Preliminary evidence about irritability in patients with epilepsy treated by perampanel as first add-on therapy compared to levetiracetam and valproic acid

Monitoring levetiracetam concentration in saliva during pregnancy is stable and feasible

AIMS

This multicenter prospective cohort study (registration no. ChiCTR2000032089) aimed to investigate the relationship between saliva and plasma levetiracetam concentrations to determine whether saliva could be used for routine monitoring of levetiracetam during pregnancy.

METHODS

The slot concentrations of levetiracetam in simultaneously obtained saliva and plasma samples were measured using UPLC-MS/MS. The correlations between saliva and plasma levetiracetam concentrations and the dose-normalized concentrations were compared among pregnant women in different stages and nonpregnant control participants with epilepsy.

RESULTS

In total, 231 patients with 407 plasma and saliva sample pairs were enrolled from 39 centers. Linear relationships between salivary and plasma levetiracetam concentrations were reported in the enrolled population (r = 0.898, p < 0.001), including pregnant (r = 0.935, p < 0.001) and nonpregnant participants (r = 0.882, p < 0.001). Plasma concentrations were moderately higher than saliva concentrations, with ratios of saliva to plasma concentrations of 0.98 for nonpregnant women, 0.98, 1, and 1.12 for pregnant women during the first trimester, the second trimester, the and third trimester, respectively. The effective range of saliva levetiracetam concentration was found to be 9.98 μg/mL (lower limit) with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.937 (95% confidence intervals, 0.915-0.959), sensitivity of 88.9%, specificity of 86.8%, and p < 0.001, to 24.05 μg/mL (upper limit) with an AUC of 0.952 (0.914-0.99), sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 92.3%, and p = 0.007.

CONCLUSION

The saliva/plasma concentration ratio of levetiracetam remains constant during pregnancy and is similar to that in non-pregnant individuals. Monitoring levetiracetam concentration in saliva during pregnancy should be widely promoted.

Irritability: A concept analysis

Irritability is a term used to describe feelings of anger, annoyance and impatience, and is commonly experienced by individuals in daily life. However, there are diverse conceptualizations of irritability in public and clinical research, which often result in confusing irritability with anger and other overlapping concepts. This, in turn, leads to a lack of conceptual clarity. Accordingly, the purpose of this concept analysis was to explore the irritability concept, including its definitions, defining characteristics, antecedents, consequences and empirical referents. The findings showed that irritability is predominantly conceptualized as a psychophysiological concept in the literature. We demonstrated that irritability can be differentiated from overlapping concepts like anger by qualities, such as 'unpredictability and lowered emotion control', 'lowered threshold for negative emotional stimuli', 'being manifested in response to frustrative situations or physiological needs' and 'experience of disproportionate and unjustified emotional irritation'. Importantly, severe irritability prospectively predicts psychiatric disorders and greater impairments in health, financial, educational and social functioning in individuals. Taken together, our analysis showed that one should take into account the context, duration, intensity and importantly outcomes, when assessing irritability in an individual. Considering these findings and the presence of irritability in nursing practice, it is crucial for nurses to recognize and successfully identify this concept in the nursing care they provide within the diverse settings and patient populations.

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.

Perampanel outcomes at different stages of treatment in people with focal and generalized epilepsy treated in clinical practice: Evidence from the PERMIT study

Introduction

The PERMIT study is the largest pooled analysis of perampanel (PER) clinical practice data conducted to date.

Methods

This post-hoc analysis of PERMIT investigated the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of PER when used as early add-on therapy (after failure of one or two previous antiseizure medications) in comparison with late add-on therapy (after failure of three or more previous antiseizure medications). Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months, and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness was assessed by seizure type (total seizures, focal seizures, generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCS]) and assessments included seizure freedom rate and responder rate. Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs.

Results

The Full Analysis Set included 1184 and 2861 PWE treated with PER as early and late add-on therapy, respectively. Compared to the late add-on subgroup, the early add-on subgroup was characterized by later mean age at epilepsy onset, shorter mean duration of epilepsy, lower rates of intellectual disability and psychiatric comorbidity, and lower frequency of seizures per month, suggesting a less severe form of epilepsy in this subgroup. After 12 months, retention was significantly higher in the early versus late add-on subgroup (67.7% vs. 62.4%; p = 0.004). At the last visit, responder rates in the early versus late add-on subgroup were significantly higher for total seizures (68.2% vs. 39.3%; p &lt; 0.001), focal seizures (65.0% vs. 36.8%; p &lt; 0.001) and GTCS (83.7% vs. 67.2%; p &lt; 0.001), as were seizure freedom rates (total seizures, 35.9% vs. 11.9% [p &lt; 0.001]; focal seizures, 29.4% vs. 8.7% [p &lt; 0.001]; GTCS, 69.0% vs. 48.1% [p &lt; 0.001]). Incidence of AEs was significantly lower in the early versus late add-on subgroup (42.1% vs. 54.7%; p &lt; 0.001), as was the rate of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months (15.0% vs. 18.1%; p = 0.031).

