1
|
Kassoum A, Intravooth T, Wendling AS, Staack AM, Steinhoff BJ. Psychiatric assessment prior to and after switch from levetiracetam to brivaracetam. Seizure 2024; 117:193-197. [PMID: 38460458 DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2024.02.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2023] [Revised: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/28/2024] [Indexed: 03/11/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Brivaracetam is often used as an alternative to levetiracetam in patients with epilepsy (PWE) encountering efficacy issues or adverse events with levetiracetam. This study evaluated the psychological status of PWE who were switched from levetiracetam to brivaracetam due to psychiatric tolerability concerns in comparison to those who remained on levetiracetam. METHODS We used various psychological assessments including the Symptom Checklist SCL-90-R, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, and the adverse event profile. Eligible participants completed the questionnaires at baseline and again 8 days later. Psychological changes were assessed using standard statistical methods to show differences between a group that immediately switched from levetiracetam to brivaracetam and another group with unchanged levetiracetam. RESULTS Between May 2020 and May 2021, 63 patients participated in the study, of whom 34 switched from levetiracetam to brivaracetam. At baseline, participants who switched to brivaracetam had fewer antiseizure medications but experienced more monthly seizures. Baseline scores for anxiety (p = 0.020) and psychoticism (p = 0.046) on SCL-90-R in PWE switched to brivaracetam were higher than in the remaining group. In the subsequent assessment, all psychological scores were reduced and were no longer significantly different between both groups. Using multiple regression, initial treatment with a single antiseizure medication and male gender emerged as predictors of psychological improvement. CONCLUSION Our study found no increased risk of adverse events or psychiatric symptoms after switching from levetiracetam to brivaracetam. Though statistically non-significant, a trend towards improved psychiatric outcomes in the switch group warrants further investigation in future trials with stronger designs for enhanced statistical power.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ammar Kassoum
- Department of Adult Epilepsy, Kork Epilepsy Center, Landstr. 1, Kehl-Kork, Germany; Department of Neurology and Clinical Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 64, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Tassanai Intravooth
- Department of Adult Epilepsy, Kork Epilepsy Center, Landstr. 1, Kehl-Kork, Germany.
| | - Anne-Sophie Wendling
- Department of Adult Epilepsy, Kork Epilepsy Center, Landstr. 1, Kehl-Kork, Germany
| | - Anke M Staack
- Department of Adult Epilepsy, Kork Epilepsy Center, Landstr. 1, Kehl-Kork, Germany
| | - Bernhard J Steinhoff
- Department of Adult Epilepsy, Kork Epilepsy Center, Landstr. 1, Kehl-Kork, Germany; Department of Neurology and Clinical Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 64, Freiburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Celdran de Castro A, Nascimento FA, Beltran-Corbellini Á, Toledano R, Garcia-Morales I, Gil-Nagel A, Aledo-Serrano Á. Levetiracetam, from broad-spectrum use to precision prescription: A narrative review and expert opinion. Seizure 2023; 107:121-131. [PMID: 37023625 DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2023.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Revised: 03/18/2023] [Accepted: 03/22/2023] [Indexed: 04/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Levetiracetam (LEV) is an antiseizure medication (ASM) whose mechanism of action involves the modulation of neurotransmitters release through binding to the synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A. It is a broad-spectrum ASM displaying favorable pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles. Since its introduction in 1999, it has been widely prescribed, becoming the first-line treatment for numerous epilepsy syndromes and clinical scenarios. However, this might have resulted in overuse. Increasing evidence, including the recently published SANAD II trials, suggests that other ASMs are reasonable therapeutic options for generalized and focal epilepsies. Not infrequently, these ASMs show better safety and effectiveness profiles compared to LEV (partially due to the latter's well-known cognitive and behavioral adverse effects, present in up to 20% of patients). Moreover, it has been shown that the underlying etiology of epilepsy is significantly linked to ASMs response in particular scenarios, highlighting the importance of an etiology-based ASM choice. In the case of LEV, it has demonstrated an optimal effectiveness in Alzheimer's disease, Down syndrome, and PCDH19-related epilepsies whereas, in other etiologies such as malformations of cortical development, it may show negligible effects. This narrative review analyzes the current evidence related to the use of LEV for the treatment of seizures. Illustrative clinical scenarios and practical decision-making approaches are also addressed, therefore aiming to define a rational use of this ASM.
