Efficacy of Brivaracetam in children with epilepsy

New Pharmacological Therapies in the Treatment of Epilepsy in the Pediatric Population

Epilepsy is a disorder characterized by abnormal brain neuron activity, predisposing individuals to seizures. The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) categorizes epilepsy into the following groups: focal, generalized, generalized and focal, and unknown. Infants are the most vulnerable pediatric group to the condition, with the cause of epilepsy development being attributed to congenital brain developmental defects, white matter damage, intraventricular hemorrhage, perinatal hypoxic-ischemic injury, perinatal stroke, or genetic factors such as mutations in the Sodium Channel Protein Type 1 Subunit Alpha (SCN1A) gene. Due to the risks associated with this condition, we have investigated how the latest pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in children impact the reduction or complete elimination of seizures. We reviewed literature from 2018 to 2024, focusing on the age group from 1 month to 18 years old, with some studies including this age group as well as older individuals. The significance of this review is to present and compile research findings on the latest antiseizure drugs (ASDs), their effectiveness, dosing, and adverse effects in the pediatric population, which can contribute to selecting the best drug for a particular patient. The medications described in this review have shown significant efficacy and safety in the studied patient group, outweighing the observed adverse effects. The main aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive summary of the current state of knowledge regarding the newest pharmacotherapy for childhood epilepsy.

Epilepsy and psychiatric comorbidities: A bidirectional mendelian randomization study

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Psychiatric comorbidities are relatively common among patients with epilepsy; however, the underlying mechanisms of this association remain largely unknown. The objective of this Mendelian randomization (MR) study was to analyze the genetic correlations and causality underlying these reciprocal associations.

METHODS

Single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with epilepsy (29,677 controls and 15,212 cases) and seven psychiatric comorbidities (485,436 controls and 269,495 cases) were identified from genome-wide association studies. Causal significance was estimated using inverse variance weighting. Sensitivity analyses included the weighted median, MR-Egger, and MR-PRESSO. The psychiatric comorbidities analyzed in this study included attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and anorexia nervosa.

RESULTS

Both forward and reverse genetic associations were observed for the selected psychiatric disorders. Notably, ADHD was significantly associated with an increased risk of generalized epilepsy (odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.18; p = 0.013). However, MR-PRESSO detected the existence of pleiotropy (p = 0.001). Additionally, focal epilepsy was significantly associated with a higher risk of OCD (OR, 1.44; 95 % CI, 1.08-1.92; p = 0.013), and all sensitivity tests yielded favorably nonsignificant results. There was no significant genetic association between epilepsy and other examined psychiatric disorders. However, due to the detection of pleiotropy by MR-Egger and considerations related to the threshold for genetic instruments, a cautious approach is warranted in interpreting some of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed significant genetic causality between focal epilepsy and OCD, as well as between ADHD and generalized epilepsy. However, no casual significance was observed with other psychiatric comorbidities examined. Considering the inherent limitations of MR studies, further research is warranted to definitively clarify these genetic causal associations.

Brivaracetam as add-on therapy in children with developmental epileptic encephalopathies: A study of 42 patients

OBJECTIVE

Here we present a multicenter series of patients with developmental epileptic encephalopathies (DEE) who were treated with brivaracetam (BRV) as add-on therapy.

METHODS

Medical records of 42 patients with DEE treated with add-on BRV seen at four pediatric neurology centers in Argentina between January 2021 and July 2023 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 42 patients (26 males, 16 females) with a mean age of 7 years (SD, ± 3.8; median, 9; range, 2-16). The children had different types of childhood-onset treatment-resistant DEEs and received BRV as add-on therapy for a mean period of 2 years (SD, ± 1.3 years; median, 1.5 years; range, 0.5-3 years). Thirty-three patients received levetiracetam (LEV) before the introduction of BRV. In nine patients, BRV was started without prior LEV because of behavioral disturbances. Three patients (9.5 %) became seizure free and 26/42 patients (62.1 %) had a greater than 50 % decrease in seizures after a mean follow-up of 21 months. Ten patients (23.8 %) had a 25-50 % seizure reduction, while seizure frequency remained unchanged in two (4.7 %) and increased in one patient (2.4 %). The interictal EEG abnormalities improved in all the responders. Adverse effects, consisting of drowsiness, irritability, and decreased appetite, were observed in seven patients (16.6 %), but did not lead to treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Brivaracetam was found to be effective, safe, and well tolerated in children with DEE. In patients on LEV with behavioral disturbances, BRV may be tried. BRV may also be given without a previous trial with LEV in patients with behavioral problems.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of 12-Month Brivaracetam in the Real World: EXPERIENCE, an International Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Records

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Real-world evidence studies of brivaracetam (BRV) have been restricted in scope, location, and patient numbers. The objective of this pooled analysis was to assess effectiveness and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in routine practice in a large international population.