Discussion

This study demonstrated that PER was effective and generally well tolerated when initiated as early or late add-on therapy, but it was significantly more effective and better tolerated when initiated early. These findings support PER's use as a broad-spectrum, early add-on therapy for use in PWE with focal and generalized seizures.

Perampanel may represent an effective treatment for the prevention of migraine comorbid with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a common comorbidity in patients with epilepsy. Considering the proven associations and the common pathophysiological features linking epilepsy and migraine, some anti-seizure medications (ASMs) have been considered as a treatment for both disorders. This study aimed at assessing both the effectiveness of perampanel (PER) on epileptic seizures and migraine attacks in patients with epilepsy and comorbid migraine, as well as the reduction in the monthly mean rate usage of rescue migraine medications.

METHODS

This observational, multi-centre study included adult patients with epilepsy and comorbid migraine who started PER to better control epileptic seizures and who were followed up for 12 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included (mean age 40.13 ± 13.13 years; 67.0% female). At the 12-month follow-up visit, 27 patients were continuing PER concomitantly with 1 (45.2%) or 2 ASMs (54.8%). A significant reduction in epileptic seizures, migraine attacks, and the monthly use of rescue migraine medications between baseline and both 6- and 12-month follow-up visits was documented.

CONCLUSION

PER demonstrated good effectiveness in reducing both epileptic seizures and migraine attacks in patients with comorbid epilepsy and migraine. Future studies with possibly larger samples are needed to evaluate the efficacy of PER in migraine other than epilepsy.

Perampanel Increases Cortical EEG Fast Activity in Child and Adult Patients Affected by Epilepsy: A Quantitative EEG Study

OBJECTIVE

Quantitative EEG (qEEG) is an established technique used as objective measure for evaluating the effect of antiseizure medications (ASMs) on EEG background activity and monitoring cognitive effects of ASMs. Perampanel (PER) has been associated with relatively more tolerable cognitive effects in patients with epilepsy. The primary aim of the present study was to verify the effect of PER as first add-on ASM on qEEG in child and adult patients affected by epilepsy. The secondary aim of this study was to verify the effectiveness of the drug as first add-on treatment in both child and adult patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

We collected data from 17 adults and 10 children treated with PER as first add-on treatment, who underwent qEEG analysis before starting PER and at 3-month follow-up under stable treatment.

RESULTS

PER resulted with significant effectiveness in reducing seizures in both children and adults. Considering qEEG analysis, we observed at follow-up the significant increase in beta1 and beta total bands both in children and adult patients. In particular, children showed the significant increase of beta band frequencies predominantly in the occipital regions, whereas adults showed a widespread increase of beta activity. Moreover, we documented in both child and adult patients the global reduction of delta bands activity.

CONCLUSIONS

This qEEG study documented the relative increase of cortical EEG fast activity in both children and adult patients affected by epilepsy and treated by PER. This result may suggest a potential less negative impact of PER on cognition in patients affected by epilepsy, other than demonstrating effectiveness of the drug when used as first add-on treatment in both children and adult patients.

PERMIT study: a global pooled analysis study of the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in routine clinical practice

The PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) study was a pooled analysis of data from 44 real-world studies from 17 countries, in which people with epilepsy (PWE; focal and generalized) were treated with perampanel (PER). Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months, and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included 50% responder rate (≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency from baseline) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit); in PWE with status epilepticus, response was defined as seizures under control. Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs. The Full Analysis Set included 5193 PWE. Retention, effectiveness and safety/tolerability were assessed in 4721, 4392 and 4617, respectively. Retention on PER treatment at 3, 6, and 12 months was 90.5%, 79.8%, and 64.2%, respectively. Mean retention time on PER treatment was 10.8 months. The 50% responder rate was 58.3% at 12 months and 50.0% at the last visit, and the corresponding seizure freedom rates were 23.2% and 20.5%, respectively; 52.7% of PWE with status epilepticus responded to PER treatment. Overall, 49.9% of PWE reported AEs and the most frequently reported AEs (≥ 5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (15.2%), somnolence (10.6%), irritability (8.4%), and behavioral disorders (5.4%). At 12 months, 17.6% of PWEs had discontinued due to AEs. PERMIT demonstrated that PER is effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat people with focal and/or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice.

