Long-term open-label perampanel: generalized tonic-clonic seizures in idiopathic generalized epilepsy

Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy: Misunderstandings, Challenges, and Opportunities

The idiopathic generalized epilepsies (IGE) make up a fifth of all epilepsies, but <1% of epilepsy research. This skew reflects misperceptions: diagnosis is straightforward, pathophysiology is understood, seizures are easily controlled, epilepsy is outgrown, morbidity and mortality are low, and surgical interventions are impossible. Emerging evidence reveals that patients with IGE may go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed with focal epilepsy if EEG or semiology have asymmetric or focal features. Genetic, electrophysiologic, and neuroimaging studies provide insights into pathophysiology, including overlaps and differences from focal epilepsies. IGE can begin in adulthood and patients have chronic and drug-resistant seizures. Neuromodulatory interventions for drug-resistant IGE are emerging. Rates of psychiatric and other comorbidities, including sudden unexpected death in epilepsy, parallel those in focal epilepsy. IGE is an understudied spectrum for which our diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, scientific understanding, and therapies remain inadequate.

Antiseizure medications for idiopathic generalized epilepsies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of antiseizure medications (ASMs), both as monotherapies and adjunctive therapies, for idiopathic generalized epilepsies (IGEs) and related entities.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for relevant randomized controlled trials from December 2022 to February 2023. Studies on the efficacy and safety of ASM monotherapies or adjunctive therapies for IGEs and related entities-including juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, childhood absence epilepsy (CAE), juvenile absence epilepsy, or generalized tonic-clonic seizures alone (GTCA)-were included. Efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients remaining seizure free for 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; safety outcomes were the proportions of any treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Network meta-analyses were performed in a random-effects model to obtain odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Rankings of ASMs were based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). This study is registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022372358).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomized controlled trials containing 4282 patients were included. As monotherapies, all ASMs were more effective than placebo, and valproate and ethosuximide were significantly better than lamotrigine. According to the SUCRA for efficacy, ethosuximide ranked first for CAE, whereas valproate ranked first for other types of IGEs. As adjunctive therapies, topiramate ranked best for GTCA as well as overall for IGEs, while levetiracetam ranked best for myoclonic seizures. For safety, perampanel ranked best (measured by any TEAE).

CONCLUSIONS

All of the studied ASMs were more effective than placebo. Valproate monotherapy ranked best overall for IGEs, whereas ethosuximide ranked best for CAE. Adjunctive topiramate and levetiracetam were most effective for GTCA and myoclonic seizures, respectively. Furthermore, perampanel had the best tolerability.

Perampanel for the treatment of people with idiopathic generalized epilepsy in clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to evaluate perampanel (PER) when used under real-world conditions to treat people with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) included in the PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) study.

METHODS

The multinational, retrospective, pooled analysis PERMIT explored the use of PER in people with focal and generalized epilepsy treated in clinical practice across 17 countries. This subgroup analysis included PERMIT participants with IGE. Time points for retention and effectiveness measurements were 3, 6, and 12 months (last observation carried forward, defined as "last visit," was also applied to effectiveness). Effectiveness was evaluated by seizure type (total seizures, generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCS], myoclonic seizures, absence seizures) and included ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom rate (defined as no seizures since at least the previous visit). Safety/tolerability was monitored throughout PER treatment and evaluated by documenting the incidence of adverse events (AEs), including psychiatric AEs and those leading to treatment discontinuation.

RESULTS

The Full Analysis Set included 544 people with IGE (51.9% women, mean age = 33.3 years, mean epilepsy duration = 18.1 years). At 3, 6, and 12 months, 92.4%, 85.5%, and 77.3% of participants were retained on PER treatment, respectively (Retention Population, n = 497). At the last visit, responder and seizure freedom rates were, respectively, 74.2% and 54.6% (total seizures), 81.2% and 61.5% (GTCS), 85.7% and 66.0% (myoclonic seizures), and 90.5% and 81.0% (absence seizures) (Effectiveness Population, n = 467). AEs occurred in 42.9% of patients and included irritability (9.6%), dizziness/vertigo (9.2%), and somnolence (6.3%) (Tolerability Population, n = 520). Treatment discontinuation due to AEs was 12.4% over 12 months.

SIGNIFICANCE

This subgroup analysis of the PERMIT study demonstrated the effectiveness and good tolerability of PER in people with IGE when administered under everyday clinical practice conditions. These findings are in line with clinical trial evidence, supporting PER's use as broad-spectrum antiseizure medication for the treatment of IGE.

Replacement of Valproic Acid with New Anti-Seizure Medications in Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy

Background: Little is known regarding the non-inferiority of new anti-seizure medications (ASMs) in terms of replacing valproic acid (VPA) in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE). We hypothesized that replacement of VPA with new ASMs would offer non-inferior or better control of seizure frequency. The purpose of this study was to compare epileptic seizure frequency between the subset of patients with IGE who were on VPA and the subset of patients with IGE who replaced VPA with new ASMs. Methods: Patients with IGE who were on or had been on VPA between January 2016 and March 2022 were divided into a group that replaced VPA with new ASMs (VPA-replace group) and a group that remained on VPA (VPA-continue group). We then compared the groups in terms of seizure frequency and myoclonus. Results: Of the 606 patients on VPA between January 2016 and March 2022, 156 patients with IGE were enrolled to this study (VPA-replace group, n = 68; VPA-continue group, n = 88). The VPA-replace group included significantly more females than the VPA-continue group (p < 0.001). The VPA-replace group also showed significantly higher seizure frequency before replacement (p < 0.001), but not after replacement (p = 0.074). Patients on monotherapy displayed improved seizure frequency with new ASMs (p < 0.001). Among the new ASMs, perampanel (PER) significantly improved seizure frequency (p = 0.002). Forty-two patients in the VPA-replace group who had myoclonus achieved significant improvements (p < 0.001). Among these, patients on PER monotherapy (p < 0.001) or PER + lamotrigine (0.016) showed significantly improved myoclonus scale scores. Conclusions: This study shows the non-inferiority of new ASMs compared to VPA, with better seizure control using new ASMs in subsets of patients with IGE on monotherapy.