Tolerability, safety, and efficacy of adjunctive brivaracetam for focal seizures in older patients: A pooled analysis from three phase III studies

Brivaracetam effectiveness and tolerability in older and younger adults with epilepsy: EXPERIENCE, a pooled analysis of international data from retrospective studies

This analysis assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in older (≥65 years of age) and younger (≥16 to <65 years of age) adults with epilepsy. This was a subgroup analysis from EXPERIENCE/EPD332, a pooled analysis of individual patient records from multiple independent, non-interventional studies of patients with epilepsy starting BRV in Australia, Europe, and the United States. Included patients had ≥6 months of follow-up data. Outcomes included responders (≥50 % reduction from baseline in seizure frequency), seizure freedom (no seizures within 3 months before the time point), and continuous seizure freedom (no seizures from baseline) at 12 months; BRV discontinuation during the whole study follow-up; and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Patients with missing data after BRV discontinuation were deemed non-responders/not seizure-free. Analysis populations included the Full Analysis Set (FAS; patients who received ≥1 BRV dose and had seizure type and age documented at baseline) and the modified FAS (FAS patients who had ≥1 seizure recorded during baseline). The FAS was used for all outcomes except seizure reduction. The FAS included 147 (8.9 %) patients aged ≥65 years and 1497 (91.1 %) aged ≥16 to <65 years. Compared with the younger subgroup, patients aged ≥65 years had a longer median epilepsy duration (33.0 years [n = 144] vs 17.0 years [n = 1460]) and lower median seizure frequency at index (2.0 seizures/28 days [n = 129] vs 4.0 seizures/28 days [n = 1256]), and less commonly had >1 prior antiseizure medication (106/141 [75.2 %] vs 1265/1479 [85.5 %]). At 12 months, a numerically higher percentage of patients aged ≥65 years versus the younger subgroup achieved ≥50 % seizure reduction (46.5 % [n = 71] vs 36.0 % [n = 751]), seizure freedom (26.0 % [n = 100] vs 13.9 % [n = 1011]), and continuous seizure freedom (22.0 % [n = 100] vs 10.7 % [n = 1011]). During the whole study follow-up, 43/147 (29.3 %) patients aged ≥65 years and 508/1492 (34.0 %) aged ≥16 to <65 years discontinued BRV. The incidence of TEAEs since the prior visit was similar in both subgroups at 3 months (≥65 years vs ≥16 to <65 years: 38/138 [27.5 %] vs 356/1404 [25.4 %]), 6 months (19/119 [16.0 %] vs 176/1257 [14.0 %]), and 12 months (8/104 [7.7 %] vs 107/1128 [9.5 %]). This real-world analysis suggests BRV was effective in patients aged ≥65 years and ≥16 to <65 years, with numerically higher effectiveness in the older subgroup. BRV was well tolerated in both subgroups.

Narrative Review of Brivaracetam: Preclinical Profile and Clinical Benefits in the Treatment of Patients with Epilepsy

One third of patients with epilepsy will continue to have uncontrolled seizures despite treatment with antiseizure medications (ASMs). There is therefore a need to develop novel ASMs. Brivaracetam (BRV) is an ASM that was developed in a major drug discovery program aimed at identifying selective, high-affinity synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligands, the target molecule of levetiracetam. BRV binds to SV2A with 15- to 30-fold higher affinity and greater selectivity than levetiracetam. BRV has broad-spectrum antiseizure activity in animal models of epilepsy, a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, few clinically relevant drug-drug interactions, and rapid brain penetration. BRV is available in oral and intravenous formulations and can be initiated at target dose without titration. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive BRV (50-200 mg/day) treatment of focal-onset seizures was demonstrated in three pivotal phase III trials (NCT00490035/NCT00464269/NCT01261325), including in patients who had previously failed levetiracetam. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive BRV were also demonstrated in adult Asian patients with focal-onset seizures (NCT03083665). In several open-label trials (NCT00150800/NCT00175916/NCT01339559), long-term safety and tolerability of adjunctive BRV was established, with efficacy maintained for up to 14 years, with high retention rates. Evidence from daily clinical practice highlights BRV effectiveness and tolerability in specific epilepsy patient populations with high unmet needs: the elderly (≥ 65 years of age), children (< 16 years of age), patients with cognitive impairment, patients with psychiatric comorbid conditions, and patients with acquired epilepsy of specific etiologies (post-stroke epilepsy/brain tumor related epilepsy/traumatic brain injury-related epilepsy). Here, we review the preclinical profile and clinical benefits of BRV from pivotal trials and recently published evidence from daily clinical practice.

