes in AMPAR expression were translated into deficits in receptors at specific synapses in the feedforward inhibitory microcircuit. Using western blot immunolabeling on biochemically isolated synaptic fractions, we demonstrate a loss of AMPAR GluA1–4 subunits in the somatosensory cortex of stargazers compared to non-epileptic control mice. Furthermore, using double post-embedding immunogold-cytochemistry, we show a loss of GluA1–4-AMPARs at excitatory synapses onto cortical PV⁺ interneurons. Altogether, these data indicate a loss of synaptic AMPAR-mediated excitation of cortical PV⁺ inhibitory neurons. As the cortex is considered the site of initiation of spike wave discharges (SWDs) within the corticothalamocortical circuitry, loss of AMPARs at cortical PV⁺ interneurons likely impairs feed-forward inhibitory output, and contributes to the generation of SWDs and absence seizures in stargazers.

[Perampanel in the treatment of patients with epilepsy]

Development of new antiepileptic drugs (AED) does not stop due to the fact that the number of patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy remains at about 30%. One of the newest AEDs is perampanel (PER), a selective, non-competitive AMPA receptor antagonist to target post-synaptic glutamate transmission. PER is approved in the Russian Federation as adjunctive treatment for focal seizures with or without secondarily generalized seizures and for primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) in patients with epilepsy aged ≥12 years. The drug is effective and well-tolerated in the dose of 4-8 mg/day, and most side effects are dose-dependent. The high efficacy of PER combined with the good tolerability, absence of life-threatening adverse reactions and convenient intake allow us to recommend PER as the first choice additional drug in treatment of patients with epilepsy.

Focusing on claudin-5: A promising candidate in the regulation of BBB to treat ischemic stroke

Claudin-5 is a tight junction (TJ) protein in the blood-brain barrier (BBB) that has recently attracted increased attention. Numerous studies have demonstrated that claudin-5 regulates the integrity and permeability of the BBB. Increased claudin-5 expression plays a neuroprotective role in neurological diseases, particularly in cerebral ischemic stroke. Moreover, claudin-5 might be a potential marker for early hemorrhagic transformation detection in ischemic stroke. In light of the distinctive effects of claudin-5 on the nervous system, we present the elaborate network of roles that claudin-5 plays in ischemic stroke. In this review, we first introduce basic knowledge regarding the BBB and the claudin family, the characterization and regulation of claudin-5, and association between claudin-5 and other TJ proteins. Subsequently, we describe BBB dysfunction and neuron-specific drivers of pathogenesis of ischemic stroke, including inflammatory disequilibrium and oxidative stress. Furthermore, we summarize promising ischemic stroke treatments that target the BBB via claudin-5, including modified rt-PA therapy, pharmacotherapy, hormone treatment, receptor-targeted therapy, gene therapy, and physical therapy. This review highlights recent advances and provides a comprehensive summary of claudin-5 in the regulation of the BBB and may be helpful for drug design and clinical therapy for treatment of ischemic stroke.

One-Year Retention Study of Adjunctive Perampanel Treatment in Epilepsy Patients

OBJECTIVES

Perampanel is a recently introduced antiepileptic drug (AED) with a unique action mechanism of noncompetitive and selective α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid antagonist. Because of delayed approval of perampanel in most Asian countries, there is limited information on the clinical usefulness of perampanel in the Asian population. We performed a retrospective analysis of retention rate, seizure outcome, and adverse events for perampanel treatment in South Korea.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center, 1-year observational study. A total of 137 epilepsy patients (86 men, 51 women; age, 17-86 years) who were treated with perampanel as an adjunctive treatment were included. Perampanel was administered at a starting dose of 2 mg/d, and optimal-dose adjustments were made according to individual clinical responses. Efficacy and tolerability were analyzed during a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The overall retention rate was 71.3% at the 6-month follow-up and 61.0% at the 1-year follow-up. Retention rates were similar between patients with 1 concomitant AED and those taking 2 or more concomitant AEDs. The most common adverse event was somnolence, followed by dullness and psychiatric reactions, and the presence of psychiatric comorbidity was significantly associated with the development of psychiatric adverse reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that the retention rate and adverse events for adjunctive perampanel treatment in the Korean population were comparable with those in Western countries. Our study also suggests that adjuvant perampanel treatment may be effective in patients taking a higher number of concomitant AEDs and that psychiatric comorbidity may be a risk factor for perampanel-induced psychiatric reactions.

