Absence of Liver Toxicity in Perampanel-Treated Subjects: Pooled results from partial seizure phase III perampanel clinical studies

The Effect of Plasma Protein Binding on the Therapeutic Monitoring of Antiseizure Medications

Epilepsy is a widely diffused neurological disorder including a heterogeneous range of syndromes with different aetiology, severity and prognosis. Pharmacological treatments are based on the use, either in mono- or in polytherapy, of antiseizure medications (ASMs), which act at different synaptic levels, generally modifying the excitatory and/or inhibitory response through different action mechanisms. To reduce the risk of adverse effects and drug interactions, ASMs levels should be closely evaluated in biological fluids performing an appropriate Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM). However, many decisions in TDM are based on the determination of the total drug concentration although measurement of the free fraction, which is not bound to plasma proteins, is becoming of ever-increasing importance since it correlates better with pharmacological and toxicological effects. Aim of this work has been to review methodological aspects concerning the evaluation of the free plasmatic fraction of some ASMs, focusing on the effect and the clinical significance that drug-protein binding has in the case of widely used drugs such as valproic acid, phenytoin, perampanel and carbamazepine. Although several validated methodologies are currently available which are effective in separating and quantifying the different forms of a drug, prospective validation studies are undoubtedly needed to better correlate, in real-world clinical contexts, pharmacokinetic monitoring to clinical outcomes.

Perampanel Reduces Hyperthermia-Induced Seizures in Dravet Syndrome Mouse Model

Treatment options for Dravet syndrome are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antiepileptic effect of the AMPA receptor antagonist perampanel (PER) on a mouse model of Dravet syndrome (Scn1a^E1099X/+). We report here that the PER (2 mg/kg) treatment inhibited the spontaneous recurrent seizures and attenuated epileptic activity in Scn1a^E1099X/+ mice. In the hyperthermia-induced seizure experiment, PER clearly increased temperature tolerance and significantly ameliorated seizure frequency and discharge duration. PER also demonstrated antiepileptic effects in a cross-over study and a synergistic effect for attenuating heat-induced seizure when given in combination with stiripentol or valproic acid. The results showed that PER effectively decreased the occurrence of spontaneous recurrent seizures and showed significant therapeutic potential for hyperthermia-induced seizures with regard to both susceptibility and severity in a Dravet syndrome mouse model. Potential therapeutic effects of PER for treatment of Dravet syndrome were demonstrated.

Management of status epilepticus in patients with liver or kidney disease: a narrative review

Introduction: Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurologic and medical emergency with significant related morbidity and mortality. Hepatic or renal dysfunction can considerably affect the pharmacokinetics of drugs used for SE through a variety of direct or indirect mechanisms.Areas Covered: This review aims to focus on the therapeutic management of SE in patients with hepatic or renal impairment, highlighting drugs' selection and dose changes that may be necessary due to altered drug metabolism and excretion. The references for this review were identified by searches of PubMed and Google Scholar until May 2020.Expert opinion: According to literature evidence and clinical experience, in patients with renal disease, the authors suggest considering lorazepam as the drug of choice in pre-hospital and intra-hospital early-stage SE, phenytoin in definite SE, propofol in refractory or super-refractory SE. In patients with liver disease, the authors suggest the use of lorazepam as drug of choice in pre-hospital and intra-hospital early-stage SE, lacosamide in definite SE, propofol in refractory or super-refractory SE. A list of preferred drugs for all SE stages is provided.

Antiepileptic Drugs and Liver Disease

Acute, symptomatic seizures or epilepsy may complicate the course of hepatic disease. Choosing the most appropriate antiepileptic drug in this setting represents a difficult challenge, as most medications are metabolized by the liver. This article focuses on the acute and chronic treatment of seizures in patients with advanced liver disease and reviews the hepatotoxic potential of specific antiepileptic drugs. Newer antiepileptic drugs without, or with minimal, hepatic metabolism, such as levetiracetam, lacosamide, topiramate, gabapentin, and pregabalin should be used as first-line therapy. Medications undergoing extensive hepatic metabolism, such as valproic acid, phenytoin, and felbamate should be used as drugs of last resort. In special circumstances, as in patients affected by acute intermittent porphyria, exposure to most antiepileptic drugs could precipitate attacks. In this clinical scenario, bromides, levetiracetam, gabapentin, and vigabatrin constitute safe choices. For the treatment of status epilepticus, levetiracetam and lacosamide, available in intravenous preparations, are good second-line therapies after benzodiazepines fail to control seizures. Hepatotoxicity is also a rare and unexpected side effect of some antiepileptic drugs. Drugs such as valproic acid, phenytoin, and felbamate, have a well-recognized association with liver toxicity. Other antiepileptic drugs, including phenobarbital, benzodiazepines, ethosuximide, and the newer generations of antiepileptic drugs, have only rarely been linked to hepatotoxicity. Thus physicians should be mindful of the pharmacokinetic profile and the hepatotoxic potential of the different antiepileptic drugs available to treat patients affected by liver disease.

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.

Retention of perampanel in adults with pharmacoresistant epilepsy at a single tertiary care center

RATIONALE

Observational data on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) inform about their use in clinical practice. We describe our clinical experience with perampanel (PER) in a large UK tertiary epilepsy center.

METHODS

Adults initiated on PER between October 2012 and March 2015 were followed until they discontinued PER or 10 September 2016. Data on epilepsy syndrome, duration, seizure types, concomitant and previous AED use, PER dosing, efficacy and side effects were recorded. Efficacy was categorized as temporary or ongoing (at last follow-up) seizure freedom, ≥50% seizure reduction, or other benefit (e.g. No convulsions or daytime seizures). These categories were mutually exclusive except for people with temporary seizure freedom.

RESULTS

391 received a PER prescription, five of whom never took it. No follow-up data were available for ten. 83% had focal epilepsy. People were prescribed PER in addition to 1-7 (Interquartile range [IQR] 2, 2, 3) AEDs and had previously used up to 18 (IQR 5, 7, 10) AEDs. Total exposure was 639patient/years. Retention rates were 60.4% at one year, 48.3% at two years, and 42.7% at three years. 19 (5%) people reported seizure free periods lasting at least six months. A ≥50% reduction in seizures lasting at least six months was reported by 76 people (20%), and marked improvement for ≥6months was seen in 52 (14%). Five (1%) were taken off other AEDs and continued on PER monotherapy for 4-27months. Seizures were aggravated in 57 (15%). Somatic side effects were reported by 197 (52%), mostly CNS. Mood changes, irritability or challenging behavior were reported by 137 (36%). PER was discontinued by 211 (56%) due to adverse effects (39%), inefficacy (26%), or both (35%). No idiosyncratic adverse events were seen.

CONCLUSION

PER resulted in some benefit in 40% of those exposed. Adverse effects on mental health and on balance were common and should be discussed with people before initiating PER.