Brivaracetam use in clinical practice: a Delphi consensus on its role as first add-on therapy in focal epilepsy and beyond

BACKGROUND

Antiseizure medications remain the cornerstone of treatment for epilepsy, although a proportion of individuals with the condition will continue to experience seizures despite appropriate therapy. Treatment choices for epilepsy are based on variables related to both the individual patient and the available medications. Brivaracetam is a third-generation agent antiseizure medication.

METHODS

We carried out a Delphi consensus exercise to define the role of brivaracetam in clinical practice and to provide guidance about its use as first add-on ASM and in selected clinical scenarios. A total of 15 consensus statements were drafted by an expert panel following review of the literature and all were approved in the first round of voting by panelists. The consensus indicated different clinical scenarios for which brivaracetam can be a good candidate for treatment, including first add-on use.

RESULTS

Overall, brivaracetam was considered to have many advantageous characteristics that render it a suitable option for patients with focal epilepsy, including a fast onset of action, favorable pharmacokinetic profile with few drug-drug interactions, broad-spectrum activity, and being well tolerated across a range of doses. Brivaracetam is also associated with sustained clinical response and good tolerability in the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

These characteristics also make it suitable as an early add-on for the elderly and for patients with post-stroke epilepsy or status epilepticus as highlighted by the present Delphi consensus.

Brivaracetam and topiramate serum levels during pregnancy and delivery: a case report and a review of literature

BACKGROUND

An increasing use of newer antiseizure medication (ASM) such as SV2A ligand brivaracetam is observed. However, data on newer antiseizure medication and therapeutic drug monitoring during pregnancy is scarce.

METHODS

Therapeutic drug monitoring of brivaracetam (BRV) and topiramate (TPM) serum levels were performed during pregnancy, delivery and in the umbilical cord blood at delivery in a 34-year-old female patient with severe drug-resistant epilepsy.

RESULTS

During pregnancy, the serum levels of brivaracetam and topiramate remained stable. At 39th week of pregnancy, the patient gave birth to a healthy daughter. 1.5 h after the last ASM intake, the penetration rate measured in umbilical cord blood was 45% lower for BRV and 35% lower for TPM.

CONCLUSIONS

While the pharmacokinetics of topiramate are well known and its use during pregnancy should only be undertaken under special circumstances, there have been few studies on newer ASM in pregnancy such as brivaracetam. Based on our results and other case reports of BRV use during pregnancy, further studies are necessary to confirm its pharmacokinetics and safety during pregnancy.

Safety and Efficacy of Cenobamate for the Treatment of Focal Seizures in Older Patients: Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase III, Multicenter, Open-Label Study

BACKGROUND

Cenobamate is an antiseizure medication (ASM) approved in the US and Europe for the treatment of uncontrolled focal seizures.

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis of a phase III, open-label safety study assessed the safety and efficacy of adjunctive cenobamate in older adults versus the overall study population.

METHODS

Adults aged 18-70 years with uncontrolled focal seizures taking stable doses of one to three ASMs were enrolled in the phase III, open-label safety study; adults aged 65-70 years from that study were included in our safety analysis. Discontinuations due to adverse events and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed throughout the study in all patients who received one or more doses of cenobamate (safety study population). Efficacy was assessed post hoc in patients who had adequate seizure data available (post hoc efficacy population); we assessed patients aged 65-70 years from that population. Overall, 100% responder rates were assessed in the post hoc efficacy maintenance-phase population in 3-month intervals. Concomitant ASM drug load changes were also measured. For each ASM, drug load was defined as the ratio of actual drug dose/day to the World Health Organization defined daily dose (DDD).

RESULTS

Of 1340 patients (mean age 39.7 years) in the safety study population, 42 were ≥ 65 years of age (mean age 67.0 years, 52.4% female). Median duration of exposure was 36.1 and 36.9 months for overall patients and older patients, respectively, and mean epilepsy duration was 22.9 and 38.5 years, respectively. At 1, 2, and 3 years, 80%, 72%, and 68% of patients overall, and 76%, 71%, and 69% of older patients, respectively, remained on cenobamate. Common TEAEs (≥ 20%) were somnolence and dizziness in overall patients, and somnolence, dizziness, fall, fatigue, balance disorder, and upper respiratory tract infection in older patients. Falls in older patients occurred after a mean 452.1 days of adjunctive cenobamate treatment (mean dose 262.5 mg/day; mean concomitant ASM drug load 2.46). Of 240 patients in the post hoc efficacy population, 18 were ≥ 65 years of age. Mean seizure frequency at baseline was 18.1 seizures/28 days for the efficacy population and 3.1 seizures/28 days for older patients. Rates of 100% seizure reduction within 3-month intervals during the maintenance phase increased over time for the overall population (n = 214) and older adults (n = 15), reaching 51.9% and 78.6%, respectively, by 24 months. Mean percentage change in concomitant ASM drug load, not including cenobamate, was reduced in the overall efficacy population (31.8%) and older patients (36.3%) after 24 months of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this post hoc analysis showed notable rates of efficacy in older patients taking adjunctive cenobamate. Rates of several individual TEAEs occurred more frequently in older patients. Further reductions in concomitant ASMs may be needed in older patients when starting cenobamate to avoid adverse effects such as somnolence, dizziness, and falls.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02535091.

