Perampanel Dose Research Articles

Serum perampanel levels in patients with seizures are not affected by hemodialysis.

Perampanel belongs to a novel class of antiseizure medications (ASMs). Studies examining the effect of hemodialysis on perampanel serum levels in clinical settings are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the changes in serum perampanel levels during hemodialysis. We studied patients with seizures who received oral perampanel between April 2020 and March 2023 and whose serum concentration of perampanel was measured before and after hemodialysis. We analyzed the serum concentrations of levetiracetam and lacosamide for comparison. Fourteen patients, with a mean age of 76.1 ± 7.88 years, were included. The dose of perampanel was 2.14 ± 1.27 mg. The hemodialysis clearance rate of perampanel, levetiracetam, and lacosamide was 0 ± 13%, 69 ± 11%, and 59.6 ± 8.2%, respectively. The post-dialysis CD ratio decreased significantly with levetiracetam but not with perampanel. Adverse but acceptable effects of perampanel were observed in two patients. The serum concentrations of several ASMs have been shown to be reduced during hemodialysis. Our study revealed that the serum perampanel concentration does not decrease during hemodialysis. Owing to the low rate of adverse effects and the stability of perampanel serum concentration during hemodialysis, perampanel could be a favorable choice as an ASM for patients with seizures undergoing hemodialysis. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Our study looked at how hemodialysis affects the serum levels of perampanel, a new type of medication for seizures. In 14 patients who started treatment between April 2020 and March 2023, perampanel serum levels did not decrease during hemodialysis, unlike other seizure medications. This shows that perampanel can be a good option for patients with seizures who need hemodialysis, with fewer side effects compared to other medications.

PERPRISE: A prospective non-interventional study of PERampanel as only adjunctive treatment in patients with PRImary or SEcondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures: First interim analysis.

To report the interim results of the PERPRISE study (Study 509; NCT04202159), which is evaluating perampanel as the only adjunctive anti-seizure medication (ASM) in adults with focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). PERPRISE is an ongoing 12-month multicenter, prospective, observational, non-interventional study of perampanel in a real-world setting in Germany. Patients are aged ≥18 years with FBTCS or GTCS due to focal or idiopathic generalized epilepsy. Perampanel, as an adjunctive therapy to ASM monotherapy ('add-on therapy') or as a substitute for one ASM in dual therapy ('substitution therapy'), is prescribed in line with its SmPC. The Interim Analysis Set comprises the first 100 patients who received ≥1 dose of perampanel and attended or discontinued prior to the ~6-month visit. Interim endpoints include retention rate, measures of effects on seizure frequency, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). One hundred patients were included in the Interim Analysis Set (add-on, n = 43 [43.0%]; substitution, n = 55 [55.0%]; unknown, n = 2). The 6-month retention rate was 78.0% (add-on, 83.7%; substitution, 72.7%). For the overall population with GTCS and/or FBTCS, seizure-freedom rate at 6 months was 58.8% (add-on, 72.2%; substitution, 47.9%) and 50% responder rate at 6 months was 82.6% (add-on, 89.2%; substitution, 76.6%). Retention rates and seizure outcomes were better with perampanel as an early-line treatment than as a late-line treatment. TEAEs were reported by 48 patients (48.0%), most commonly dizziness (n = 9), fatigue (n = 7), and irritability (n = 7). Sixteen patients (16.0%) withdrew from perampanel treatment due to TEAEs. The interim analysis of PERPRISE offers insight into the real-world use of perampanel in Germany, including for the first time, clinical practice data from patients with GTCS and switching ASMs within a dual therapy. Further data from PERPRISE will be of value to inform clinical decision-making in this patient cohort. Patients with epilepsy often take more than one medication for seizure control. This 12month study looked at patients in Germany receiving perampanel as only add-on medication. The interim analysis shows, that at 6 months, over 70% of the 100 patients continued to use perampanel; 59% experienced no seizures during treatment with perampanel, and in 83%, seizure frequency was reduced by half. Side effects occurred in 48% of patients (most commonly dizziness, fatigue, and irritability) and caused 16% to withdraw from the study. Overall, perampanel was a suitable as only add-on medication for patients with epilepsy.

Non-hepatic Hyperammonemia with Loading Dose of Perampanel in a Case of CNS Lupus Presenting with Non-Convulsive Status Epilepticus

Non-hepatic Hyperammonemia with Loading Dose of Perampanel in a Case of CNS Lupus Presenting with Non-Convulsive Status Epilepticus

Intravenous perampanel as an alternative to the oral formulations in Japanese patients with epilepsy.

