Add-on Perampanel Research Articles

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

ObjectivePerampanel (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. MethodA 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. ResultsIn 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. ConclusionThe 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.

Long-term effectiveness of add-on perampanel in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: A multicenter retrospective study.

This retrospective study assessed long-term effectiveness of add-on perampanel (PER) in patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS). Outcomes included time to PER failure and time to seizure relapse in responders. PER failure was defined as either discontinuation of PER or initiation of another treatment. Seizure relapse in responders was defined as occurrence of a seizure in seizure-free patients and increase of at least 50% in average monthly seizure frequency for those who were responders. Eighty-seven patients were included. Treatment failure occurred in 52 (59.8%) subjects at a median time of 12 months. Treatment failure was due to lack of efficacy in 27 (52.0%) patients, lack of tolerability in 14 (27.0%), and both reasons in 11 (21.0%). A slower titration was associated with a lower risk of PER failure compared to faster titration schedules, and the occurrence of adverse events increased the risk of treatment failure. Thirty-six patients (41.4%) were responders during a median follow-up of 11 months. Seizure relapse occurred in 13 of 36 (36.1%) patients after a median time of 21 months. The overall rate of seizure responders was 23 of 87 (26.4%) at the end of follow-up. This study provides real-world evidence on the effectiveness of PER as adjunctive treatment in LGS patients.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Perampanel in Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Epilepsy is a frequent comorbidity in patients with brain tumors, in whom seizures are often drug-resistant. Current evidence suggests that excess of glutamatergic activity in the tumor microenvironment may favor epileptogenesis, but also tumor growth and invasiveness. The selective non-competitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist perampanel (PER) was demonstrated to be efficacious and well-tolerated in patients with focal seizures. Moreover, preclinical in vitro studies suggested a potential anti-tumor activity of this drug. In this systematic review, the clinical evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of PER in brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is summarized. (2) Methods: Five databases and two clinical trial registries were searched from inception to December 2022. (3) Results: Seven studies and six clinical trials were included. Sample size ranged from 8 to 36 patients, who received add-on PER (mean dosage from 4 to 7 mg/day) for BTRE. After a 6-12 month follow-up, the responder rate (% of patients achieving seizure freedom or reduction ≥ 50% of seizure frequency) ranged from 75% to 95%, with a seizure freedom rate of up to 94%. Regarding tolerability, 11-52% of patients experienced non-severe adverse effects (most frequent: dizziness, vertigo, anxiety, irritability). The retention rate ranged from 56% to 83%. However, only up to 12.5% of patients discontinued the drug because of the adverse events. (4) Conclusions: PER seems to be efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated in patients with BTRE. Further randomized studies should be conducted in more homogeneous and larger populations, also evaluating the effect of PER on tumor progression, overall survival, and progression-free survival.

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.

ObjectivesThe 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.MethodsOur 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.Results15/20 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.SignificanceOur 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.

Use of perampanel in children with refractory epilepsy of genetic aetiology

Pathogenic mutations in refractory childhood epilepsy are being increasingly discovered. In this study, we analysed the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel as treatment for genetically-related refractory childhood epilepsy. This prospective study, conducted in China, included 50 patients with refractory epilepsy of genetic aetiology, who were treated with adjunctive perampanel therapy. Perampanel treatment was considered effective when the seizure frequency was reduced by >50%. Perampanel treatment was evaluated over at least nine months, from January 2020. A total of 184 paediatric patients with refractory epilepsy received addon perampanel therapy, and of these, 128 received treatment for ≥nine months and underwent genetic analysis. Fifty children were identified with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. A total of 24 different causative monogenic mutations were found, and the most common causative monogenic variants were observed in the SCN1A gene (n = 15). The mean maximal dose of perampanel was 3.4±1.2 mg/day in responders. The response rates to perampanel in children with genetically-related refractory epilepsy (n=50) were 68.0%, 58.0%, and 46.0% at three, six and nine months post-initiation, respectively. Adverse events were reported in 23 patients (46.0%) with genetic aetiology. Somnolence, ataxia, and irritability were the most common adverse events. The response rates to perampanel in children with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with Dravet syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, mitochondrial encephalopathy with lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes, Rett syndrome, and dentatorubral-pallidoluysian atrophy were high. A low maintenance dose of perampanel may be effective and well-tolerated as adjunctive treatment in children with refractory epilepsy of genetic aetiology.

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 PurposeFAME (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.MethodsPatients 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).ResultsIn 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.ConclusionsPost 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.

Psychiatric and Behavioural Side Effects Associated With Perampanel in Patients With Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. A Real-World Experience.

