Real-Life Effectiveness and Tolerability of Perampanel in Pediatric Patients Aged 4 Years or Older with Epilepsy: A Korean National Multicenter Study

Effects of CYP3A4 genetic polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of perampanel in Chinese pediatric patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

This study was the first to evaluate the effect of CYP3A4 gene polymorphisms on the plasma concentration and effectiveness of perampanel (PER) in Chinese pediatric patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

We enrolled 102 patients for this investigation. The steady-state concentration was determined after patients maintained a consistent PER dosing regimen for at least 21 days. Plasma PER concentrations were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Leftover samples from standard therapeutic drug monitoring were allocated for genotyping analysis. The primary measure of efficacy was the rate of seizure reduction with PER treatment at the final check-up.

RESULTS

The CYP3A4×10 GC phenotype exhibited the highest average plasma concentration of PER at 491.1 ± 328.1 ng/mL, in contrast to the CC phenotype at 334.0 ± 161.1 ng/mL. The incidence of adverse events was most prominent in the CYP3A4×1 G TT and CYP3A4×10 GC groups, with rates of 77.8 % (7 of 9 patients) and 50.0 % (46 of 92 patients), respectively. Moreover, the percentage of patients for whom PER was deemed ineffective was least in the CYP3A4×1 G TT and CYP3A4×10 CC groups, recorded at 11.1 % (1 of 9 patients) and 10.0 % (1 of 10 patients), respectively. There was a significant correlation between PER plasma concentration and either exposure or toxicity (both with p < 0.05). We suggest a plasma concentration range of 625-900 ng/mL as a suitable reference for PER in Chinese patients with epilepsy.

CONCLUSION

The CYP3A4×10 gene's genetic polymorphisms influence plasma concentrations of PER in Chinese pediatric patients with epilepsy. Given that both efficacy and potential toxicity are closely tied to plasma PER levels, the CYP3A4 genetic phenotype should be factored in when prescribing PER to patients with epilepsy.

Psychiatric and behavioral concerns of perampanel with concomitant levetiracetam in children with epilepsy

PURPOSE

Perampanel (PER) is expanding the therapeutic scope for pediatric epilepsy owing to its efficacy and favorable safety profile. However, concerns about psychiatric and behavioral adverse events (PBAEs) in combination therapy with levetiracetam (LEV) continue to contribute to hesitation in its prescription. We investigated the risk profiles for PBAEs when adding PER to pediatric epilepsy treatment and analyzed the differences according to the presence of concomitant LEV.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of children aged 4-18 years with epilepsy who were prescribed PER as adjunctive therapy from March 2016 to February 2023. We compared the occurrence and management of PBAEs between the PER without LEV and PER with LEV groups. The risk factors for PBAEs were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients (53 boys and 41 girls) were included in this study. The median age of total patients at the time of adding PER was 14.9 years (12.3-16.4 years), and 53 patients (56.4 %) had concomitant LEV. Forty-seven PBAEs occurred in 34 patients (36.2 %), with no significant differences depending on whether concomitant LEV is present or not. The most common PBAEs were aggression (14.9 %), irritability (9.6 %), affect lability (7.4 %), and acute psychosis (6.4 %). PBAEs occurred at a lower dosage (2-6 mg/day) in 70.6 % of the patients. In addition, 73.5 % of patients with PBAEs continued PER treatment by follow-up observation or by reducing the PER dosage. No risk factors, such as the presence of concomitant LEV or lamotrigine, any comorbid conditions, higher PER dosage (8-12 mg/day), two or more concomitant anti-seizure medications, and younger age (<13 years) at PER add-on, showed significant associations.

CONCLUSION

When expanding the use of anti-seizure medications in pediatric patients, real-world evidence on safety issues is crucial for pediatric epileptologists. We confirmed that combination therapy with PER and LEV did not increase the risk profile of PBAEs.

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.

Efficacy and safety of perampanel as the first add-on therapy for children with epilepsy: A real-world multicenter prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Perampanel (PER) is a new anti-seizure medication (ASM) with a novel mechanism of action. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of PER when added to monotherapy in children and adolescents (age, 4-18 years) with epilepsy.

