Perampanel effectiveness and tolerability in patients with epilepsy at long-term follow-up

Structural connectivity as a predictive factor for perampanel response in patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify clinical characteristics that could predict the response to perampanel (PER) and determine whether structural connectivity is a predictive factor.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with epilepsy who received PER and were followed-up for a minimum of 12 months. Good PER responders, who were seizure-free or presented with more than 50 % seizure reduction, were classified separately from poor PER responders who had seizure reduction of less than 50 % or non-responders. A graph theoretical analysis was conducted based on diffusion tensor imaging to calculate network measures of structural connectivity among patients with epilepsy.

RESULTS

106 patients with epilepsy were enrolled, including 26 good PER responders and 80 poor PER responders. Good PER responders used fewer anti-seizure medications before PER administration compared to those by poor PER responders (3 vs. 4; p = 0.042). Early PER treatment was more common in good PER responders than poor PER responders (46.2 vs. 21.3 %, p = 0.014). Regarding cortical structural connectivity, the global efficiency was higher and characteristic path length was lower in good PER responders than in poor PER responders (0.647 vs. 0.635, p = 0.006; 1.726 vs. 1,759, p = 0.008, respectively). For subcortical structural connectivity, the mean clustering coefficient and small-worldness index were higher in good PER responders than in poor PER responders (0.821 vs. 0.791, p = 0.009; 0.597 vs. 0.560, p = 0.009, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that early PER administration can predict a good PER response in patients with epilepsy, and structural connectivity could potentially offer clinical utility in predicting PER response.

The latest advances in the pharmacological management of focal epilepsies in children: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Focal epilepsy constitutes the most common epilepsy in children, and medical treatment represents the first-line therapy in this condition. The main goal of medical treatment for children and adolescents with epilepsy is the achievement of seizure freedom or, in drug-resistant epilepsies, a significant seizure reduction, both minimizing antiseizure medications (ASM)-related adverse events, thus improving the patient's quality of life. However, up to 20-40% of pediatric epilepsies are refractory to drug treatments. New ASMs came to light in the pediatric landscape, improving the drug profile compared to that of the preexisting ones. Clinicians should consider several factors during the drug choice process, including patient and medication-specific characteristics.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review aims to summarize the latest evidence on the effectiveness and tolerability of the newest ASMs administered as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in pediatric epilepsies with focal onset seizures, providing a practical appraisal based on the existing evidence.

EXPERT OPINION

The latest ASMs have the potential to be effective in the pharmacological management of focal onset seizures in children, and treatment choice should consider several drug- and epilepsy-related factors. Future treatments should be increasingly personalized and targeted on patient-specific pathways. Future research should focus on discovering new chemical compounds and repurposing medications used for other indications.

Long-term efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients aged 4-19 years with epilepsy: a real-world study

This study determined the 24-month outcomes of perampanel treatment in children and adolescents with epilepsy. The percentage of ≥ 50% responders was 47.3% (139/294) at 12 months and 49.0% (144/294) at 24 months. A 100% reduction in seizures for more than 12 months was observed in 12.2% (36/294). Discontinuation occurred in 39.8% (117/294). The most common reason for discontinuation was adverse events (29.1%, 34/117). Baseline seizure frequency was higher in children aged < 12 years than in patients aged ≥ 12 years; however, the percentage of seizure reduction and ≥ 50% responders did not significantly differ between the two groups. The rate of early discontinuation was higher (p < 0.001) and the duration of perampanel treatment was shorter in children aged < 12 years (p = 0.001). Most children aged < 12 years discontinued PER due to inadequate effectiveness, while adverse event was the most common reason in patients aged ≥ 12 years (p = 0.045). Only slow titration was significantly associated with ≥ 50% of responders. In conclusion, this study showed that perampanel can be utilized effectively and safely for a prolonged period in pediatric patients aged 4 to < 12 years, as well as in patients aged 12 years and older.

Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of perampanel and oxcarbazepine as monotherapy in children and adolescents with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy

Objective: This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of perampanel and oxcarbazepine as monotherapy in children with focal epilepsy (FE). Methods: This is an ambispective, single-center, non-inferiority study comparing the effectiveness and safety of perampanel (PER) monotherapy and oxcarbazepine (OXC) monotherapy in children with newly diagnosed FE. The primary endpoint was a six-month seizure freedom rate. The secondary endpoints included retention, responder, and seizure freedom rates at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were also recorded for both groups. Results: One hundred and thirty children and adolescents aged from 4 to 18years newly diagnosed with FE between May 2020 and November 2022 in Wuhan Children's Hospital were included. There were 71 patients in the PER group and 59 patients in the OXC group. In the per protocol set (PPS), 50 (78.1%) in the PER group and 43 (78.2%) in the OXC group completed six months of treatment without seizures. The lower 95% CI (66.0%-87.5%) limit of PER was higher than the non-inferiority margin of 62.4% (80% of the 6-month seizure freedom rate in the OXC group); PER was non-inferior to OXC. The 3-month and 12-month seizure freedom rates were 77.1% and 82.9% for the PER group, respectively, while they were 80.4% and 75.8% for the OXC group. There were no serious adverse events in both groups. Conclusion: PER showed comparable effectiveness and safety compared with OXC in children with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy, which might be an effective and safe treatment for children and adolescents with newly diagnosed FE. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier ChiCTR2300074696.

Efficacy and safety of perampanel as early add-on therapy in Chinese patients with focal-onset seizures: a multicenter, open-label, single-arm study

Background

No interventional study has been conducted in China to assess efficacy and safety of perampanel in treating Chinese patients with epilepsy, nor has there been any study on perampanel early add-on therapy in China. This interventional study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of perampanel as an early add-on treatment of focal-onset seizures (FOS) with or without focal-to-bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) in Chinese patients.

Methods

In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 4 interventional study, Chinese patients ≥ 12 years old with FOS with or without FBTCS who failed anti-seizure medication (ASM) monotherapy from 15 hospitals in China were enrolled and treated with perampanel add-on therapy (8-week titration followed by 24-week maintenance). The primary endpoint was 50% responder rate. Secondary endpoints included seizure-freedom rate and changes in seizure frequency from baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and drug-related TEAEs were recorded.

Results

The full analysis set included 150 patients. The mean maintenance perampanel dose was 5.9 ± 1.5 mg/day and the 8-month retention rate was 72%. The 50% responder rate and seizure-freedom rate for all patients during maintenance were 67.9 and 30.5%, respectively. Patients with FBTCS had higher 50% responder rate (96.0%) and seizure-freedom rate (76.0%) during maintenance. Patients on concomitant sodium valproate had a significantly higher seizure-freedom rate than those on concomitant oxcarbazepine. Eight-six (55.1%) patients experienced treatment-related TEAEs, and the most common TEAEs were dizziness (36.5%), hypersomnia (11.5%), headache (3.9%), somnolence (3.2%), and irritability (3.2%). Withdrawal due to TEAEs occurred to 14.7% of the patients.

Conclusion

Perampanel early add-on was effective and safe in treating Chinese patients≥12 years old with FOS with or without FBTCS.Clinical trial registrationwww.chictr.org.cn, Identifier ChiCTR2000039510.

The broad-spectrum activity of perampanel: state of the art and future perspective of AMPA antagonism beyond epilepsy

Glutamate is the brain's main excitatory neurotransmitter. Glutamatergic neurons primarily compose basic neuronal networks, especially in the cortex. An imbalance of excitatory and inhibitory activities may result in epilepsy or other neurological and psychiatric conditions. Among glutamate receptors, AMPA receptors are the predominant mediator of glutamate-induced excitatory neurotransmission and dictate synaptic efficiency and plasticity by their numbers and/or properties. Therefore, they appear to be a major drug target for modulating several brain functions. Perampanel (PER) is a highly selective, noncompetitive AMPA antagonist approved in several countries worldwide for treating different types of seizures in various epileptic conditions. However, recent data show that PER can potentially address many other conditions within epilepsy and beyond. From this perspective, this review aims to examine the new preclinical and clinical studies-especially those produced from 2017 onwards-on AMPA antagonism and PER in conditions such as mesial temporal lobe epilepsy, idiopathic and genetic generalized epilepsy, brain tumor-related epilepsy, status epilepticus, rare epileptic syndromes, stroke, sleep, epilepsy-related migraine, cognitive impairment, autism, dementia, and other neurodegenerative diseases, as well as provide suggestions on future research agenda aimed at probing the possibility of treating these conditions with PER and/or other AMPA receptor antagonists.

Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel monotherapy in children with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy

Objective

To examine the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) as initial monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 62 children with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy who were treated with PER at the Epilepsy Center of Jinan Children's Hospital from July 2021 to July 2022. The treatment status, prognosis, and adverse reactions were followed up for a minimum of 6 months after the initiation of PER monotherapy. The effectiveness of the patients was estimated by the PER effective rate at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up evaluations and adverse reactions were also recorded. The effective rates of PER in different etiologies and epilepsy syndromes were also statistically analyzed.

Results

The effective rates of PER treatment at the different time points of evaluation were 88.7% (3 months), 79.1% (6 months), and 80.4% (12 months). With PER treatment, seizure freedom varied over time, with 61.3%, 71.0%, and 71.7% of patients at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups, respectively. Among the etiologies of epilepsy, the effective rates of genetic etiology, structural etiology, and unknown etiology were generally above 50% at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Among the epilepsy syndromes, the categories with higher treatment efficacy were self-limiting epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (SeLECTs), self-limited epilepsy with autonomic seizures (SeLEAS), and childhood occipital visual epilepsy (COVE), with an effective rate of above 80%. Adverse events were documented in 22 patients (35.5%), but they were mild and tolerable. The most common adverse events comprised irritability, drowsiness, dizziness, and increased appetite.

Conclusion

PER has favorable effectiveness and tolerability as initial monotherapy for children with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy, which could be a potential option for long-term medication in the treatment of focal epilepsy in children. The current study provided potential evidence for PER as initial monotherapy in children with focal epilepsy in clinical practice.

Survey on the management of childhood epilepsy among general practitioners in the area of Marrakech

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common chronic neurological disorder in the pediatric population and its evolution can be fatal. It represents a major public health problem as well as an economic burden for the families of affected children, health systems and the overall economies of countries. This further accentuates the role that general practitioners can play in the management of childhood epilepsy in the face of the persistent lack of neurologists and neuro-pediatricians in our country.

METHODS

In order to assess the knowledge and therapeutic habits of general practitioners, we carried out a descriptive and cross-sectional study with general practitioners practicing in the two healthcare sectors: public and private, and in two settings: urban and rural, during the year 2018. The data was collected through a pre-established survey.

RESULTS

In total, 155 general practitioners responded to the survey. For 85.2% of physicians, the diagnosis of childhood epilepsy was based on interrogation, physical examination, and EEG. While brain imaging would be systematic regardless of the type of epilepsy for 45.2% of doctors. Only 6 doctors (3.9%) had knowledge of the latest classifications of the "ILAE". For treatment, the majority of physicians (65.5%) adopted first-line monotherapy with valproate in leading position. Almost half of the doctors (48.4%) found that education of parents and children was always necessary. None of the GPs interviewed in our series assessed the academic impact of epilepsy. Only 32% of doctors had received continuing education on epilepsy.

CONCLUSION

The data from our study demonstrates that continuing education on the management of childhood epilepsy and the greater involvement of general practitioners were essential elements in improving care.

Sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness in patients with epilepsy after initiating perampanel as adjunctive therapy

BACKGROUND

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) may affect nocturnal sleep and daytime vigilance. Perampanel (PER), a third-generation ASM, showed to improve nocturnal sleep in patients with epilepsy (PWE). Although ASMs can have beneficial effects on nocturnal sleep and daytime sleepiness, no study investigated the effect of PER on both sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness. Therefore, this study aimed to objectively evaluate the sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness in PWE treated with PER as adjunctive therapy.