Perampanel is an oral anti-seizure medication, which is approved in Japan for focal-onset seizures, with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, as monotherapy/adjunctive therapy in patients aged 4 years and older. Treatment for generalized tonic-clonic seizures as adjunctive therapy in patients aged 12 years and older is approved as well. We evaluated the feasibility of intravenous (IV) administration of perampanel as an alternative to oral administration. Study 240 (NCT03754582) was an uncontrolled, open-label study of IV perampanel, conducted in 21 Japanese patients with epilepsy who received a stable dose of 8-12 mg/day of oral perampanel. Patients received 30-minute IV infusions at equivalent daily doses of oral perampanel for 4 days, then were switched back to oral perampanel. Safety, tolerability, plasma concentration, and maintenance of efficacy throughout the transition between IV and oral dosing of perampanel were assessed. As supportive data, a subgroup analysis was also conducted using data from healthy Japanese subjects (n = 18) who were enrolled in Study 050 (NCT03376997) investigating the pharmacokinetics and safety of IV perampanel in healthy subjects who received an IV infusion (30-, 60-, or 90-minute) of perampanel 12 mg and a single oral administration of perampanel 12-mg tablet. In Study 240, the transition between 30-minute IV and oral perampanel dosing was associated with a ≤1.4-fold increase in the mean change in maximum observed concentration of perampanel. Seizure outcomes demonstrated no considerable changes in efficacy before, during, or after 30-minute IV dosing of perampanel. The safety profiles were similar between IV and oral formulations. In Study 050, the pharmacokinetics of 30- or 60-minute IV infusion of perampanel further support the interchangeability between oral and IV formulations in the Japanese subjects. These results support that 30-minute IV perampanel may be a potential short-term alternative to oral formulations for patients with epilepsy.

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

Open-label study to investigate the safety and efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients (aged 4 to

PurposeTo evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in a Japanese subpopulation of Study 311 (NCT02849626), which was a global, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study of children (aged 4 to <12 years) with inadequately controlled focal-onset seizures (FOS), with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). MethodsStudy 311 comprised a Core Study, Extension A, and Extension B; this report focuses on the Japanese patient subgroup in the Core Study only. In the Core Study, Japanese patients (FOS only) received adjunctive perampanel ≤12 mg/day in a 23-week Treatment Phase. Endpoints included safety/tolerability (primary) and median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline. Patients were stratified by age and concomitant enzyme-inducing anti-seizure medication (EIASM) use. ResultsOf 65 enrolled Japanese patients, 56 completed the Core Study and nine withdrew. The most common reason for discontinuation was adverse events (AEs) (n = 4 [6.2%]). The mean (standard deviation) daily dose of perampanel in Japanese FOS patients was 5.8 (2.2) mg/day. During the Core Study, treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported by 89% of Japanese patients, most commonly nasopharyngitis (28%) and somnolence (28%). The median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline was 37% and the lower limit of the 95% CI was greater than 10.5%, satisfying the pre-defined efficacy criteria. Perampanel was effective regardless of age or concomitant EIASM use. ConclusionPerampanel as adjunctive therapy is generally safe, well-tolerated, and efficacious in Japanese children aged 4 to <12 years with FOS (with/without FBTCS).

Effects of low-dose titration on the tolerability and safety of perampanel

PurposeTo evaluate the effects of low-dose titration on the tolerability and safety of perampanel. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 1065 patients who started perampanel therapy and compared the incidence of adverse events after standard titration (Group A: starting dose, 2 mg/day; titration speed, 2 mg/2 weeks or longer) and low-dose titration (Group B: starting dose, < 1 mg/day; titration speed, < 1 mg/2 weeks or longer). ResultsAdverse events were reported in 158 patients (14.8%) within the initial first 90 days of starting perampanel (mean concentration, 331 ng/mL). At 90 days, the cumulative incidence of adverse events was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (24.5% vs. 16.3%, respectively; log-rank test p < 0.001). A Cox proportional hazards model also showed that low-dose titration decreased the incidence risk of adverse events (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.35–0.69). When the groups were stratified by use of enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (inducers), Group A patients without inducers had a significantly higher cumulative incidence of adverse events than the other three subgroups (26.7%, p < 0.001). In patients taking 2 mg of perampanel, median concentrations in patients with or without inducers were 43 ng/mL and 204 ng/mL, respectively. ConclusionPerampanel is generally initiated at 2 mg, but serum perampanel concentrations show substantial interindividual variation. Our study suggests that care must be taken when setting the starting dose of perampanel. In particular, low-dose titration is recommended in patients not taking inducers.

Long-Term Efficacy of Perampanel Monotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed/Currently Untreated Recurrent Focal-Onset Seizures: FREEDOM Study 342 Extension Phase Analysis by Seizure Type (P11-1.005)