METHOD

A multicenter prospective observational study was performed on children and adolescents (age, 4-18 years) with epilepsy who did not respond to ASM monotherapy between July 2021 and October 2022. PER was used as the first add-on therapy for the enrolled patients. Seizure-free rate, response rate, inefficacy rate, and drug retention rate were the main observation indicators during the 6 months of treatment. The patients were grouped based on treatment efficacy, and factors affecting efficacy were statistically analyzed. Adverse reactions were also recorded.

RESULTS

In this study, 93 patients with epilepsy were enrolled; among them, 9 patients were lost to follow-up (attrition rate, 9.7 %), and 84 were included in the analysis. Five patients with unknown efficacy discontinued taking PER early due to intolerable adverse reactions, and 79 patients (48 males, 31 females; mean age, 11.0 ± 3.9 years) finally remained. Genetic epilepsy and structural epilepsy were found in 22 patients and 36 patients, respectively. The mean duration of epilepsy history at the time of PER initiation was 4.0 ± 3.8 years, and the mean maintenance dosage of add-on PER was 4.5 ± 1.8 mg/day (equivalent to 0.14 ± 0.07 mg/kg/day). Among the 79 patients, 28 patients were diagnosed with epilepsy syndrome, including 13 patients having self-limited epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes, among whom 9 patients were seizure-free after adding PER during the 6-month follow-up (seizure-free rate, 69.2 %). For these 79 patients, the seizure-free, response, and retention rates at the end of follow-up were 45.6 %, 74.7 %, and 82.1 %, respectively. Among the 84 patients included in the analyses, adverse reactions occurred in 20 patients, mainly dizziness (8 patients), somnolence (6 patients), and irritability (4 patients), and 4 patients developed two adverse reactions simultaneously. Univariate analyses revealed statistically significant differences in efficacy between groups with structural and non-structural epilepsy and between groups with different baseline concomitant ASMs, suggesting that these factors affected the efficacy of PER as the first add-on therapy.

CONCLUSION

The overall response rate of PER as the first add-on therapy for children and adolescents with epilepsy who were followed up for 6 months was 74.7 %, indicating a relatively favorable safety and tolerability profile. The group of the baseline concomitant ASM administered and the etiological classification of epilepsy as either structural or non-structural were the factors influencing the efficacy of PER as the first add-on therapy.

Role of Perampanel in the Management of Pediatric Epilepsies in Asia: Expert Opinion

Management of pediatric epilepsies poses unique challenges around diagnosis, treatment options, comorbidities, and the potential for these factors to interact with processes in the developing brain. In pediatric patients, broad-spectrum antiseizure medications (ASMs) with minimal potential for adverse events (AEs) and limited impact on cognition and behavior are preferred. Perampanel is a first-in-class ASM with broad-spectrum efficacy, a tolerable safety profile, minimal negative impact on cognitive function, and other features that make it a viable treatment option in this patient population. However, evidence and experience of its use in pediatric patients are less extensive than in adult patients. Experts in pediatric epilepsy across the region convened at a series of meetings to discuss the use of perampanel in pediatric patients, including dose optimization, AE prevention and management, and considerations in particular groups. This article summarizes key evidence for perampanel in the pediatric population and consolidates the experts' recommendations for using the ASM in managing pediatric epilepsies.

Plasma Concentration, Efficacy, and Tolerability of Perampanel in Chinese Pediatric Patients with Epilepsy: Real-World Clinical Experience

BACKGROUND

Information on the efficacy and plasma concentration of perampanel (PER) in Chinese pediatric patients with epilepsy is limited. Therefore, this real-world retrospective study aimed to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and plasma concentration of the maximum dose of PER for epilepsy treatment in Chinese pediatric patients.

METHODS

A total of 107 pediatric patients from 2 hospitals in China were enrolled in this study. The plasma concentration of PER was determined using ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography. The primary efficacy endpoint was the seizure reduction rate after PER treatment at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

The response rate to PER therapy was 59.8% (64/107). The authors observed that patients younger than 6 years of age (n = 49) showed a significantly lower concentration-to-dose ratio than patients with ages between 6 and 14 years (n = 58) (2.2 ± 1.7 vs. 3.0 ± 1.8 mcg·mL -1 ·kg·mg -1 , respectively; P < 0.05). Patients who received enzyme-inducing antiseizure medication had significantly lower concentration-to-dose ratios than those who did not receive enzyme-inducing antiseizure medication (EIASM) (2.1 ± 1.8 vs. 3.1 ± 2.0 mcg·mL -1 ·kg·mg -1 , P < 0.05). A total of 37 patients (34.6%) reported treatment adverse events. Patients with somnolence and irritability had a significantly higher PER plasma concentration than the "no treatment-emergent adverse effect" groups ( P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PER is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for patients with epilepsy. To ensure the clinical efficacy and safety of PER in pediatric patients, it is necessary to monitor its plasma concentrations.