Management of epilepsy in older adults: A critical review by the ILAE Task Force on Epilepsy in the elderly

Older adults represent a highly heterogeneous population, with multiple diverse subgroups. Therefore, an individualized approach to treatment is essential to meet the needs of each unique subgroup. Most comparative studies focusing on treatment of epilepsy in older adults have found that levetiracetam has the best chance of long-term seizure freedom. However, there is a lack of studies investigating other newer generation antiseizure medications (ASMs). Although a number of randomized clinical trials have been performed on older adults with epilepsy, the number of participants studied was generally small, and they only investigated short-term efficacy and tolerability. Quality of life as an outcome is often missing but is necessary to understand the effectiveness and possible side effects of treatment. Prognosis needs to move beyond the focus on seizure control to long-term patient-centered outcomes. Dosing studies with newer generation ASMs are needed to understand which treatments are the best in the older adults with different comorbidities. In particular, more high-level evidence is required for older adults with Alzheimer's disease with epilepsy and status epilepticus. Future treatment studies should use greater homogeneity in the inclusion criteria to allow for clearer findings that can be comparable with other studies to build the existing treatment evidence base.

BRIVEST: A 'real-world' observational, single-centre study investigating the efficacy, safety and tolerability of Brivaracetam

OBJECTIVE

Via measures of efficacy, tolerability, and safety, this open-label, single-center study assessed the overall effectiveness of Brivaracetam (BRV) for the treatment of epilepsy in the context of 'real-world' clinical practice.

METHODS

Unselected consecutive patients were recruited and stratified into 3 cohorts with either fully prospective, fully retrospective or mixed data collection, dependent on whether their BRV prescriptions were historical, current, or pending. Prospective data were obtained at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and at 6-month intervals thereafter, from patient interviews and seizure diaries, and retrospective data from medical records. Efficacy variables were derived from seizure-related changes, and tolerability and safety variables from reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), BRV withdrawal, and changes to questionnaire scores. Additionally, we investigated treatment outcomes for those with previous levetiracetam (LEV) use, a history of psychiatric comorbidity, a learning disability, and of older age.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine patients (58.7% female, mean age 42 years, range: 18 to 72) were included, 59 with prospective follow-up for a minimum of 6 (47 patients, excluding those who withdrew) and a maximum of 24 months (2 patients). Of the full cohort, 87.2% had drug-resistant epilepsy. Retention: At the study end, the median treatment duration was 384 days (range: 6 to 1514 days), and BRV retention was 68.8%. Kaplan-Meier survival functions predicted retention rates of 74.0% and 70.0% at 6 and 12 months respectively.

EFFICACY

At the last follow-up, there was a ≥ 50% responder rate of 30.8%, with 12.1% seizure-free. Seizure frequency categories improved in 31.4% of patients, remained the same in 44.2%, and worsened in 24.4%. Monthly tonic-clonic seizure frequency had significantly decreased, and of those reporting these seizures, 58.3% showed reductions and 25.0% showed complete tonic-clonic seizure freedom.

TOLERABILITY

91.7% of patients reported at least 1 TEAE, with fatigue (30.3%), irritability (29.4%), and depression/low mood (28.4%) as the most common. Only 58.4% of all TEAEs were persistent. Brivaracetam discontinuation due to side effects occurred in 27.5% of the cohort. Depression and anxiety scores remained stable over time, and quality-of-life scores improved. Subgroups: Measures of BRV efficacy and tolerability did not differ according to previous LEV exposure. Tolerability profiles of those with learning disabilities, histories of psychiatric comorbidities, and older age did not greatly differ from the rest of the cohort. Of note, specific history of depression predicted the reporting of suicidal ideation.

CONCLUSION

The BRIVEST study provides real-world evidence of the effectiveness of BRV, suggesting that neither drug-resistant epilepsy nor previous LEV failure should preclude its use. Furthermore, BRV appears to be well-tolerated, even among those from vulnerable patient populations.

The clinical correlation between Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy

Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy are common nervous system diseases in older adults, and their incidence rates tend to increase with age. Patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease are more prone to have seizures. In patients older than 65 years, neurodegenerative conditions accounted for ~10% of all late-onset epilepsy cases, most of which are Alzheimer's disease. Epilepsy and seizure can occur in the early and late stages of Alzheimer's disease, leading to functional deterioration and behavioral alterations. Seizures promote amyloid-β and tau deposits, leading to neurodegenerative processes. Thus, there is a bi-directional association between Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy. Epilepsy is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease and, in turn, Alzheimer's disease is an independent risk factor for developing epilepsy in old age. Many studies have evaluated the shared pathogenesis and clinical relevance of Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy. In this review, we discuss the clinical associations between Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy, including their incidence, clinical features, and electroencephalogram abnormalities. Clinical studies of the two disorders in recent years are summarized, and new antiepileptic drugs used for treating Alzheimer's disease are reviewed.