Simple and rapid validated HPLC-fluorescence determination of perampanel in the plasma of patients with epilepsy

We present a simple and fast high-performance liquid chromatography method with fluorescence detection for the determination of the antiepileptic drug perampanel in human plasma. The chromatographic separation was performed on a Kinetex PFP (100 × 2.6 mm, 4.6 µm) column, using a mobile phase of sodium acetate 0.03 M pH 3.7 and acetonitrile (40/60, v/v), at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min. Total chromatography time for each run was 5 min. Sample preparation (250 µL) involved only one simple precipitation step by acetonitrile spiked with mirtazapine as internal standard. The method was validated over a concentration range of 20-1000 ng/mL and successfully applied to measure perampanel concentrations in plasma samples obtained from patients with epilepsy. This assay combines the high specificity of fluorescence detection with a very simple and fast sample pretreatment and can offer real advantages over existing methods in terms of simplicity and transferability to a therapeutic drug monitoring setting.

Efficacy of perampanel in a patient with epilepsia partialis continua

Perampanel is the first-in-class selective and noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor antagonist. It is authorized in the U.S. and Europe as an add-on antiepileptic drug for partial-onset seizures, and for primary generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Single reports have also indicated a potential efficacy for myoclonic jerks. Here, we report a patient whose drug-resistant epilepsia partialis continua completely resolved after adding perampanel. She has remained seizure-free in an eighteen-month follow-up period. Epilepsia partialis continua reemerged transiently after perampanel was temporarily discontinued, with no recurrence after its reintroduction. Therefore, this effect was reproducible, and suggests that it might be worth trying perampanel in similar settings.

Spotlight on perampanel in the management of seizures: design, development and an update on place in therapy

Purpose

Perampanel is a first-in-class antiepileptic medication approved for the treatment of partial (focal) seizures, and as adjunctive treatment for primarily generalized tonic–clonic seizures. The pharmacology, efficacy data, adverse-effect profile, pharmacokinetics and place in therapy are reviewed.

Summary

Perampanel is indicated for use in patients with epilepsy who are 12 years of age or older. It is the first medication designed specifically to be a non-competitive antagonist at post-synaptic α-amino-3-hydroxyl-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionate receptors. Efficacy in refractory seizures has been established, and ongoing efficacy demonstrated by post-marketing data. The drug is completely absorbed, and exhibits a half-life that allows for once-daily administration in doses up to 12 mg/day. Drug interactions are minimal, but increased doses may be necessary when given with strong inducers of cytochrome P450 enzymes, including when perampanel is co-administered with other antiepileptics that exhibit this property. The most common adverse effects noted in both clinical trials and post-marketing are dizziness and somnolence. Psychiatric and behavioral adverse events have been documented in both adult and pediatric patients, including those with no corresponding diagnostic history.

Conclusion

Perampanel is a novel adjunctive antiepileptic medication that is an effective option for adolescents and adults with partial seizures, and primarily generalized tonic–clonic seizures uncontrolled with other medications.

Budget impact of perampanel as adjunctive treatment of uncontrolled partial-onset and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in the United States

PURPOSE

To evaluate the budget impact (BI) of adopting perampanel for adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS), with or without secondarily generalized seizures, and the adjunctive treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) in patients 12years or older in the United States.

METHODS

A BI model was developed to estimate the potential BI of adopting adjunctive perampanel from a US payer (direct costs only) and societal (direct and indirect costs) perspective over a 5-year period. Efficacy data for perampanel and antiepileptic drug (AED) maintenance therapy were obtained from perampanel phase III clinical trials. Drug, direct medical (healthcare provider, emergency room, and hospitalizations), and indirect (productivity loss) costs were obtained from appropriate sources (e.g., AnalySource® Online [wholesale acquisition costs], 2013 Optum Insight Clinformatics Database [market share percentages, direct medical costs per unit], and 2011-2013 National Health and Wellness Survey [NHWS; healthcare resource utilization, overall work impairment, and baseline distribution of patients across the 4 health states]). Mapping of seizure frequency to medical resource utilization and work impairment was obtained from Kantar Health's NHWS.