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.

Five-Year Retention of Perampanel and Polytherapy Patterns: 328 Patients From a Single Center in South Korea

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Perampanel (PER) is an α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid antagonist used to treat focal and generalized epilepsy. Comprehensive data from real-world settings with long-term follow-ups are still scarce. This study aimed to determine the factors related to PER retention and the polytherapy pattern with PER.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients with epilepsy with a history of PER prescription during 2008-2017 and over a follow-up of >3 years. PER usage patterns and associated factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 2,655 patients in the cohort, 328 (150 females, 178 males) were enrolled. The ages at onset and diagnosis were 21.1±14.7 years and 25.6±16.1 years (mean±standard deviation), respectively. The age at the first visit to our center was 31.8±13.8 years. Seizure types were focal, generalized, and unknown onset in 83.8%, 15.9%, and 0.3% of patients, respectively. The most common etiology was structural (n=109, 33.2%). The maintenance duration of PER was 22.6±19.2 months (range=1-66 months). The initial number of concomitant antiseizure medications was 2.4±1.4 (range=0-9). The most common regimen was PER plus levetiracetam (n=41, 12.5%). The median number of 1-year seizures before PER usage was 8 (range=0-1,400). A seizure reduction of >50% was recorded in 34.7% of patients (52.0% and 29.2% in generalized and focal seizures, respectively). The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year retention rates for PER were 65.3%, 50.4%, 40.4%, 35.3%, and 21.5%, respectively. A multivariate analysis indicated that lower age at onset was associated with longer retention (p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

PER was safely used in patients with diverse characteristics and was maintained for a long time in a real-world setting, especially in patients with a lower age at onset.

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Treatment With Perampanel in Pediatric Patients With Epilepsy Aged ≥4 Years: A Real-Life Observational Study

Purpose: The safety and effectiveness of perampanel in clinical settings involving Chinese pediatric patients are limited, as perampanel has only recently been approved for use in China, in September 2019. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel as an adjunctive therapy for pediatric patients with epilepsy aged ≥ 4 years in Xinjiang, Northwest China. Methods: Efficacy was assessed by measuring changes in seizure frequency at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up compared with baseline. The baseline was 3 months before the addition of perampanel, and the seizure frequency was based on the patients' seizure diary. The safety and tolerability depended on the type and frequency of any adverse event during epilepsy treatment across all pediatric patients. Results: Overall, 67 pediatric patients from 2 different hospitals were enrolled in the study. Among the pediatric patients with seizures during the baseline period, the effective rates for all seizure types at 3, 6, and 12 months were 59.1%, 58.7%, and 57.4%, respectively. During perampanel treatment, 34 patients (50.7%) experienced at least 1 adverse reaction. Conclusion: Overall, this real-world retrospective study of pediatric patients validated that perampanel is an effective treatment option as an adjunctive therapy among pediatric patients with epilepsy aged ≥4 years.

Perampanel as precision therapy in rare genetic epilepsies

OBJECTIVE

Perampanel, an antiseizure drug with α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor antagonist properties, may have a targeted effect in genetic epilepsies with overwhelming glutamate receptor activation. Epilepsies with loss of γ-aminobutyric acid inhibition (e.g., SCN1A), overactive excitatory neurons (e.g., SCN2A, SCN8A), and variants in glutamate receptors (e.g., GRIN2A) hold special interest. We aimed to collect data from a large rare genetic epilepsy cohort treated with perampanel, to detect possible subgroups with high efficacy.