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

INTRODUCTION

The main of the present study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel (PER) in association with 1 or 2 concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) in patients with epilepsy throughout a follow-up period of 24 months or longer in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, multi-center study collected data from both underage (<18 years old) and adult patients who had started PER in association with 1 or 2 ASMs. Only patients who had started PER and were followed up for at least 24 months were included. Response to treatment was analyzed at the 24-, 36-, and 48-month visits by considering the last visit undergone by patients. Subgroup analyses were performed according to age, gender, and epilepsy type and patients were categorized following PER treatment in concomitance with 1 or 2 ASMs to evaluate the factors affecting the achievement of seizure freedom (SF) at the 24-month FU.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients were included (mean age 36.89 years; 51.1% female). At the 24-month follow-up visit, 90 (95.74%) patients were still receiving PER concomitantly with 1 or 2 ASMs. The mean PER dose was 6.02 mg/day and SF was achieved by 33 (35.1%) patients. A significantly higher SF rate was found in patients who had started PER with only 1 ASM when compared to those who had started PER with 2 concomitant ASMs. Effectiveness was maintained also in the subgroups of patients with a 36- or 48-month follow-up visit. Adult patients had a higher final daily dosage of PER than underage patients. Logistic regression found that the lowest number of previously failed ASMs was associated with a higher SF rate (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Perampanel demonstrated a good effectiveness in association with 1 or 2 ASMs in both pediatric and adult patients, without having to use a high dose of the drug. The possibility to present SF was higher when PER was added early. Finally, the maintenance of effectiveness was observed also in the subgroups of patients with a follow-up of 36 and 48 months.

The impact of perampanel treatment on quality of life and psychiatric symptoms in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy: An observational study in Italy

An observational, prospective study has been conducted to evaluate the effects of adjunctive treatment with perampanel (PER) on psychological functioning and quality of life (QoL) in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Fifty-six adult patients treated with PER in addition to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were recruited in 2 Italian Epilepsy Centers. Irritability in Adult Patients with Epilepsy (I-EPI), Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-31), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Y-1 and Y-2 (STAI) questionnaires were administered at baseline and 3 and 6 months after the treatment onset. Adverse events (AEs) were collected during the observational 6 months period. Retention rate of treatment with PER was 82.1% at 3 months and 64.3% at 6 months. Thirteen patients reported a significant seizure frequency reduction, and one seizure freedom case was observed after 4 months of PER treatment. Perampanel was stopped because of inefficacy or paradoxical effects in 28.6% of cases and because of AEs in 7.1%. The peak dose was not associated with discontinuation probability. Irritability, QoL, depression, trait, and state anxiety did not change significantly during the PER therapy. A tendency of association between higher level of irritability at baseline and PER discontinuation was found. The results of this observational study have shown that the addition of PER to AEDs may improve seizure control, does not increase levels of irritability, depression, and anxiety, and does not reduce patients' QoL. This study also confirms the importance of a comprehensive clinical assessment, including psychiatric symptoms evaluation before offering a new treatment, to improve therapy compliance.

Preliminary evidence about irritability in patients with epilepsy treated by perampanel as first add-on therapy compared to levetiracetam and valproic acid

Aims

Irritability has been described as a frequent adverse event in patients affected by epilepsy and treated with perampanel (PER), levetiracetam (LEV), and less frequently with valproic acid (VPA). Since the questionnaire for irritability (I‐EPI) is a validated instrument to measure this psychiatric manifestation in patients affected by epilepsy, in this study we aimed at investigating the effect of PER as first add‐on therapy on I‐EPI. Moreover, we compared the effectiveness and I‐EPI scores obtained at 12‐month follow‐up visits in patients treated by PER, LEV, or VPA in order to measure irritability as a consequence of these treatments.

Methods

We collected data from 17 patients treated by PER, 16 patients treated by LEV, and 16 patients under VPA treatment followed for 12 months.

Results

We did not document significant changes of I‐EPI questionnaire between baseline and follow‐up in the PER group. As concerning the comparison of I‐EPI among PER, LEV, and VPA groups, we documented lower global scores in PER than both LEV (P < 0.05) and VPA (P < 0.05) groups. Moreover, patients under PER treatment showed lower scores than LEV and VPA (P < 0.05) in I‐EPI items measuring the gentle personality, anxiety of having epileptic seizures in front of others, and irritability in thinking that they can have an epileptic seizure.

Conclusions

This retrospective study described a stable and possibly lower degree of irritability in patients starting PER than LEV and VPA treatments, although we documented the comparable effectiveness of PER, LEV, and VPA as first add‐on treatments in patients affected by uncontrolled epileptic seizures. However, the small sample of patients included in this study and the absence of I‐EPI scores obtained at baseline visits in LEV and VPA groups require further investigations to confirm this preliminary evidence.