METHODS

This prospective study included adult PWE who received PER as add-on treatment. Sleep-wake cycle was assessed through actigraphic monitoring and daytime sleepiness by the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) performed at the end of the actigraphic recording. All patients performed both tests at baseline and at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Ten patients (mean age: 44.50 ± 22.71 years, 50.0% female) were included. The mean monthly seizure frequency was 3.20 ± 5.94. Six of ten patients started PER as a first add-on treatment. The final PER dose was 5.11 ± 2.02 mg/day, and nine of ten patients achieved seizure freedom at follow-up. There was a significant decrease in mean monthly seizure frequency from baseline to follow-up (p = 0.004). No significant changes were found in the sleep-wake cycle parameters. An increase in sleep latency mean was observed at MSLT at 6-month follow-up (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that adjunctive PER is effective on seizures without pathologically change of the sleep-wake cycle in PWE and can even improve daytime sleepiness. This effect can be mediated by the achievement of seizure control. Therefore, PER may be promising in PWE with sleep disturbances and daytime sleepiness.

Epilepsy and Cognitive Impairment in Childhood and Adolescence: A Mini-Review

Managing epilepsy in people with an intellectual disability remains a therapeutic challenge and must take into account additional issues such as diagnostic difficulties and frequent drug resistance. Advances in genomic technologies improved our understanding of epilepsy and raised the possibility to develop patients-tailored treatments acting on the key molecular mechanisms involved in the development of the disease. In addition to conventional antiseizure medications (ASMs), ketogenic diet, hormone therapy and epilepsy surgery play an important role, especially in cases of drugresistance. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the mainfactors influencing cognition in children and adolescents with epilepsy and the main therapeutic options available for the epilepsies associated with intellectual disability.

Effectiveness and safety of perampanel as adjunctive therapy among Chinese patients with focal-onset epilepsy: A real-world prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Perampanel (PER) has previously been shown to be effective and tolerable when used as an adjunctive therapy for patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PER as adjunctive therapy for patients with FOS in the Chinese population under real-world conditions for 1 year.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, 1-year observational study was conducted at Huashan Hospital, enrolling both under age (≥4 years old) and adult patients with FOS. Response to PER was assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month checkpoints by analyzing the 50 % responder rate, the seizure-free rate, and reduction in seizure frequency.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients (mean age: 26.6 years, 56.5 % males) with FOS were included, with seventy-six patients finishing the 1-year follow-up (retention rate: 70.4 %, mean PER dose: 4.3 mg/day). The seizure frequency was reduced significantly at 3, 6, and 12 months relative to baseline (p < 0.001 for each seizure type). At 12 months, the responder rate was 65.8 %, and the seizure-free rate was 39.5 %. A significantly higher responder rate was found in patients with focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (p = 0.024), among which the percentage of patients with sleep-related epilepsy was significantly high (p = 0.045). Responders had a lower number of concomitant anti-seizure medications (ASMs) than the non-responders (p = 0.009). Drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 37 % of patients, mostly mild or moderate, and the patients who experienced AEs had a higher daily dose of PER than those who did not (p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Perampanel, an add-on therapy for focal-onset seizures, was found to be effective and tolerable in Chinese patients at 12 months.

Effectiveness of perampanel in the treatment of pediatric patients with focal epilepsy and ESES: A single-center retrospective study

Objective: To investigate the therapeutic effect and influencing factors of perampanel (PER) on electrical status epilepticus during sleep (ESES).

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of pediatric patients with focal epilepsy and ESES who were treated at the Epilepsy Center of Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University between January 2016 and March 2022. Changes in the spike wave index (SWI) after 24 weeks of PER add-on treatment were compared. Kaplan‒Meier survival analysis, the log-rank test and multivariate Cox regression analysis were performed.

Results: A total of 54 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria, including 33 males and 21 females. The mean age at the diagnosis of epilepsy was 6.41 ± 2.14 years and at ESES diagnosis was 7.58 ± 2.40 years. The mean ESES duration before add-on PER was 25.31 ± 15.12 months. The mean age of the patients at add-on PER initiation was 9.69 ± 2.12 years. The ESES resolved in 29 children after 6 months of PER add-on treatment, and the response rate was 53.7%. Univariate analysis with the log-rank test showed that the therapeutic effect of PER differed according to the age at ESES diagnosis and ESES duration before add-on PER treatment. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that only ESES duration before PER administration was a risk factor for PER treatment failure, and the other factors had no effect on the therapeutic effect.