METHODS

This multicenter project was based on the framework of NETRE (Network for Therapy in Rare Epilepsies), a web of pediatric neurologists treating rare epilepsies. Retrospective data from patients with genetic epilepsies treated with perampanel were collected. Outcome measures were responder rate (50% seizure reduction), and percentage of seizure reduction after 3 months of treatment. Subgroups of etiologies with high efficacy were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients with 79 different etiologies, aged 2 months to 61 years (mean = 15.48 ± 9.9 years), were enrolled. The mean dosage was 6.45 ± 2.47 mg, and treatment period was 2.0 ± 1.78 years (1.5 months-8 years). Sixty-two patients (44.9%) were treated for >2 years. Ninety-eight patients (71%) were responders, and 93 (67.4%) chose to continue therapy. The mean reduction in seizure frequency was 56.61% ± 34.36%. Sixty patients (43.5%) sustained >75% reduction in seizure frequency, including 38 (27.5%) with >90% reduction in seizure frequency. The following genes showed high treatment efficacy: SCN1A, GNAO1, PIGA, PCDH19, SYNGAP1, POLG1, POLG2, and NEU1. Eleven of 17 (64.7%) patients with Dravet syndrome due to an SCN1A pathogenic variant were responders to perampanel treatment; 35.3% of them had >90% seizure reduction. Other etiologies remarkable for >90% reduction in seizures were GNAO1 and PIGA. Fourteen patients had a continuous spike and wave during sleep electroencephalographic pattern, and in six subjects perampanel reduced epileptiform activity.

SIGNIFICANCE

Perampanel demonstrated high safety and efficacy in patients with rare genetic epilepsies, especially in SCN1A, GNAO1, PIGA, PCDH19, SYNGAP1, CDKL5, NEU1, and POLG, suggesting a targeted effect related to glutamate transmission.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of perampanel in children and adolescents with epilepsy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Perampanel (PER) is a novel antiepileptic drug. The efficacy, tolerability and safety of PER in children and adolescents with epilepsy are still unclear. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of PER in children and adolescents with epilepsy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for relevant literature up to November 2022. Then we extracted the relevant data from eligible literature for systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESULT

Twenty-one studies involving 1968 children and adolescent patients were included. A reduction in seizure frequency of at least 50 percent occurred in 51.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] [47.1%, 55.9%]) of patients. Complete seizure cessation occurred in 20.6% (95%CI [16.7%, 25.4%]). The incidence of adverse events was 40.8% (95%CI [33.8%, 48.2%]). The most common adverse events were drowsiness 15.3% (95% CI [13.7%, 16.9%]), irritability 9.3% (95%CI [8.0%, 10.6%]), dizziness 8.4% (95% CI [7.2%, 9.7%]). The incidence of drug discontinuation due to adverse events was 9.2% (95% CI [7.0%, 11.5%]).

CONCLUSION

PER is generally well tolerated and effective in the treatment of epilepsy in children and adolescents. Larger studies are still needed to explore the application of PER in children and adolescents.

RISK OF BIAS AND LIMITATION

The funnel plot suggests that there may be publication bias in our meta-analysis, and most of the included studies were Asian, so there may be some racial differences.

Effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients (aged 4-12 years) with refractory epilepsy: An observational study

Information on the effects of perampanel in Chinese children ≤12 years of age with refractory epilepsy is limited; thus, we conducted an observational study to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in this pediatric population. In this study, we reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients aged 4 to 12 years with refractory epilepsy who were admitted to Children's Hospital of Soochow University and prescribed perampanel between January 2020 and January 2021. Effectiveness of perampanel was measured by 50% responder rates, seizure-freedom rates, and retention rates for up to 48 weeks. Adverse events were monitored and recorded throughout the study. A total of 34 patients (male, n = 15) who exhibited refractory epilepsy were included in this study, and 64.71% of patients had focal-onset seizures combined with generalized epilepsy. The mean (± standard deviation) age of patients was 7.21 (± 2.12) years, with a mean (± standard deviation) age at seizure onset of 4.57 (± 2.59) years. After the addition of perampanel, the 50% responder rates at 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks were 37.50% (12/32), 43.75% (14/32), 53.13% (17/32), 59.38% (19/32), 59.38% (19/32), and 62.07% (18/29). Two patients withdrew from perampanel treatment due to adverse events in the first 2 weeks. Adverse events were reported by 44.12% (15/34) of patients, and the retention rates at 36 and 48 weeks were 94.12% (32/34) and 85.29% (29/34), respectively. Overall, perampanel exhibited good effectiveness, safety, and tolerability in the treatment of pediatric patients (aged 4-12 years) with refractory epilepsy. These findings suggest that personalized treatment and better baseline seizure control may increase the responder rate and retention rate of perampanel.