METHODS

EXPERIENCE/EPD332 was a pooled analysis of individual patient records from multiple independent non-interventional studies of patients with epilepsy initiating BRV in Australia, Europe, and the United States. Eligible study cohorts were identified via a literature review and engagement with country lead investigators, clinical experts, and local UCB Pharma scientific/medical teams. Included patients initiated BRV no earlier than January 2016 and no later than December 2019, and had ≥ 6 months of follow-up data. The databases for each cohort were reformatted and standardised to ensure information collected was consistent. Outcomes included ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in seizure frequency, seizure freedom (no seizures within 3 months before timepoint), continuous seizure freedom (no seizures from baseline), BRV discontinuation, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Patients with missing data after BRV discontinuation were considered non-responders/not seizure free. Analyses were performed for all adult patients (≥ 16 years), and for subgroups by seizure type recorded at baseline; by number of prior antiseizure medications (ASMs) at index; by use of BRV as monotherapy versus polytherapy at index; for patients who switched from levetiracetam to BRV versus patients who switched from other ASMs to BRV; and for patients with focal-onset seizures and a BRV dose of ≤ 200 mg/day used as add-on at index. Analysis populations included the full analysis set (FAS; all patients who received at least one BRV dose and had seizure type and age documented at baseline) and the modified FAS (all FAS patients who had at least one seizure recorded during baseline). The FAS was used for all outcomes other than ≥ 50% seizure reduction. All outcomes were summarised using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Analyses included 1644 adults. At baseline, 72.0% were 16-49 years of age and 92.2% had focal-onset seizures. Patients had a median (Q1, Q3) of 5.0 (2.0, 8.0) prior antiseizure medications at index. At 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, ≥ 50% seizure reduction was achieved by 32.1% (n = 619), 36.7% (n = 867), and 36.9% (n = 822) of patients; seizure freedom rates were 22.4% (n = 923), 17.9% (n = 1165), and 14.9% (n = 1111); and continuous seizure freedom rates were 22.4% (n = 923), 15.7% (n = 1165), and 11.7% (n = 1111). During the whole study follow-up, 551/1639 (33.6%) patients discontinued BRV. TEAEs since prior visit were reported in 25.6% (n = 1542), 14.2% (n = 1376), and 9.3% (n = 1232) of patients at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis using data from a variety of real-world settings suggests BRV is effective and well tolerated in routine clinical practice in a highly drug-resistant patient population.

Safety and efficacy of brivaracetam in children epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases, affecting people of any age. Although the treatments of epilepsy are more and more diverse, the uncertainty regarding efficacy and adverse events still exists, especially in the control of childhood epilepsy.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis following the Cochrane Handbook and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library were searched. Studies reporting the use of brivaracetam monotherapy or adjuvant therapy in children (aged ≤18 years) were eligible for inclusion. Each stage of the review was conducted by two authors independently. Random-effects models were used to combine effect sizes for the estimation of efficacy and safety.

Results

A total of 1884 articles were retrieved, and finally 9 articles were included, enrolling 503 children with epilepsy. The retention rate of BRV treatment was 78% (95% CI: 0.64-0.91), the responder rate (reduction of seizure frequency ≥ 50%) was 35% (95% CI: 0.24-0.47), the freedom seizure rate (no seizure) was 18% (95% CI: 0.10-0.25), and the incidence rate of any treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) was 39% (95% CI: 0.09-0.68). The most common TEAE was somnolence, which had an incidence rate of 9% (95% CI: 0.07-0.12). And the incidence rate of mental or behavioral disorders was 12% (95% CI: 0.06-0.17).

Conclusion

Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that BRV seemed to be safe and effective in the treatment of childhood epilepsy.

Psychobehavioural and Cognitive Adverse Events of Anti-Seizure Medications for the Treatment of Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathies

The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and significant neurodevelopmental comorbidities. The latter include intellectual disability, developmental delay, behavioural problems including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder, psychiatric problems including anxiety and depression, speech impairment and sleep problems. Classical examples of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies include Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and tuberous sclerosis complex. The mainstay of treatment is with multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs); however, the ASMs themselves can be associated with psychobehavioural adverse events, and effects (negative or positive) on cognition and sleep. We have performed a targeted literature review of ASMs commonly used in the treatment of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies to discuss the latest evidence on their effects on behaviour, mood, cognition, sedation and sleep. The ASMs include valproate (VPA), clobazam, topiramate (TPM), cannabidiol (CBD), fenfluramine (FFA), levetiracetam (LEV), brivaracetam (BRV), zonisamide (ZNS), perampanel (PER), ethosuximide, stiripentol, lamotrigine (LTG), rufinamide, vigabatrin, lacosamide (LCM) and everolimus. Bromide, felbamate and other sodium channel ASMs are discussed briefly. Overall, the current evidence suggest that LEV, PER and to a lesser extent BRV are associated with psychobehavioural adverse events including aggressiveness and irritability; TPM and to a lesser extent ZNS are associated with language impairment and cognitive dulling/memory problems. Patients with a history of behavioural and psychiatric comorbidities may be more at risk of developing psychobehavioural adverse events. Topiramate and ZNS may be associated with negative effects in some aspects of cognition; CBD, FFA, LEV, BRV and LTG may have some positive effects, while the remaining ASMs do not appear to have a detrimental effect. All the ASMs are associated with sedation to a certain extent, which is pronounced during uptitration. Cannabidiol, PER and pregabalin may be associated with improvements in sleep, LTG is associated with insomnia, while VPA, TPM, LEV, ZNS and LCM do not appear to have detrimental effects. There was variability in the extent of evidence for each ASM: for many first-generation and some second-generation ASMs, there is scant documented evidence; however, their extensive use suggests favourable tolerability and safety (e.g. VPA); second-generation and some third-generation ASMs tend to have the most robust evidence documented over several years of use (TPM, LEV, PER, ZNS, BRV), while evidence is still being generated for newer ASMs such as CBD and FFA. Finally, we discuss how a variety of factors can affect mood, behaviour and cognition, and untangling the associations between the effects of the underlying syndrome and those of the ASMs can be challenging. In particular, there is enormous heterogeneity in cognitive, behavioural and developmental impairments that is complex and can change naturally over time; there is a lack of standardised instruments for evaluating these outcomes in developmental and epileptic encephalopathies, with a reliance on subjective evaluations by proxy (caregivers); and treatment regimes are complex involving multiple ASMs as well as other drugs.