Trends in antiseizure medication prescription patterns among all adults, women, and older adults with epilepsy: A German longitudinal analysis from 2008 to 2020

INTRODUCTION

The prescription patterns of antiseizure medication (ASM) are subject to new scientific evidence and sociodemographic and practical aspects. This study analyzed trends in ASM prescription patterns among all adults with epilepsy, with special consideration for women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) and older adult (≥65 years old) patients.

METHODS

Data from four questionnaire-based cohort studies, conducted in 2008, 2013, 2016, and 2020, were analyzed for ASM prescription frequencies and common mono- and dual therapy regimens. Statistical comparisons were performed with the Chi-square test and one-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Overall, the individual prescription patterns among 1,642 adult patients with epilepsy were analyzed. A significant increase in the prescription frequency of third-generation ASMs, from 59.3% to 84.2% (p = 0.004), was accompanied by a decrease in the frequency of first- and second-generation ASMs (5.4% to 2.1% and 34.9% to 12.6%, respectively). This trend was accompanied by a significant decrease in the use of enzyme-inducing ASMs, from 23.9% to 4.6% (p = 0.004). Among frequently prescribed ASMs, prescriptions of carbamazepine (18.6% to 3.1%, p = 0.004) and valproate (15.4% to 8.7%, p = 0.004) decreased, whereas prescriptions of levetiracetam (18.0% up to 32.4%, p = 0.004) increased significantly. The prescription frequency of lamotrigine remained largely constant at approximately 20% (p = 0.859). Among WOCBP, the prescription frequencies of carbamazepine (11.4% to 2.0%, p = 0.004) and valproate (16.1% to 6.1%, p = 0.004) decreased significantly. Levetiracetam monotherapy prescriptions increased significantly (6.6% to 30.4%, p = 0.004) for WOCBP, whereas lamotrigine prescriptions remained consistent (37.7% to 44.9%, p = 0.911). Among older adult patients, a significant decrease in carbamazepine prescriptions (30.1% to 7.8%, p = 0.025) was the only relevant change in ASM regimens between 2008 and 2020. In patients with genetic generalized epilepsies, levetiracetam was frequently used as an off-label monotherapy (25.0% to 35.3%).

CONCLUSION

These results show a clear trend toward the use of newer and less interacting third-generation ASMs, with lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and lacosamide representing the current ASMs of choice, displacing valproate and carbamazepine over the last decade. In WOCBP, prescription patterns shifted to minimize teratogenic effects, whereas, among older adults, the decrease in carbamazepine use may reflect the avoidance of hyponatremia risks and attempts to reduce the interaction potential with other drugs and ASMs. Levetiracetam is frequently used off-label as a monotherapy in patients with genetic generalized epilepsy.

Adjunctive Brivaracetam in Older Patients with Focal Seizures: Evidence from the BRIVAracetam add‑on First Italian netwoRk Study (BRIVAFIRST)

Background

The management of epilepsy in older adults has become part of daily practice because of an aging population. Older patients with epilepsy represent a distinct and more vulnerable clinical group as compared with younger patients, and they are generally under-represented in randomized placebo-controlled trials. Real-world studies can therefore be a useful complement to characterize the drug’s profile. Brivaracetam is a rationally developed compound characterized by high-affinity binding to synaptic vesicle protein 2A and approved as adjunctive therapy for focal seizures in adults with epilepsy.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the 12-month effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in older patients (≥65 years of age) with epilepsy treated in a real-world setting.

Methods

The BRIVAFIRST (BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy) was a 12-month retrospective multicenter study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive brivaracetam. Effectiveness outcomes included the rates of seizure response (≥50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), seizure freedom, and treatment discontinuation. Safety and tolerability outcomes included the rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events and the incidence of adverse events. Data were compared for patients aged ≥65 years of age (‘older’) vs those aged <65 years (‘younger’).