Collapse
|
3
|
Li KY, Hsu CY, Yang YH. A review of cognitive and behavioral outcomes of Brivaracetam. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2023; 39:104-114. [PMID: 36661137 DOI: 10.1002/kjm2.12648] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Revised: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Anti-seizure medications (ASMs) can cause cognitive or behavioral adverse drug reactions, which is an important consideration when selecting an appropriate ASM. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a newer synaptic vesicle protein 2A ligand, which is expected to result in fewer neuropsychiatric adverse effects due to its mechanism of action. To understand the impact of BRV on cognition and behavior compared with other ASMs, we conducted a review of the literature using the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase. After the screening process, a total of two animal studies, one randomized controlled trial, one pooled analysis of clinical trials, one controlled study, and nine observational studies were included. The animal studies showed that BRV did not worsen cognitive or behavioral performance in rodents. The human studies showed that BRV was associated with fewer cognitive adverse events compared with other second- or third-generation ASMs. In addition, BRV was less associated with behavioral disturbance than levetiracetam. In summary, this review revealed that BRV has a limited impact on cognition and behavior. For patients who are intolerant to levetiracetam and have levetiracetam-related behavioral side effects, switching to BRV could be beneficial. However, heterogeneity between studies resulted in low-quality of evidence, and further trials are needed to confirm the findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kuan-Ying Li
- Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Chung-Yao Hsu
- Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Neuroscience Research Center, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Yuan-Han Yang
- Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Neuroscience Research Center, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.,Department of and Master's Program in Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Naddell S, Manuel M, Cavill R, White P, Sieradzan K. BRIVEST: A 'real-world' observational, single-centre study investigating the efficacy, safety and tolerability of Brivaracetam. Epilepsy Behav 2023; 138:108985. [PMID: 36442261 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2022.108985] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Revised: 10/07/2022] [Accepted: 10/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Naddell
- Department of Neurology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom.
| | - Megan Manuel
- Department of Neurology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Rebecca Cavill
- Department of Neurology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Paul White
- Department of Data Science and Mathematics, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Katarzyna Sieradzan
- Department of Neurology, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Green SF, Hare N, Kassam M, Rugg-Gunn F, Koepp MJ, Sander JW, Rajakulendran S. Retention of brivaracetam in adults with drug-resistant epilepsy at a single tertiary care center. Epilepsy Behav 2022; 135:108868. [PMID: 35985166 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2022.108868] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2022] [Revised: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Brivaracetam (BRV) is licensed as an adjunctive treatment for focal epilepsy. We describe our clinical experience with BRV at a large UK tertiary center. METHODS Adults initiated on BRV between July 2015 and July 2020 were followed up until they discontinued BRV or September 2021. Data on epilepsy syndrome, duration, seizure types, concomitant and previous antiseizure medication (ASM) use, BRV dosing, efficacy, and side effects were recorded. Efficacy was categorized as temporary (minimum three months) or ongoing (at last follow-up) seizure freedom, ≥50% seizure reduction, or other benefits (e.g., no convulsions or daytime seizures). Brivaracetam retention was estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS Two-hundred people were treated with BRV, of whom 81% had focal epilepsy. The mean (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up time was 707 (688) days, and the dose range was 50-600 mg daily. The mean (IQR) of the previous number of used ASMs was 6.9 (6.0), and concomitant use was 2.2 (1.0). One-hundred and eighty-eight people (94%) had previously discontinued levetiracetam (LEV), mainly due to side effects. 13/200 (6.5%) were seizure free for a minimum of six months during treatment, and 46/200 (23%) had a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency for six months or more. Retention rates were 83% at six months, 71% at 12 months, and 57% at 36 months. Brivaracetam was mostly discontinued due to side effects (38/75, 51%) or lack of efficacy (28/75, 37%). Concomitant use of carbamazepine significantly increased the hazard ratio of discontinuing BRV due to side effects (p = 0.006). The most commonly reported side effects were low mood (20.5%), fatigue (18%) and aggressive behavior (8.5%). These side effects were less prevalent than when the same individuals took LEV (low mood, 59%; aggressive behavior, 43%). Intellectual disability was a risk factor for behavioral side effects (p = 0.004), and a pre-existing mood disorder significantly increased the likelihood of further episodes of low mood (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS Brivaracetam was effective at a broad range of doses in managing drug-resistant epilepsy across various phenotypes, but less effective than LEV in those who switched due to poor tolerability on LEV. There were no new tolerability issues, but 77% of the individuals experiencing side effects on BRV also experienced similar side effects on LEV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian F Green
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom; Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Nisha Hare
- Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Mehreen Kassam
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom
| | - Fergus Rugg-Gunn
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom
| | - Matthias J Koepp
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom
| | - Josemir W Sander
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom; Stichting Epilepsie Instellingen Nederland (SEIN), Heemstede, The Netherlands.