Conclusion: PER add-on treatment has a good therapeutic effect on ESES and can be used as an alternative to corticosteroid and benzodiazepines. The therapeutic effect of PER add-on treatment was not related to the dose. A longer ESES duration results in a worse therapeutic effect. Therefore, more aggressive treatment measures should be implemented for ESES.

Perampanel and childhood absence epilepsy: A real life experience

Objectives

The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) as first add-on and as second line monotherapy in subjects with childhood absence epilepsy.

Methods

Our sample consisted of 20 patients with childhood absence epilepsy, aged between 8 and 10, already in therapy with a first antiseizure medication with incomplete seizure control. PER was added as first add-on in a dose ranging from 3 to 8 mg/die with 1- 2 mg/week increments. The patients that were seizure-free were shifted to a PER monotherapy. All patients underwent a standardized neuropsychological evaluation in order to assess non-verbal intelligence and executive functions before adding PER and after 6 months of drug therapy. All parents completed two questionnaires, in order to assess the emotional-behavioral problems and parental stress.

Results

15/20 patients responded to add-on PER and were seizure-free, in 3/20 patients we observed a reduction of seizure frequency <50%, and in the 2 remaining patients the add-on therapy with PER did not lead to a reduction in seizures frequency from baseline. The patients who were seizure-free were switched to PER monotherapy. 9/15 patients remained seizure-free in monotherapy with PER. In the first month of therapy with PER 2/20 patients (10%) reported mild, transient side effects of irritability, headache and dizziness, which did not lead to discontinuation of therapy. Adjunctive treatment with PER did not negatively affect non-verbal intelligence, executive functions, emotional/behavioral symptoms of children and parental stress levels.

Significance

Our clinical experience in real life showed that PER appears to be effective in the control of absence seizures in childhood absence epilepsy, with a favorable tolerability profile. PER would seem effective on absence seizures even in monotherapy. Further studies with larger samples, longer follow-up and controlled vs. placebo (or other first choice antiseizure medications) are needed to confirm our data.

Perampanel as adjunctive therapy in drug resistant epilepsy in adolescents and children waiting for epilepsy surgery: A multicenter observational study in Thailand

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) in real-world settings in patients between 1 month and 18 years of age with drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) waiting for epilepsy surgery.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, patients between 1 month and 18 years of age with DRE treated with PER between January 2020 and June 2021 were selected. The study outcome was effectiveness of PER treatment reported as reduction in seizure frequency and seizure freedom rate. Effectiveness was assessed at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 days after initiation of PER. Tolerability profiles were reported as adverse events according to the observations of the patients' family members and physician.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients treated with PER were included in the study. The mean initial dose and mean maximum dose of adjunctive PER was 2 mg/day and 5.8 mg/day, respectively. The mean seizure frequency (rate/week) was 41.3, 25.4, 18.9, 14.3, 11.2, 11.1 and 8.9 seizures at baseline, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 days, respectively; the reduction in the mean seizure frequency at all timepoints was significant compared at the baseline (p<0.001). At 180 days, ≥75% seizure reduction was seen in 64.9% (37/57) of the patients and seizure freedom was achieved in 36.8% (21/57). Drowsiness, ataxia, and behavioral changes were the common adverse events observed, and these improved after the dose of PER was reduced. No discontinuation of PER was required due to side effects or intolerance.

CONCLUSION

In real-world settings, PER is well tolerated and effective in seizure control in pediatric and adolescent patients with DRE.

Efficacy and adverse reactions of perampanel in the treatment of epilepsy in children

Objective

To observe the clinical effect and adverse reactions of perampanel in the treatment of epilepsy in children.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 83 children with epilepsy who were treated with perampanel in the Department of Pediatric Neurology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from April to August 2021. The treatment status, prognosis and adverse reactions were followed up. The effective rates of different age groups, different seizure types and epilepsy syndromes, and different treatment methods were statistically analyzed. The effective rate and adverse reactions of all patients were statistically analyzed.