Perampanel as First Adjunctive Treatment in Patients with Focal-Onset Seizures in the FAME Study: <i>Post hoc</i> Analyses of Dose-Related Efficacy, Safety and Clinical Factors Associated with Response

Background and Purpose: Perampanel is approved for the adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures (FOS) with or without secondary generalized seizures. The FAME (Fycompa^® as first Add-on to Monotherapy in patients with Epilepsy; NCT02726074) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of perampanel added to monotherapy in patients with FOS with or without secondary generalized seizures (SGS). <i>Post hoc</i> analyses of the FAME study assessed potential predictors of response and an in-depth evaluation of the safety and efficacy of perampanel.Methods: Efficacy was assessed by reduction of total seizure frequency by ≥50%, ≥75% or 100%, and safety by incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for treatment response were performed.Results: Most patients (82/85) received perampanel doses of 4-8 mg/day during maintenance therapy and the highest efficacy rates were achieved with 4 mg/day, irrespective of efficacy outcome. Doses of 4 or 6 mg/day in patients with FOS with SGS (n=16) produced comparable efficacy outcomes. In multivariate analysis, total perampanel dose was predictive of 50% and 75% response rates; longer total perampanel administration period with 50% response; and concomitant non-anti-seizure medication with a 100% response. Patients developed a TEAE more frequently during the 12-week titration period (60.2%) than the 24-week maintenance period (28.4%), including dizziness (45.5% vs. 9.1%), somnolence (10.2% vs. 0%), and headache (4.5% vs. 3.4%).Conclusions: <i>Post hoc</i> analyses show that even low doses of perampanel may be effective and TEAEs are usually self-limited or well-tolerated.

Perampanel as First Add-On Therapy in Patients with Focal-Onset Seizures in the FAME Trial: Post hoc Analyses of Efficacy and Safety Related to Maintenance Dose and Background Antiepileptic Drug Therapy

Background and Purpose

FAME (Fycompa® as first Add-on to Monotherapy in patients with Epilepsy; NCT02726074), a previously reported single-arm, phase IV study, showed that perampanel improved seizure control as first add-on to failed anti-seizure medication (ASM) monotherapy in 85 South Korean patients aged ≥12 years with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. We present results of three post hoc analyses of FAME that further assessed the efficacy and safety of perampanel.

Methods

Patients were stratified by low- (4, 6 mg/day) versus high- (8, 10, 12 mg/day) dose maintenance perampanel, perampanel added to first- versus second-line ASM monotherapy, and concomitant background ASM monotherapy and perampanel dose. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in total seizure frequency during the 24-week maintenance period. Safety was assessed by the descriptive incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

Results

In post hoc analyses, 50% responder rates were significantly higher for low- versus high-dose maintenance perampanel (88.6% vs. 40.0%; p<0.001) and when added to first- versus second-line ASM monotherapy (83.5% vs. 33.3%; p=0.013). By concomitant background ASM and perampanel maintenance dose, 50% responder rates were 100% for perampanel 4 mg/day added to carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, or valproic acid, and 85% when added to levetiracetam. Add-on perampanel improved 75% and seizure-free responder rates, and median percent changes from baseline seizure frequency per 28 days. Perampanel was well tolerated when added to ASM monotherapy, with dizziness being the most common TEAE.

Conclusions

Post hoc analyses of FAME provide supportive data for the use of perampanel as an effective and well-tolerated first add-on treatment to a broad spectrum of ASM monotherapies in patients with FOS.

Movement disorders associated with antiseizure medications: A systematic review

New-onset movement disorders have been frequently reported in association with the use of antiseizure medications (ASMs). The frequency of specific motor manifestations and the spectrum of their semiology for various ASMs have not been well characterized. We carried out a systematic review of literature and conducted a search on CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus from inception to April 2021. We compiled the data for all currently available ASMs using the conventional terminology of movement disorders. Among 5123 manuscripts identified by the search, 437 met the inclusion criteria. The largest number of reports of abnormal movements were in association with phenobarbital, valproic acid, lacosamide, and perampanel, and predominantly included tremor and ataxia. The majority of attempted interventions for all agents were discontinuation of the offending drug or dose reduction which led to the resolution of symptoms in most patients. Familiarity with the movement disorder phenomenology previously encountered in relation with specific ASMs facilitates early recognition of adverse effects and timely institution of targeted interventions.