Psychiatric and behavioural side effects are common, undesirable effects associated with antiseizure medication use. Temporal lobe epilepsy is the most common focal epilepsy in adults and it is frequently associated with drug resistance. Patients with intractable epilepsy are more likely to have psychiatric and behavioural side effects when taking antiseizure medications and seem to be at higher risk for psychiatric comorbidities. Perampanel is a novel anti-seizure medication approved for focal and generalised epilepsies as add-on therapy. This is a 12-week short-term observational prospective study on people with focal epilepsy consecutively recruited from an Italian tertiary epilepsy centre, aimed to compare incidence and severity of psychiatric and behavioural side effects associated with perampanel use in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy as compared to other focal epilepsies. All patients received add-on perampanel according to indication and clinical judgement. Incidence and severity of psychiatric and behavioural side effects were rated by Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire. All patients enrolled answered the questionnaire before starting perampanel and after 12 weeks of treatment. We found no significant difference in terms of incidence and severity of psychiatric and behavioural side effects associated with perampanel in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy as compared to other focal epilepsies. In line with the literature, the most common adverse effects were “irritability” for both groups and “aggression” for patients with other focal epilepsies.

Adjunctive Perampanel in Older Patients With Epilepsy: A Multicenter Study of Clinical Practice.

BackgroundClinical data regarding use of newer antiseizure medications (ASMs) in an older population are limited. In randomized-controlled, placebo-controlled trials, older patients are under-represented, and protocols deviate markedly from routine clinical practice, limiting the external validity of results. Studies performed in a naturalistic setting are a useful complement to characterize the drug profile. Perampanel is a third-generation ASM and the first and only non-competitive alfa-amino-3-hydroxyl-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionate receptor antagonist.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel over a 1‐year period in a population of older patients with epilepsy treated in a real-world setting.MethodsOlder (≥ 65 years of age) patients prescribed add-on perampanel at 12 Italian epilepsy centers were retrospectively identified. Seizure occurrence, adverse events (AEs), and drug withdrawal were analyzed. Effectiveness outcomes included the rates of seizure response (≥ 50% reduction in baseline monthly seizure frequency), seizure freedom, and treatment discontinuation. Safety and tolerability outcomes were the rate of treatment discontinuation due to AEs and the incidence of AEs.ResultsA total of 92 patients with a median age of 69 (range 65–88) years were included. The median daily dose of perampanel at 12 months was 6 mg (interquartile range 4–6 mg). At 12 months, 53 (57.6%) patients were seizure responders, and 22 (23.9%) patients were seizure free. Twenty (21.7%) patients discontinued perampanel; the reasons for treatment withdrawal were insufficient efficacy (n = 6/20; 30.0%), AEs (n = 12/20; 60.0%), and a combination of both (n = 2/20; 10%). The most common AEs included irritability (8.7%), somnolence (4.3%), and dizziness/vertigo (4.3%). The rate of behavioral and psychiatric AEs was higher in patients with history of psychiatric comorbidities (p = 0.044). There were no differences in the occurrence of behavioral and psychiatric AEs according to the concomitant use of levetiracetam (p = 0.776) and history of cognitive decline (p = 0.332).ConclusionsAdjunctive perampanel was associated with improvement in seizure control and good tolerability in a real-life setting and can represent a viable therapeutic option in older patients with epilepsy.

Perampanel effect on sleep architecture in patients with epilepsy

PurposeAmong patients with epilepsy, sleep disturbances can worsen seizure control. This prospective open-label study determined the effect of the antiepileptic drug perampanel on sleep architecture in patients with refractory epilepsy. MethodsAdult patients with refractory epilepsy received add-on perampanel, starting at 2 mg/day at bedtime, increased by 2 mg after 2 weeks and then monthly until the target dose of 4–8 mg/day was reached. The median dose of perampanel used was 6 mg (SD 1.2). Polysomnographic (PSG) recordings were scheduled 1 week before starting perampanel and the control PSG after 12 weeks under perampanel treatment and at least 4 weeks on stable perampanel dose; patients completed the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaires. The main endpoints were change from baseline in the ESS and PSQI scores, and PSG variables. ResultsOf 25 patients included (aged 18–65 years, 56 % female) only 17 completed the study. Perampanel caused a modest decrease from baseline in mean ESS score (n = 13 patients; p = 0.126) and PSQI score (n = 12 patients; p = 0.127). Treatment significantly improved sleep parameters (n = 17 patients) including total sleep time (p = 0.037), sleep latency (p = 0.022), sleep efficiency (p = 0.015), sleep maintenance index (p = 0.005), wake time after sleep onset (p = 0.015), and duration of N3 sleep stage (p = 0.026). Patients with altered sleep efficiency parameters at baseline showed a significant increase in sleep maintenance index (p = 0.015), and 77.8 % achieved sleep efficiency >85 % (p = 0.016 vs baseline). ConclusionPerampanel improved sleep architecture in patients with focal refractory epilepsy without worsening daytime sleepiness.