Results

There were 1029 patients with focal epilepsy included in the study, of whom 111 (10.8%) were aged ≥65 years. The median daily dose of brivaracetam at 3 months was 100 [interquartile range, 100–175] mg in the older group and 100 [100–200] mg in the younger group (p = 0.036); it was 150 [100–200] mg in both groups either at 6 months (p = 0.095) or 12 months (p = 0.140). At 12 months, 49 (44.1%) older and 334 (36.4%) younger patients had a reduction in their baseline seizure frequency by at least 50% (p = 0.110), and the seizure freedom rates were 35/111 (31.5%) and 134/918 (14.6%) in older and younger groups, respectively (p < 0.001). During the 1-year study period, 20 (18.0%) patients in the older group and 245 (26.7%) patients in the younger group discontinued brivaracetam (p = 0.048). Treatment withdrawal because of insufficient efficacy was less common in older than younger patients [older: n = 7 (6.3%), younger: n = 152 (16.6%); p = 0.005]. Adverse events were reported by 24.2% of older patients and 30.8% of younger patients (p = 0.185); the most common adverse events were somnolence, nervousness and/or agitation, vertigo, and fatigue in both study groups.

Conclusions

Adjunctive brivaracetam was efficacious, had good tolerability, and no new or unexpected safety signals emerged when used to treat older patients with uncontrolled focal seizures in clinical practice. Adjunctive brivaracetam can be a suitable therapeutic option in this special population.

New anti-seizure medication for elderly epilepsy patients - a critical narrative review

Introduction: The number of elderly patients with epilepsy is growing in resource rich countries due to demographic changes and increased longevity. Management in these patients is challenging as underlying etiology, co-morbidities, polypharmacy, age-related pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes need to be considered.Areas covered: Lacosamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, brivaracetam, and perampanel have been approved in the USA and Europe for monotherapy and/or adjunctive treatment of seizures in the last few years. The authors review the pharmacological properties and safety profile of these drugs and provide recommendations for their use in in the elderly.Expert opinion: There are only limited data available on more recent antiseizure medications (ASMs). Drugs with a low risk of interaction (lacosamide, brivaracetam) are preferred choices. Once daily formulations (perampanel and eslicarbazepine acetate) have the advantage of increased compliance. Intravenous formulations (brivaracetam and lacosamide) are useful in emergency situations and in patients who have difficulties to swallow. Dose adjustments are necessary for all ASMs used in the elderly with slow titration and lower target doses than in the regulatory trials. The adverse event profile does not significantly differ from that found in the general adult population.

Effect of Brivaracetam on Efficacy and Tolerability in Patients With Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Background: Epilepsy is a common symptom of brain tumors and is often pharmacoresistent. Among new antiseizure medications (ASMs) Brivaracetam (BRV) has been approved as adjunctive treatment for focal seizures and it was tested in non-oncological patient populations. This is the first study that retrospectively explored efficacy and tolerability of BRV as add-on therapy in brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 33 BTRE patients from six Italian epilepsy centers; charts included tumor history, diagnosis of BTRE, BRV added as first or second add-on for uncontrolled seizures and/or adverse events (AEs) of the previous ASMs, at least 1-month follow-up, seizure frequency, and AEs assessment. Results: Thirty-three patients (19 males, mean age: 57.6 years; 14 females, mean age: 42.4 years): 11 low grade gliomas, five high grade gliomas, six meningiomas, 10 glioblastomas, one primary cerebral lymphoma. Fourteen patients had focal aware seizures, nine focal unaware, seven focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, three patients presented more than one seizure type: focal unaware with focal to bilateral tonic clonic seizures (two patients) and focal aware and unaware seizures (one patient). Mean seizure frequency in the month preceding BRV introduction: 7.0; at last follow-up: 2.0 (p = 0.001). Seven patients (21.2%) reported AEs (anxiety, agitation, fatigue, vertigo) and three of them (9.0%) required drug withdrawal due to psychiatric adverse events (PAEs). Three other patients withdrew BRV: one for scarce compliance (3.0%), two for uncontrolled seizures (6.0%). Conclusion: Our results showed that BRV could be a new therapeutic option effective in reducing seizures in BTRE patients, taking into account the incidence of PAEs in this particular population. Future and larger prospective studies are needed.

[Epilepsy in old age]

In an aging society, epilepsy in old age will become a more and more relevant disease. The diagnosis is often difficult because of the frequent occurrence of focal seizures in old age, which are easily overlooked. The diagnosis is often delayed, particularly in older patients who, for example also suffer from dementia. The causes of the epilepsy can be manifold in the aging brain. Another challenge for neurologists is the medicinal treatment of geriatric epilepsy, as many anticonvulsive drugs can be associated with serious side effects and interactions. The evidence for the effectiveness and tolerability of anticonvulsive drugs in old age is insufficient, so that the choice of drugs must be made on an individual basis. Status epilepticus is a neurological emergency, which occurs not only more frequently in older than in younger persons but is also associated with a higher mortality, so that immediate diagnosis and adequate treatment is necessary.