Reduced efficacy of perampanel in patients with severe motor and intellectual disabilities syndrome and drug-resistant epilepsy: A single-center analysis from Japan

People with severe motor and intellectual disabilities syndrome (SMIDS) have multiple comorbidities and high mortality rates. This study examined whether there is a difference in the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) between patients with drug-resistant epilepsy with or without SMIDS. The study identified 65 patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who underwent PER treatment as adjunctive therapy. The 50 % responder rate was 22 % (14/65) overall and 11 % (5/44) in patients with SMIDS versus 43 % (9/21) in patients without SMIDS (p <0.01). Although the overall 50 % responder rate was similar to those of previous reports, PER was less efficacious in the patients with SMIDS; nevertheless, PER was tolerated in the patients with SMIDS.

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.

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.

Optimal Use of Perampanel in Asian Patients with Epilepsy: Expert Opinion

Perampanel is a once-daily, first-in-class AMPA receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of epilepsy and exhibits broad-spectrum efficacy in a range of seizure types when used as both monotherapy and adjunctive therapy. Clinical studies and real-world evidence have demonstrated the advantages of initiating perampanel at low doses and utilizing a slow titration strategy. Initiating perampanel at an early stage has also been shown to be associated with better patient outcomes. However, the optimal use and place of perampanel in clinical practice has not yet been clearly defined for the Asian patient population. Use of perampanel in clinical practice varies markedly across the Asia region because of variation in knowledge, attitudes, and practice. There is currently no specific guidance on best practices for prescribing perampanel in Asian patients or how to optimize treatment strategies to maximize adherence. A group of epilepsy experts attended a virtual meeting in September 2020 to discuss their experience with using perampanel in the Asian practice setting, including their views regarding appropriate patient populations, optimal starting and maintenance doses, optimal titration regimens, key barriers to adherence, and prevention and management of adverse events. This article summarizes key clinical and real-world evidence for perampanel and consolidates the experts’ opinions on optimization of perampanel prescribing and adherence in real-world practice, providing practical strategies for clinicians to implement to improve outcomes for people with epilepsy in Asia.

Exploring the Evidence for Broad-Spectrum Effectiveness of Perampanel: A Systematic Review of Clinical Data in Generalised Seizures

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of adjunctive perampanel has not been systematically assessed in seizure types other than its approved indications of focal seizures and primary generalised tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) in idiopathic generalised epilepsies (IGEs).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify and review available evidence on outcomes with perampanel in generalised seizures and epilepsies to examine its potential as a broad-spectrum anti-seizure medication.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases of publications, clinical trials, and conference abstracts were searched up to August 2020 to identify studies reporting seizure or safety outcomes in patients of any age, with any type of epilepsy-associated generalised seizures treated with perampanel. Data extracted from selected records were tabulated by seizure type and syndrome, and analysed qualitatively (PROSPERO protocol CRD42020201564).

RESULTS

Ninety-one reports met inclusion criteria and were selected: 15 reports of 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), 8 reports of 4 non-randomised interventional studies, 37 reports of observational studies, 21 case reports and 10 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Extracted data included 359 patients with PGTCS of any aetiology, 251 with myoclonic seizures, 112 with absence seizures, 50 with tonic seizures and 32 children with epileptic spasms. The most commonly reported epilepsy type was IGE (N = 378) and the most common syndromes were juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (N = 92), progressive myoclonic epilepsies (N = 59) and absence epilepsies (N = 43). The RCT provided Class I evidence of the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel for PGTCS in patients aged ≥ 12 years with IGE. Data from other studies provides weaker (observational) evidence of its effectiveness in multiple generalised seizure types, including myoclonic, absence and tonic seizures. There were no patterns suggesting seizure worsening or aggravation in any seizure or epilepsy type.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies suggest the potential of perampanel as a broad-spectrum antiseizure medication. Much of the available data, however, come from non-randomised, non-controlled studies and are open to high risk of bias. Further studies are warranted to provide more robust evidence.