RESULTS

In a hypothetical health plan of 1 million members, 660 (0.066%) members ≥12years old had uncontrolled POS (395 [59.8%]) or PGTCS (265 [40.2%]). During the first 5years of adoption of perampanel, absolute BI (including drug, direct medical, and indirect costs) was $852, $2124, $3855, $5318, and $6397, respectively, for a cumulative absolute BI of $18,545. Drug cost was estimated to increase by $13,888, $34,646, $62,863, $86,728, and $104,326, respectively; however, this cost would be mostly offset by decreases in direct medical ($5041, $12,576, $22,818, $31,481, and $37,869, respectively) and indirect ($7995, $19,946, $36,190, $49,929, and $60,060, respectively) costs. Total per-member-per-month cost (drug and direct medical costs) was estimated to increase by $0.0007, $0.0018, $0.0033, $0.0046, and $0.0055 from years 1 to 5.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on results of this BI model, increased cost of adopting perampanel in a health plan of 1 million members would be minimal for payers, and societal costs would be close to neutral.

Tolerability and Safety of Commonly Used Antiepileptic Drugs in Adolescents and Adults: A Clinician's Overview

This paper discusses the issues surrounding the tolerability and safety of the commonly used antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in adolescents and adults. The content includes dose-related adverse effects, idiosyncratic reactions, behavioural and psychiatric comorbidities, chronic problems, enzyme induction and teratogenesis. Twenty-one AEDs are discussed in chronological order of their introduction into the UK, starting with phenobarbital and ending with brivaracetam. Wherever possible, advice is given on anticipating, recognising and managing these issues and thereby improving the lives of people with epilepsy, most of whom will need to take one or more of these agents for life. Avoidance of side effects will increase the possibility of achieving and maintaining long-term seizure freedom. Alternatively, adverse events from AEDs will substantially reduce quality of life and often result in higher healthcare costs.

A two-year retrospective evaluation of perampanel in patients with highly drug-resistant epilepsy and cognitive impairment

PURPOSE

The objective of this work was to review systematically the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) in residential patients of an epilepsy center.

METHOD

We adopted an industry-independent noninterventional retrospective evaluation on the basis of the paper and electronic records complemented by personal information on the part of the treating neurologists. All patients (N=26, 15 females, mean age: 30, range 21-55years) started on PER from its introduction to the market in September 2012 until December 15th 2013 were included. Evaluation was carried out after 6, 12, and 24months of PER treatment. Changes in seizure frequency were calculated as the number of seizures during three months on PER compared to a three-month baseline period. The Clinical Global Impression Scale served as an instrument to record changes in seizure intensity beyond numerical values. Adverse effects were documented by means of the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile.

RESULTS

Most patients had structural or metabolic epilepsy, 2 patients suffered from Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, 2 from other symptomatic generalized epilepsy. All patients had grade III drug-resistant epilepsy. All patients had additional cognitive deficits of different degree. The retention rates were 61.5% after 6months, 46.2% after 12months, and 42.3% after 24months. The responder rates were 11.5% after 6months, 23.1% after 12months, and 7.7% after 24months. Partial responders (positive CGI and/or seizure reduction <50%) included, the respective values were 26.9%, 38.5%, and 23.1%. Only 1 patient was seizure free at 12months (but not at 24months). A loss of efficacy in the second year of treatment was suspected but the decrease of the responder rate could also be ascribed to a number of different circumstances. Adverse effects in the psychiatric field like irritability, aggression, increased sensitivity, and suicidal ideation/behavior occurred in 50% of the patients. They were the main reason to discontinue PER.

CONCLUSIONS

After one year of treatment PER showed reasonable efficacy in a particularly difficult-to-treat population. Psychiatric adverse effects forced discontinuation in many cases.

Perampanel (Fycompa): A Review of Clinical Efficacy and Safety in Epilepsy

Perampanel (Fycompa): a review of clinical efficacy and safety in epilepsy.

Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies-An Italian observational multicenter study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Perampanel (PER) in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies in daily clinical practice conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This Italian multicenter retrospective observational study was performed in 16 paediatric epilepsy centres. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ≤18 years of age, (ii) history of refractory epilepsy, (iii) a follow-up ≥5 months of PER add-on therapy. Exclusion criteria were: (i) a diagnosis of primary idiopathic generalized epilepsy, (ii) variation of concomitant AEDs during the previous 4 weeks. Response was defined as a ≥50% reduction in monthly seizure frequency compared with the baseline.