Safety and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in epilepsy: In-depth pooled analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this analysis was to provide a comprehensive analysis of safety data for adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV), an antiepileptic drug (AED) of the racetam class, for treatment of focal seizures in patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

Data were pooled from two phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-ranging trials (N01114 [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00175929], N01193 [NCT00175825]) and three phase III, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 12-week trials (N01252 [NCT00490035], N01253 [NCT00464269], and N01358 [NCT01261325]) in patients aged ≥16 years with focal seizures, as well as a phase III, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 16-week trial in patients aged ≥16 years with focal or generalized epilepsy (N01254 [NCT00504881]). Data are presented for the approved therapeutic dose range of 50-200 mg/day. Data for BRV administered intravenously (25-150 mg doses) were pooled separately from one phase III trial (N01258 NCT01405508]) and two clinical pharmacology trials (N01256 [Part B] [UCB Pharma, data on file]; EP0007 [NCT01796899]). Adverse events (AEs) of interest were summarized in relevant categories.

RESULTS

The safety pool comprised 1957 patients: 1271 receiving adjunctive BRV and 686 receiving placebo. Overall, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 66.9% with BRV versus 62.8% with placebo. The most frequently reported TEAEs with BRV (≥5% of patients) versus placebo were somnolence (13.3% vs. 7.9%), headache (10.5% vs. 11.5%), dizziness (10.0% vs. 7.0%), and fatigue (8.2% vs. 4.2%). Incidence of psychiatric disorder-related TEAEs was 11.3% with BRV versus 8.2% with placebo. Behavioral disorder-related TEAE incidence was low (4.0% with BRV vs. 2.5% with placebo). Irritability was reported in 2.7% of BRV-treated patients vs. 1.5% of patients receiving placebo; anger, aggression, and agitation were each reported by ≤1% of patients receiving BRV. Treatment-emergent adverse events potentially associated with psychosis were psychotic disorder (three patients on BRV vs. two patients on placebo), auditory hallucination, illusion, visual hallucination (one patient each on BRV), epileptic psychosis, and hallucination (one patient each on placebo). No additional safety concerns were identified in patients with intravenous (IV) BRV administration (n = 104).

CONCLUSIONS

These safety data for adjunctive BRV support its acceptable safety and tolerability profile.

Treatment with brivaracetam in children - The experience of a pediatric epilepsy center

INTRODUCTION

The new anticonvulsant brivaracetam is a levetiracetam analog which binds to the synaptic vesicle protein 2A, and inhibits excitatory neurotransmitters' release. Brivaracetam was Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicine Agency (EMA) approved in 2016 as adjunctive treatment for focal onset seizures in patients over 16 years of age, and in 2018 for children over four years of age. Our aim was to describe effectiveness and tolerability in real-life pediatric epilepsy clinic.

METHODS

Cross-sectional retrospective chart review of patients under 20 years of age, treated with brivaracetam. Positive response to treatment was considered when 50% decrease in seizure frequency was noted. In responders to levetiracetam, positive effect was regarded if switching to brivaracetam maintained at least the same seizure control.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients (67.7% males), aged 13.8 ± 4.07 (6.9-20 years), were treated with brivaracetam 3.8 mg/kg ± 1.8. Age of onset of epilepsy was 5.7 ± 3.7 years; 20 patients had focal epilepsies; and 11 had epileptic syndromes (5 - Lennox-Gastaut, 3 - myoclonic absence, 3 - myoclonic-atonic). Responder rate was 45.2%, with no statistical difference under and over 16 years of age (40% vs. 54.5%, Fisher's exact test). Eight patients had better response to seizures compared to levetiracetam. Gender, duration of epilepsy, and dosage did not affect epilepsy control. Six patients had seizure aggravation. Adverse effects were rare: mild somnolence (6.4%), psychosis (3.2%), and nausea (3.2%).

CONCLUSION

Brivaracetam is an effective add-on treatment in focal, as well as generalized seizures in children, with negligible side effects, including children who failed previously on levetiracetam. Seizure exacerbation may occur, but it's reason is unclear.

Brivaracetam efficacy and safety in focal epilepsy

Introduction: Brivaracetam (BRV) is an analog of levetiracetam (LEV) with 15-30 times greater affinity to SV2A and greater brain permeability than LEV. These properties have stimulated interest in its clinical trial data and post-marketing experience. Areas covered: The authors provide a background on epilepsy and its treatment, discuss the racetam family of antiepileptic drugs to which BRV belongs, and then discuss BRV properties and its efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of epilepsy. Expert opinion: While preclinical data suggest a broad spectrum of efficacy, BRV is only approved for focal epilepsy. The recommended starting dose is 100 mg per day, but in the absence of urgency, it may be prudent to start at 50 mg per day, considered the lowest effective dose. There was no added benefit when BRV was used adjunctively with LEV in clinical trials. However, post-marketing data suggest that some patients may experience improved seizure control when switching from LEV. Behavioral adverse effects seemed less common than with LEV, and most patients switched to BRV after experiencing behavioral adverse effects on LEV reported improvement. Prior or anticipated intolerability to LEV is the strongest indication for BRV in clinical practice.