| | - Sanjeev Rajakulendran
- Department of Clinical & Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London WC1N 3BG & Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy, Chalfont St Peter SL9 0RJ, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hochbaum M, Kienitz R, Rosenow F, Schulz J, Habermehl L, Langenbruch L, Kovac S, Knake S, von Podewils F, von Brauchitsch S, Hamacher M, Strzelczyk A, Willems LM. Trends in antiseizure medication prescription patterns among all adults, women, and older adults with epilepsy: A German longitudinal analysis from 2008 to 2020. Epilepsy Behav 2022; 130:108666. [PMID: 35339390 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2022.108666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2022] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maja Hochbaum
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Ricardo Kienitz
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Felix Rosenow
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Juliane Schulz
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Lena Habermehl
- Epilepsy Center Hessen and Department of Neurology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Lisa Langenbruch
- Epilepsy Center Münster-Osnabrück, Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany; Department of Neurology, Klinikum Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany
| | - Stjepana Kovac
- Epilepsy Center Münster-Osnabrück, Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany
| | - Susanne Knake
- LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Epilepsy Center Hessen and Department of Neurology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Felix von Podewils
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Sophie von Brauchitsch
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Mario Hamacher
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Adam Strzelczyk
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
| | - Laurent M Willems
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Goethe-University and University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; LOEWE Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CEPTeR), Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tulli E, Di Cara G, Iapadre G, Striano P, Verrotti A. An update on brivaracetam for the treatment of pediatric partial epilepsy. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2021; 22:1387-1395. [PMID: 33896317 DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2021.1921151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Brivaracetam (BRV) is an antiseizure medication (ASM), which has been approved as an adjunctive treatment in adults and pediatric patients aged four years and older with focal onset seizures. It is a second-generation levetiracetam (LEV) derivative, sharing the same mechanism of action, binding synaptic vesicles 2A (SV2A). BRV shows higher binding affinity and selectivity and higher brain permeability than LEV.Areas covered: This article reviews randomized controlled trials, retrospective and prospective studies published up to December 2020, searched in electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Clinical Trial Database and provide an overview of efficacy, safety and tolerability of BRV in pediatric patients with partial epilepsy. Furthermore, the authors provide their expert opinion on the drug and give their future perspectives.Expert opinion: The analysis of the literature data has demonstrated the safety and efficacy of BRV in pediatric patients, with more evidence in children aged 4 to 16 years with an onset of focal seizures. However, a positive response was also achieved in patients affected by some encephalopathic epilepsies. Comparative efficacy studies between BRV and other ASMs, in addition to well-designed RCTs that include larger pediatric populations are needed to better define the role and potentiality of this ASM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eleonora Tulli
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy
| | | | - Giulia Iapadre
- Department of Pediatrics, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy
| | - Pasquale Striano
- Pediatric Neurology and Muscolar Diseases Unit, IRRCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Genova, Italy.,Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genova, Genova, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Steinhoff BJ, Klein P, Klitgaard H, Laloyaux C, Moseley BD, Ricchetti-Masterson K, Rosenow F, Sirven JI, Smith B, Stern JM, Toledo M, Zipfel PA, Villanueva V. Behavioral adverse events with brivaracetam, levetiracetam, perampanel, and topiramate: A systematic review. Epilepsy Behav 2021; 118:107939. [PMID: 33839453 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.107939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2021] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To understand the currently available post-marketing real-world evidence of the incidences of and discontinuations due to the BAEs of irritability, anger, and aggression in people with epilepsy (PWE) treated with the anti-seizure medications (ASMs) brivaracetam (BRV), levetiracetam (LEV), perampanel (PER), and topiramate (TPM), as well as behavioral adverse events (BAEs) in PWE switching from LEV to BRV. METHODS A systematic review of published literature using the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase was performed to identify retrospective and prospective observational studies reporting the incidence of irritability, anger, or aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, or TPM in PWE. The incidences of these BAEs and the rates of discontinuation due to each were categorized by ASM, and where possible, weighted means were calculated but not statistically assessed. Behavioral and psychiatric adverse events in PWE switching from LEV to BRV were summarized descriptively. RESULTS A total of 1500 records were identified in the searches. Of these, 44 published articles reporting 42 studies met the study criteria and were included in the data synthesis, 7 studies were identified in the clinical trial database, and 5 studies included PWE switching from LEV to BRV. Studies included a variety of methods, study populations, and definitions of BAEs. While a wide range of results was reported across studies, weighted mean incidences were 5.6% for BRV, 9.9% for LEV, 12.3% for PER, and 3.1% for TPM for irritability; 3.3%* for BRV, 2.5% for LEV, 2.0% for PER, and 0.2%* for TPM for anger; and 2.5% for BRV, 2.6% for LEV, 4.4% for PER, and 0.5%* for TPM for aggression. Weighted mean discontinuation rates were 0.8%* for BRV, 3.4% for LEV, 3.0% for PER, and 2.2% for TPM for irritability and 0.8%* for BRV, 2.4% for LEV, 9.2% for PER, and 1.2%* for TPM for aggression. There were no discontinuations for anger. Switching from LEV to BRV led to improvement in BAEs in 33.3% to 83.0% of patients (weighted mean, 66.6%). *Denotes only 1 study. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review characterizes the incidences of irritability, anger, and aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, and TPM, and it provides robust real-world evidence demonstrating that switching from LEV to BRV may improve BAEs. While additional data remain valuable due to differences in methodology (which make comparisons difficult), these results improve understanding of the real-world incidences of discontinuations due to these BAEs in clinical practice and can aid in discussions and treatment decision-making with PWE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bernhard J Steinhoff
- Epilepsiezentrum Kork, Landstraße 1, 77694 Kehl, Kehl-Kork; Albert-Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Freiburg, Germany.