Results

The overall effective rate of perampanel in the treatment of epilepsy was 62.03%, and there was no significant difference in the effective rate of perampanel in the treatment of epilepsy in patients of different ages (P > 0.05). The effective rates of perampanel in the treatment of focal seizures and generalized seizures were 60.38% and 65.38%, and the effective rates of benign childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (BECT), BECT combined with electrical status epilepticus during sleep (ESES) and frontal lobe epilepsy (FLE) were 88.89, 72.73, and 66.67%. The effective rates of monotherapy and combination therapy were 88.88 and 58.57%, respectively. The above statistical differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). In addition, the adverse reaction rate of perampanel treatment was 16.45%, including irritability, drowsiness, dizziness, nausea, vomiting and abnormal liver function.

Conclusion

Perampanel has a high efficiency and controllable adverse reactions in the treatment of childhood epilepsy. This drug can be used as a reliable choice for long-term use in the treatment of epilepsy in children.

Perampanel add-on therapy for drug-refractory epilepsy: A single-center retrospective study based on 6-month treatment outcomes in Central China

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and retention of perampanel (PER) for treating drug-refractory epilepsy (DRE), and to investigate the independent factors affecting efficacy and retention. We hope this will provide clinicians with guidelines for the use of PER to treat patients with DRE.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective observational study of patients with DRE who received PER as add-on therapy at the Epilepsy Center of the People's Hospital of Henan Province, China, between 2020 Mar. and 2021 Sep. We collected clinical data from these patients. The observation period was 6 months. The observation endpoint is the drug response and retention rate at 6 months of PER use. Regression analyses were used to compare the differences in efficacy and retention rates, respectively.

RESULTS

Clinical data were obtained for 72 patients with DRE (mean duration of treatment: 10.6 months). At 6 months, 25% of patients (n = 18) were seizure free; 18.1% of patients (n = 13) remained seizure free for 6 months after the addition of PER. 22.2% of patients (n = 16) had a response (One of the patients was withdrawn 5 months after adding PER due to financial difficulties). The retention rate of PER at 6 months was 77.8%. Adverse effects tended to be dominated by neuropsychiatric symptoms. Multifactorial logistic regression analysis showed significant differences in whether the baseline seizure frequency exceeded 4 seizures/month (OR = 0.232, 95%CI: 0.077-0.702, p = 0.01) and whether the number of previously failed ASMs exceeded 3 (OR = 0.316; 95%CI:0.109-0.920, p = 0.035). This indicates that the risk of experiencing a nonresponse is higher with a higher baseline seizure frequency as well as with a higher number of previous ASM failures. Therefore, a baseline frequency exceeding four seizures/month and more than three previous ASM failures were independent influencing factors for PER addition treatment for patients with DRE. Multifactorial COX regression showed that patients with DRE due to infection had a lower retention rate (OR = 15.957, 95% CI: 3.692-68.972, P < 0.001) than patients with DRE due to other noninfectious etiologies. Patients with DRE who only had a single seizure type (OR = 0.053, 95% CI:0.006-0.476, P = 0.009), and patients who did not have cognitive impairment (OR = 134.253, 95% CI:5.623-3205.104, P = 0.002) showed longer durations of PER use. Infection-related epilepsy etiology, experiencing multiple types of seizures, and with cognitive impairment were independent influencing factors on PER use retention in patients with DRE.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated the efficacy of PER for reducing seizure frequency in patients with DRE and found significant differences in efficacy and retention rate, respectively. This provides a basis for assessing the expected efficacy and duration of use of PER for patients with DRE.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Perampanel as Adjunctive Therapy in Chinese Patients With Focal-Onset Seizures: An Observational, Prospective Study

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel (PER) in Chinese patients with focal-onset seizures, with or without secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Methods: Fifty-six patients aged 14-72 years were recruited consecutively in this single-center prospective observational study. All patients received PER as add-on treatment on the basis of clinical judgment. Seizure frequency, adverse events (AEs), and retention rates were obtained at 3 and 6 months after PER introduction. Results: The overall response rates were 60 and 71.1% after 3 and 6 months, respectively, and the freedom of seizures at the same points were reached in 8 and 15.8%. The retention rates were 89.3% at the 3-month follow-up and 67.9% at the 6-month follow-up. The overall incidence of adverse events was 55.4%. The leading reported AEs were dizziness (39.3%) and somnolence (25%). Conclusions: Our study confirmed the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive PER in Chinese patients in real-life conditions. Based on our treatment experience, a lower maintenance dose of PER would be needed in Chinese patients.