The medical treatment of epilepsy in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in elderly individuals with epilepsy.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases as well as bibliographies and conference abstracts. Published and unpublished, randomized, or quasirandomized trials reporting the use of AEDs in people aged at least 60 years with epilepsy were eligible for inclusion. Two authors independently carried out each stage of the review. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Three thousand four hundred seventeen titles and abstracts were reviewed. Eighteen studies evaluating 12 AEDs met all eligibility criteria. Ten studies, comprising 1999 subjects, were suitable for meta-analysis. Among the elderly with epilepsy, lamotrigine (LTG) is better tolerated relative to carbamazepine (pooled weighted risk ratio [RR] of experiencing withdrawal due to adverse events = 1.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23-2.43). There is a higher probability, although with a 95% CI of borderline importance, of seizure freedom when comparing levetiracetam to LTG (RR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.68-0.97). Single studies provide evidence for the efficacy and/or tolerability of other AEDs in the elderly, including brivaracetam, gabapentin, lacosamide, perampanel, and topiramate. The risk of bias of the included studies was frequently low or unclear, although there was on occasion a high risk of bias (especially with regard to selective reporting).

SIGNIFICANCE

There is some evidence for AED use in the elderly with epilepsy. More evidence is required, comparing newer AEDs to prior generations as well as examining the effects of determinants such as frailty, to guide clinicians when treating this rapidly growing patient population.

Antiepileptic drug therapy in the elderly: a clinical pharmacological review

Seizure disorder is the third most common neurological disorder in the elderly after stroke and dementia. With the increasing geriatric population, the situation of clinicians seeing more and more elderly epilepsy patients is very likely. Not only is the diagnosis of epilepsy tedious in the elderly, its management raises many challenging issues for the treating physicians. Altered physiology, age-related decline in organ function, and plasma protein binding and altered pharmacodynamics make the elderly patients with seizure disorder a difficult group to treat. This is further complicated by the presence of comorbidities and polypharmacy which increase the chances of drug interactions. The adverse effects that might be tolerated well in younger populations may be disastrous for the aged. Although the newer antiepileptic drugs are found to have a favorable safety profile, there is relative scarcity of randomized-controlled trials involving older and newer antiepileptics in the geriatric population. This review tries to compile the available literature on management of epilepsy in the elderly population including evidence of safety and efficacy of newer and older antiepileptics with special reference to the 'geriatric giants'. It also deals with the interactions between antiepileptic medications and other commonly prescribed drugs in the elderly such as anti-hypertensives and antiischemic agents. The recommended guidelines of various international bodies are also analyzed from the perspective of elderly with seizure disorder.

Brivaracetam in the treatment of epilepsy: a review of clinical trial data

Brivaracetam (BRV), an analog of levetiracetam (LEV), was discovered during a target-based rational drug discovery program that aimed to identify potent synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligands. Among the 12,000 compounds screened in vitro, BRV was found to have 15-30 times greater affinity for SV2A and faster brain permeability than LEV. Although preclinical and post-marketing studies suggest broad spectrum of efficacy, BRV is currently only approved as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy of focal-onset seizures in patients age 4 years and older. This review examines the use of BRV as add-on (5-200 mg/day) therapy for epilepsy with a particular emphasis on the six regulatory randomized clinical trialsinvolving 2399 participants. Participants receiving BRV add-on at doses of 50-200 mg/day were more likely to experience a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (pooled risk ratio [RR]) 1.79 with 95% CI of 1.51-2.12) than those receiving placebo. Participants receiving BRV were also more likely to attain seizure freedom (57 [3.3%] vs 4 [0.5%]; RR 4.74, 95% CI 2.00-11.25) than those receiving placebo. In addition, BRV demonstrated a favorable safety profile similar to placebo across all BRV doses. Treatment emergent adverse events significantly associated with BRV were irritability, fatigue, somnolence, and dizziness. Post-hoc analysis of regulatory trials, post-marketing studies, and indirect comparison meta-analyses demonstrated equivalent efficacy and better tolerability of BRV when compared to other antiseizure drugs. Further, these studies appear to suggest that behavioral adverse events are likely to be less frequent and less severe with BRV than LEV. Therefore, switching to BRV may be considered for patients who have seizure control with LEV, but who cannot tolerate its behavioral adverse effects. In this setting, immediate switch from LEV to BRV at a 10:1-15:1 ratio without titration is feasible. Further research is needed to examine the long-term tolerability and efficacy of BRV as well as its role in the treatment of other types of epilepsies, particularly dementia-related epilepsy and brain tumor-related epilepsy.

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.