Effectiveness of Add-on Perampanel on Focal Epilepsy in Mitochondrial Disease

Effectiveness of Add-on Perampanel on Focal Epilepsy in Mitochondrial Disease

Perampanel in routine clinical use across Europe: Pooled, multicenter, observational data.

To pool observational data on the routine use of perampanel to obtain information on real-world outcomes and data in populations typically underrepresented in clinical trials. Individual-level data of people with epilepsy treated with perampanel at 45 European centers were merged into a single dataset. Prespecified outcomes were: 1-year retention rate, 1-year seizure freedom rate (duration≥6months), and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). In addition, relationships were explored with logistic regression analyses. The full analysis set comprised 2396 people: 95% had focal seizures; median epilepsy duration was 27years; median number of concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) was 2; and median prior AEDs was 6. One-year retention rate was 48% (1117/2332; 95% confidence interval [CI] 46-50%), and 1-year seizure-free rate (≥6-month duration) was 9.2% (74/803; 95% CI 7-11%). Median treatment duration was 11.3months (1832 patient-years); median dose was 8mg. In 388 individuals with available data at 3, 6, and 12months, responder rates were 42%, 46%, and 39%, respectively. During the first year, TEAEs were reported in 68% of participants (1317/1497; 95% CI 66-70%). Logistic regression found higher age at perampanel initiation was associated with higher seizure-free rate, and higher number of prior AEDs with lower seizure-free rate and lower rates of somatic TEAEs. In 135 individuals aged ≥65years, 1-year retention rate was 48% and seizure-free rate was 28%. Across a large, treatment-resistant population, add-on perampanel was retained for ≥1year by 48% of individuals, and 9% were seizure-free for ≥6months. TEAEs were in line with previous reports in routine clinical use, and less frequent than in the clinical trial setting. No new or unexpected TEAEs were seen. Despite the limitations of observational studies, our data indicate that some individuals may derive a marked benefit from the use of perampanel.

Perampanel in patients with refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus in a neurological intensive care unit: A single-center audit of 30 patients.

In refractory status epilepticus (SE), γ-aminobutyric acidergic drugs become less effective and glutamate plays a major role in seizure perpetuation. Data on the efficacy of perampanel (PER) in treatment of refractory SE in humans are limited. Here, we present a single-center case series of patients with refractory SE who received PER orally in an intensive care unit. We retrospectively analyzed treatment response, outcome, and adverse effects of all patients with refractory SE in our Neurological Intensive Care Unit who received add-on PER between September 2012 and February 2018. Thirty patients with refractory SE (median = 72years, range = 18-91, 77% women) were included. In 14 patients (47%), a high-dose approach was used, with a median initial dose of 24mg (range = 16-32). In five patients (17%), SE could be terminated after PER administration (median dose = 6mg, range = 6-20mg, 2/5 patients in high-dose group). Clinical response was observed after a median of 24hours (range = 8-48hours), whereas electroencephalogram resolved after a median of 60hours (range = 12-72hours). Time to treatment response tended to be shorter in patients receiving high-dose PER (median clinical response = 16hours vs 18hours; electroencephalographic response = 24hours vs 72hours), but groups were too small for statistical analysis. Continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring showed no changes in cardiorespiratory function after "standard" and "high-dose" treatment. Elevated liver enzymes without clinical symptoms were observed after a median of 6days in seven of 30 patients (23%; 57% high dose vs 43% standard dose), of whom six also received treatment with phenytoin (PHT). Outcome was unfavorable (death, persistent vegetative state) in 13 patients (43%; 39% high dose vs 61% standard dose), and good recovery (no significant disability, moderate disability) was achieved in nine patients (56% high dose vs 44% standard dose). Oral PER in loading doses up to 32mg were well tolerated but could terminate SE only in a few patients (5/30; 17%). Long duration of SE, route of administration, and severe underlying brain dysfunction might be responsible for the modest result. An intravenous formulation is highly desired to explore the full clinical utility in the treatment of refractory SE.

Perampanel, an AMPA receptor antagonist: From clinical research to practice in clinical settings.