| | - Pavel Klein
- Mid-Atlantic Epilepsy and Sleep Center, 6410 Rockledge Drive, #610, Bethesda, MD 20817, USA.
| | - Henrik Klitgaard
- UCB Pharma, Allee de la Recherche 60, 1070 Anderlecht, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Cédric Laloyaux
- UCB Pharma, Allee de la Recherche 60, 1070 Anderlecht, Brussels, Belgium.
| | - Brian D Moseley
- University of Cincinnati, Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation Medicine, Stetson Building, 260 Stetson Street, Suite 2300, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0525, USA
| | | | - Felix Rosenow
- Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-12, Haus 95, Frankfurt a.M., 60528, Germany.
| | - Joseph I Sirven
- Mayo Clinic, Neurology and Neurosurgery, 4500 San Pablo Rd, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.
| | - Brien Smith
- OhioHealth Physician Group, 3430 OhioHealth Pkwy, 4th Floor North, Columbus, OH 43202, USA.
| | - John M Stern
- University of California, Department of Neurology, 300 Medical Plaza Driveway, Suite B200, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
| | - Manuel Toledo
- Epilepsy Unit. Neurology Department, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Servicio de Neurologia, Passeig de la Vall d'Hebron 119, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
| | - Patricia A Zipfel
- MicroMass, an Ashfield Company, 100 Regency Forest Dr, Cary, NC, USA.
| | - Vicente Villanueva
- Refractory Epilepsy Unit, Hospital Universitario y Politecnico La Fe, Avenida Fernando Abril Martorell 106, Valencia 46026, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Hung TY, Wu SN, Huang CW. The Integrated Effects of Brivaracetam, a Selective Analog of Levetiracetam, on Ionic Currents and Neuronal Excitability. Biomedicines 2021; 9:biomedicines9040369. [PMID: 33916190 PMCID: PMC8067033 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9040369] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2021] [Revised: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 03/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Brivaracetam (BRV) is recognized as a novel third-generation antiepileptic drug approved for the treatment of epilepsy. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that it has potentially better efficacy and tolerability than its analog, Levetiracetam (LEV). This, however, cannot be explained by their common synaptic vesicle-binding mechanism. Whether BRV can affect different ionic currents and concert these effects to alter neuronal excitability remains unclear. With the aid of patch clamp technology, we found that BRV concentration dependently inhibited the depolarization-induced M-type K+ current (IK(M)), decreased the delayed-rectifier K+ current (IK(DR)), and decreased the hyperpolarization-activated cation current in GH3 neurons. However, it had a concentration-dependent inhibition on voltage-gated Na+ current (INa). Under an inside-out patch configuration, a bath application of BRV increased the open probability of large-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channels. Furthermore, in mHippoE-14 hippocampal neurons, the whole-cell INa was effectively depressed by BRV. In simulated modeling of hippocampal neurons, BRV was observed to reduce the firing of the action potentials (APs) concurrently with decreases in the AP amplitude. In animal models, BRV ameliorated acute seizures in both OD-1 and lithium-pilocarpine epilepsy models. However, LEV had effects in the latter only. Collectively, our study demonstrated BRV’s multiple ionic mechanism in electrically excitable cells and a potential concerted effect on neuronal excitability and hyperexcitability disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Te-Yu Hung
- Department of Pediatrics, Chi-Mei Medical Center, Tainan 71004, Taiwan;
| | - Sheng-Nan Wu
- Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan
- Correspondence: (S.-N.W.); (C.-W.H.)