A review of the pharmacology and clinical efficacy of brivaracetam

Brivaracetam (BRV; Briviact) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal (partial-onset) seizures in adults. BRV is a selective, high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle 2A (SV2A) with 15- to 30-fold higher affinity than levetiracetam, the first AED acting on SV2A. It has high lipid solubility and rapid brain penetration, with engagement of the target molecule, SV2A, within minutes of administration. BRV has potent broad-spectrum antiepileptic activity in animal models. Phase I studies indicated BRV was well tolerated and showed a favorable pharmacokinetic profile over a wide dose range following single (10–1,000 mg) and multiple (200–800 mg/day) oral dosing. Three pivotal Phase III studies have demonstrated promising efficacy and a good safety and tolerability profile across doses of 50–200 mg/day in the adjunctive treatment of refractory focal seizures. Long-term data indicate that the response to BRV is sustained, with good tolerability and retention rate. BRV is highly effective in patients experiencing secondarily generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Safety data to date suggest a favorable psychiatric adverse effect profile in controlled studies, although limited postmarketing data are available. BRV is easy to use, with no titration and little drug–drug interaction. It can be initiated at target dose with no titration. Efficacy is seen on day 1 of oral use in a significant percentage of patients. Intravenous administration in a 2-minute bolus and 15-minute infusion is well tolerated. Here, we review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and clinical data of BRV.

Brivaracetam: a novel antiepileptic drug for focal-onset seizures

Brivaracetam (BRV), the n-propyl analogue of levetiracetam (LEV), is the latest antiepileptic drug (AED) to be licensed in Europe and the USA for the adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization in patients aged 16 years or older. Like LEV, BRV binds to synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A), but BRV has more selective binding and a 15- to 30-fold higher binding affinity than LEV. BRV is more effective than LEV in slowing synaptic vesicle mobilization and the two AEDs may act at different binding sites or interact with different conformational states of the SV2A protein. In animal models, BRV provides protection against focal and secondary generalized seizures and has significant anticonvulsant effects in genetic models of epilepsy. The drug undergoes first-order pharmacokinetics with an elimination half-life of 7-8 h. Although BRV is metabolized extensively, the main circulating compound is unchanged BRV. Around 95% of metabolites undergo renal elimination. No dose reduction is required in renal impairment, but it is recommended that the daily dose is reduced by one-third in hepatic dysfunction that may prolong half-life. BRV has a low potential for drug interactions. The efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive BRV in adults with focal-onset seizures have been explored in six randomized, placebo-controlled studies. These showed significant efficacy outcomes for doses of 50-200 mg/day. The most common adverse events reported were headache, somnolence, dizziness, fatigue and nausea. Patients who develop psychiatric symptoms with LEV appear to be at risk of similar side effects with BRV, although preliminary data suggest that these issues are likely to be less frequent and perhaps less severe. As with all AEDs, a low starting dose and slow titration schedule help to minimize side effects and optimize seizure control and thereby quality of life.

New developments in the management of partial-onset epilepsy: role of brivaracetam

Currently, a number of novel anticonvulsant drugs, the so-called third generation, are in various stages of development. Several of them are already available or in ongoing clinical trials. These new compounds should take advantage of new insights into the basic pathophysiology of epileptogenesis, drug metabolism and drug interactions. Many of them still need to be further evaluated mainly in real-world observational trials and registries. Among newer anticonvulsant drugs for partial-onset seizures (POSs), rufinamide, lacosamide, eslicarbazepine and perampanel are those new treatment options for which more substantial clinical evidence is currently available, both in adults and, to some extent, in children. Among the newest anticonvulsant drugs, brivaracetam, a high-affinity synaptic vesicle protein 2A ligand, reported to be 10- to 30-fold more potent than levetiracetam, is highly effective in a broad range of experimental models of focal and generalized seizures. Unlike levetiracetam, brivaracetam does not inhibit high-voltage Ca2+ channels and AMPA receptors and appears to inhibit neuronal voltage-gated sodium channels playing a role as a partial antagonist. Brivaracetam has a linear pharmacokinetic profile, is extensively metabolized and is excreted by urine (only 8%-11% unchanged). It does not seem to influence the pharmacokinetics of other antiepileptic drugs. It was approved in the European Union in January 2016 and in the US in February 2016 as an adjunctive therapy for the treatment of POS in patients older than 16 years of age. To date, its clinical efficacy as adjunctive antiepileptic treatment in adults with refractory POS at doses between 50 and 200 mg daily has been extensively assessed in two Phase IIb and four Phase III randomized controlled studies. Long-term extension studies show sustained efficacy of brivaracetam. Overall, the drug is generally well tolerated with only mild-to-moderate side effects. This is true also by intravenous route. Brivaracetam has not yet been evaluated as monotherapy or in comparison with other new anticonvulsant drugs.