Epileptic seizures are refractory to treatment in approximately one-third of patients despite the recent introduction of many newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Development of novel AEDs therefore remains a high priority. Perampanel is a first-in-class non-competitive selective AMPA receptor antagonist with a unique mechanism of action. Clinical efficacy and safety of perampanel as adjunctive treatment for focal seizures with/without secondary generalization (±SG) and primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures have been established in five phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and a long-term extension study, and perampanel is approved as monotherapy for focal seizures ±SG in the USA. In patients with focal seizures ±SG, add-on perampanel resulted in median percent reduction in seizure frequency 23.3%-34.5% and ≥50% responder rate 28.5%-37.6%; in PGTC seizures, these results were 76.5% and 64.2%, respectively. Efficacy among adolescents (reduction in seizure frequency 34.8%-35.6%; ≥50% responder rate 40.9%-45.0%) and elderly people (reduction in seizure frequency 12.5%-16.9%; ≥50% responder rate 22.2%-42.9%) is similar to those in adults, and results remain comparable between Asian (reduction in seizure frequency 17.3%-38.0%) and global populations. Perampanel has been extensively studied in real-world clinical practice, with similar efficacy and safety results to the RCTs (≥50% responder rate 12.8%-75.0%; adverse events of somnolence/sedation, dizziness, ataxia, and behavioral changes). Real-world observational studies suggest that perampanel tolerability can be improved by slow titration (2mg every 2-4weeks), and bedtime administration can mitigate somnolence and dizziness. Counseling about the potential for behavioral changes and close monitoring are recommended.

Add-on perampanel in Lance-Adams syndrome.

Perampanel (PER) is the first-in-class selective, noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist that has been licensed and marketed as antiepileptic drug (AED) indicated for patients with partial-onset and primary generalized tonic–clonic seizures. A positive effect was reported in some patients with epileptic myoclonic jerks in idiopathic generalized epilepsy and in progressive myoclonic epilepsy.We treated a male patient with posthypoxic nonepileptic myoclonus (Lance–Adams syndrome) with add-on PER and achieved an almost complete cessation of jerks. This effect was reproducible and, therefore, we suggest that it might be worth trying PER in comparable cases.

Perampanel: A Review in Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.

Perampanel (Fycompa®), an orally-active, selective, noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist, is a first-in-class antiepileptic drug (AED) offering the convenience of once-daily administration. In the EU and US, perampanel is approved in patients with epilepsy aged ≥12 years for the adjunctive treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) and partial-onset seizures (POS; with or without secondary generalization). In phase III trials of 17 or 19 weeks' duration, add-on perampanel ≤12 mg/day significantly improved seizure control in patients aged ≥12 years who were experiencing either primary GTCS or POS (with or without secondary generalization), despite ongoing treatment with stable dosages of one to three AEDs. Improvements in seizure control were maintained for up to 2 years in extensions of these core studies. Perampanel also provided sustained seizure control for up to ≈4 years in an extension of two phase II studies in patients aged ≥18 years with drug-resistant POS. Adjunctive perampanel therapy was generally well tolerated. Treatment-emergent adverse events were most commonly CNS-related (e.g. dizziness, somnolence, fatigue and irritability) and dose-related; however, most were of mild to moderate intensity. Clinical experience with perampanel is accumulating, although comparative studies and pharmacoeconomic data that could assist in positioning it relative to other AEDS that are approved and/or recommended as adjunctive therapy are lacking. Nonetheless, on the basis of its overall clinical profile and unique mechanism of action, perampanel is a useful additional adjunctive treatment option for patients with drug-resistant POS, with or without secondary generalization, and primary GTCS.

First clinical experiences with perampanel—The Kork experience in 74 patients

Perampanel (PER) has been approved for adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients age 12years and older. In Germany, PER was licensed and marketed in September of 2012. At our tertiary referral epilepsy center, a couple of difficult-to-treat patients were awaiting this introduction of PER; therefore, we were able to initiate treatment in many patients within a short period of time. For this report we collected and analyzed the data of the first patients who had been started on add-on PER between September and December of 2012, so that we were able to evaluate at least 6months of treatment when we made this analysis. At cutoff in June of 2013, 74 patients could be analyzed. Mean age was 38.4years (range 15-71years). PER doses ranged from 4 to 14mg (mean 8.8mg). All patients took PER once daily at bedtime. Seventy-one patients had focal epileptic seizures; the remaining four patients had Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Considering the last 3months of observation compared with baseline, 34 patients (46%) were responders with a reduction of seizure frequency of at least 50%. Ten patients of these (14% of all) were seizure-free. Adverse events were reported in 40 patients (54%). Leading side effects were somnolence (n=31, 42%) and dizziness (n=13, 18%), followed by ataxia, irritability, falls, cognitive slowing, and depression in single cases. Six-month retention rate was 70%. Our first clinical experiences with add-on PER in a highly selected group of difficult-to-treat epilepsies are promising.