| | - Chin-Wei Huang
- Department of Neurology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan
- Correspondence: (S.-N.W.); (C.-W.H.)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Adewusi J, Burness C, Ellawela S, Emsley H, Hughes R, Lawthom C, Maguire M, McLean B, Mohanraj R, Oto M, Singhal S, Reuber M. Brivaracetam efficacy and tolerability in clinical practice: A UK-based retrospective multicenter service evaluation. Epilepsy Behav 2020; 106:106967. [PMID: 32179501 DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.106967] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2019] [Revised: 01/14/2020] [Accepted: 02/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This multicenter service evaluation explores the efficacy and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in an unselected, consecutive population in 'real-life' clinical settings. METHOD We retrospectively collected data from patient records at 11 UK hospitals and epilepsy centers. Consecutive patients prescribed BRV with at least 3 months of follow-up (FU) were included. Apart from reporting effectiveness and tolerability of BRV across the whole cohort, we compared treatment outcomes depending on previous levetiracetam use (LEV+ versus LEV-), comorbid learning disability (LD+ versus LD-), and epilepsy syndrome (focal versus generalized epilepsy). RESULTS Two hundred and ninety patients (46% male, median age: 38 years, range: 15 to 77) with ≥3 months of FU were included. The median duration of BRV exposure was 12 months (range: 1 day to 72 months). Overall BRV retention was 71.1%. While 56.1% of patients improved in terms of seizure frequency category (daily, weekly, monthly, yearly seizures), 23.1% did not improve on this measure and 20.8% deteriorated. In terms of seizure frequency, 21% of patients experienced a ≥50% reduction, with 7.0% of all patients becoming seizure-free. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported by 107 (36.9%) patients, but there were no serious AEs. The commonest AEs were sedation/fatigue (18.3%), mood changes (9.0%), and irritability/aggression (4.8%). There were no significant differences in drug retention, seizure frequency outcomes, or AEs between the LEV+ and LEV- subgroups, or between patients with generalized or focal epilepsies. Although 15.5% of patients in the LD+ group achieved a ≥50% reduction, this rate was lower than in the LD- group. CONCLUSIONS This 'real-life' evaluation suggests that reductions in seizure frequency can be achieved with BRV in patients with highly refractory epilepsy. Brivaracetam may be a useful treatment option in patients who have previously failed to respond to or tolerate LEV, those with LD, or (off-label) those with generalized epilepsies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Adewusi
- Academic Neurology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK.
| | - C Burness
- The Walton Centre, NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
| | - S Ellawela
- Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
| | - H Emsley
- Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.
| | - R Hughes
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
| | | | - M Maguire
- Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, UK.
| | - B McLean
- Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust, Truro, UK.
| | - R Mohanraj
- Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
| | - M Oto
- William Quarriers Epilepsy Centre, Glasgow, UK
| | - S Singhal
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
| | - M Reuber
- Academic Neurology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Steinhoff BJ, Staack AM. Levetiracetam and brivaracetam: a review of evidence from clinical trials and clinical experience. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2019; 12:1756286419873518. [PMID: 31523280 PMCID: PMC6734620 DOI: 10.1177/1756286419873518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2019] [Accepted: 08/12/2019] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Until the early 1990s, a limited number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were available. Since then, a large variety of new AEDs have been developed and introduced, several of them offering new modes of action. One of these new AED families is described and reviewed in this article. Levetiracetam (LEV) and brivaracetam (BRV) are pyrrolidone derivate compounds binding at the presynaptic SV2A receptor site and are thus representative of AEDs with a unique mode of action. LEV was extensively investigated in randomized controlled trials and has a very promising efficacy both in focal and generalized epilepsies. Its pharmacokinetic profile is favorable and LEV does not undergo clinically relevant interactions. Adverse reactions comprise mainly asthenia, somnolence, and behavioral symptoms. It has now been established as a first-line antiepileptic drug. BRV has been recently introduced as an adjunct antiepileptic drug in focal epilepsy with a similarly promising pharmacokinetic profile and possibly increased tolerability concerning psychiatric adverse events. This review summarizes the essential preclinical and clinical data of LEV and BRV that is currently available and includes the experiences at a large tertiary referral epilepsy center.
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yamane Makke
- Department of Neurology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center , Nashville , TN , USA
| | - Bassel Abou-Khalil
- Department of Neurology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center , Nashville , TN , USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Feyissa AM. Brivaracetam in the treatment of epilepsy: a review of clinical trial data. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2019; 15:2587-2600. [PMID: 31571877 PMCID: PMC6750854 DOI: 10.2147/ndt.s143548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2019] [Accepted: 08/15/2019] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|