RESULTS

62 patients suffering from various refractory epilepsies were included in this study: 53% were males, the mean age was 14.2 years (range 6-18 years), 8 patients aged <12 years. Mean age at epilepsy onset was 3.4 years and the mean duration of epilepsy was 10.8 years (range 1-16), which ranged from 2 seizures per-month up to several seizures per-day (mean number=96.5). Symptomatic focal epilepsy was reported in 62.9% of cases. Mean number of AEDs used in the past was 7.1; mean number of concomitant AEDs was 2.48, with carbamazepine used in 43.5% of patients. Mean PER daily dose was 7.1mg (2-12mg). After an average of 6.6 months of follow-up (5-13 months), the retention rate was 77.4% (48/62). The response rate was 50%; 16% of patients achieved ≥75% seizure frequency reduction and 5% became completely seizure free. Seizure aggravation was observed in 9.7% of patients. Adverse events were reported in 19 patients (30.6%) and led to PER discontinuation in 4 patients (6.5%). The most common adverse events were behaviour disturbance (irritability and aggressiveness), dizziness, sedation and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

PER was found to be a safe and effective treatment when used as adjunctive therapy in paediatric patients with uncontrolled epilepsy.

Add-on perampanel in Lance-Adams syndrome

Perampanel (PER) is the first-in-class selective, noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist that has been licensed and marketed as antiepileptic drug (AED) indicated for patients with partial-onset and primary generalized tonic–clonic seizures. A positive effect was reported in some patients with epileptic myoclonic jerks in idiopathic generalized epilepsy and in progressive myoclonic epilepsy.

We treated a male patient with posthypoxic nonepileptic myoclonus (Lance–Adams syndrome) with add-on PER and achieved an almost complete cessation of jerks. This effect was reproducible and, therefore, we suggest that it might be worth trying PER in comparable cases.

Successful treatment of epilepsia partialis continua due to Rassmussen encephalitis with perampanel

Background. Epilepsia partialis continua (EPC) is a difficult to treat condition, which tends to be refractory to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). We previously published two other treatment episodes of EPC due to stroke and vascular dementia with a possible effect of perampanel (PER).

Aim. With the publication of a third treatment episode of EPC terminated by the administration of PER we would like to suggest that PER may be an effective treatment option in this condition.

Material and Methods. We present a case where PER was the last AED introduced in the treatment of a patient with EPC and individual seizures due to Rasmussen encephalitis before his seizure frequency could be reduced significantly.

Results. A 44 years old male patient, who had been on a combination therapy of at least 4 AEDs since the age of 24, was admitted to our hospital presenting with an EPC. After the introduction of PER in the therapy EPC stopped and he remained seizure free for more than a year. Two of his other AEDs could be tapered of.

Conclusion. PER might be especially effective in EPC.

Perampanel for focal epilepsy: insights from early clinical experience

Perampanel is approved for adjunctive therapy of focal epilepsy with or without secondarily generalized seizures in patients aged >12 years. This narrative review uses real-world and clinical trial data to elucidate perampanel's role in the clinic. Audit data show good tolerability with perampanel and higher freedom-from-seizure rates in elderly vs younger patients. When using perampanel in elderly patients, special attention should be given to comorbidities and co-medication to avoid potential interactions or adverse events. Slower titration is generally recommended, and seizure control should be reassessed at a dose of 4 mg before further dose increases. Perampanel efficacy is similar in adolescents and adults; however, somnolence, nasopharyngitis, and aggression are more frequent in adolescents vs the overall population. Individualized and slow-dose titration can minimize adverse events. Low serum concentrations of perampanel may occur in patients also receiving some enzyme-inducing anti-epileptic drugs; a perampanel dose increase may be required. Adverse events of importance with perampanel include dizziness; anger, aggression, and hostile behavior (particularly in adolescents); and falls (particularly in patients >65 years). An individualized approach to dosing, including slower up-titration and bedtime dosing, reduces dizziness risk. Other drugs may cause or aggravate dizziness; reducing concomitant drugs may be necessary when up-titrating perampanel. It would seem clinically appropriate to give due consideration to avoiding use in patients with a history of anger or hostile/aggressive behavior. The possibility of such behaviors should be discussed with patients before starting perampanel, with monitoring during up-titration. Slower up-titration of perampanel in older patients helps reduce fall risk.