<h3>Objective:</h3> To assess efficacy of perampanel monotherapy by seizure type in a post hoc analysis of the FREEDOM Study (Study 342; NCT03201900). <h3>Background:</h3> FREEDOM demonstrated long-term (52 weeks) efficacy and tolerability of perampanel monotherapy (4–8mg/day) in patients aged ≥12 years with newly diagnosed or currently untreated recurrent focal-onset seizures (FOS), with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) in Japan and Korea. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> The Core Study comprised a 4-week Pretreatment Phase and a 32-week Treatment Phase (6-week Titration; 26-week Maintenance) during which patients received perampanel 4mg/day. Patients who experienced seizure(s) during the 4-mg/day Maintenance Period could be transitioned to an additional 30-week 8-mg/day Treatment Phase (4-week Titration; 26-week Maintenance). Patients could also enter a 26-week Extension Phase to continue treatment with perampanel monotherapy after completion of the Core Study. The 52-week seizure-freedom rates were stratified by prior history of the following subtypes of FOS: focal impaired awareness seizures (FIAS), FBTCS, and FIAS plus FBTCS. <h3>Results:</h3> Overall, 89 patients received ≥1 dose of perampanel (Safety Analysis Set [SAS]) and 73 patients entered the 4-mg/day Maintenance Period (modified Intent-to-Treat [mITT] Analysis Set), of whom 21 patients transitioned to the 8-mg/day Treatment Phase. In the SAS, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of perampanel exposure was 66.5 (52.0) weeks across the Core Study and Extension Phase. In the mITT population, the mean (SD) age was 41.7 (18.5) years, and most patients had newly diagnosed epilepsy (95.9% [n=70/73]). The 52-week seizure-freedom rates were 34.1% for FIAS, 31.3% for FBTCS, and 32.9% for FIAS plus FBTCS; these rates at last evaluated dose (4 or 8mg/day) were 41.5% (FIAS), 43.8% (FBTCS), and 42.9% (FIAS plus FBTCS). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> These results suggest that seizure freedom can be achieved and sustained with perampanel monotherapy treatment (4–8mg/day) long-term (≤52 weeks) regardless of seizure type. <b>Disclosure:</b> Sung Chul Lim has nothing to disclose. Anna Patten, 14934 has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Eisai Ltd. An immediate family member of Dr. Morita-Sherman has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Forrester Research. Dr. Morita-Sherman has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Eisai Inc.. An immediate family member of Dr. Morita-Sherman has stock in Forrester Research. The institution of Dr. Morita-Sherman has received research support from Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Ngo has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Eisai Inc.. Dr. Yamamoto has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Eisai. Dr. Yamamoto has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Daiichi-Sankyo.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Perampanel in Children With Refractory Epilepsy: Focus on Influencing Factors on the Free-Perampanel Concentration.

This study aimed to assess the effect of perampanel dose, age, sex, and antiseizure medication cotherapy on steady-state free-perampanel concentration in children with refractory epilepsy, as well as the relationship between inflammation and the pharmacokinetics of perampanel. This prospective study in China included 87 children with refractory epilepsy treated with adjunctive perampanel therapy. Free and total perampanel concentrations in plasma were determined using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Free-perampanel concentration was compared among patients with various potential influencing factors. A total of 87 pediatric patients (44 female children) aged 2-14 years were enrolled. The mean free-perampanel concentration and free concentration-to-dose (CD) ratio in plasma were 5.7 ± 2.7 ng/mL (16.3 ± 7.7 nmol/L) and 45.3 ± 21.0 (ng/mL)/(mg/kg) [129.6 ± 60.1 (nmol/L)/(mg/kg)], respectively. The protein binding of perampanel in plasma was 97.98%. A linear relationship was observed between perampanel dose and free concentration in plasma, and a positive relationship was found between the total and free-perampanel concentrations. Concomitant use of oxcarbazepine reduced the free CD ratio by 37%. Concomitant use of valproic acid increased the free CD ratio by 52%. Five patients had a plasma high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP) level of >5.0 mg/L (Hs-CRP positive). The total and free CD ratios of perampanel were increased in patients with inflammation. Two patients with inflammation developed adverse events, which disappeared as the Hs-CRP level returned to normal, and neither required perampanel dose reduction. Age and sex did not influence the free-perampanel concentration. This study found complex drug interactions between perampanel and other concomitant antiseizure medications, providing valuable information to enable clinicians to apply perampanel in the future reasonably. In addition, it may be important to quantify both the total and free concentrations of perampanel to assess complex pharmacokinetic interactions.

A Single- and Multiple-Dose Pharmacokinetic Study of Oral Perampanel in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

Perampanel is a once-daily oral anti-seizure medication indicated for focal-onset seizures and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. This study investigated the single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of perampanel in healthy Chinese adults. Study 052 (NCT03424564) was a phase I, single-center, open-label, parallel-group study. In the single-dose part of the study, subjects received a single oral dose of perampanel 2, 4, or 8 mg. In the multiple-dose part, subjects received once-daily oral perampanel 2 mg on Days 1-7 and 4 mg on Days 8-21. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from perampanel plasma concentrations using non-compartmental analysis. Dose proportionality after single doses of perampanel was assessed. Safety and tolerability were evaluated. In the single-dose part (N=30), median time to reach maximum concentration (tmax) was 0.75-1.0h, mean terminal elimination phase half-life (t½) was 85.6-122h, mean maximum observed concentration (Cmax) was 77.9-276 ng/mL, and mean area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(0-t)) was 4070-15100 ng·h/mL. Single-dose pharmacokinetics were linear for perampanel 2-8 mg. In the multiple-dose part (N=12), Day 21 steady-state (4 mg/day) parameters were median time at which the highest drug concentration occurs at steady state (tss,max), 1.25h; mean t½, 109h; mean maximum observed concentration at steady state (Css,max), 453ng/mL; and mean area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval on multiple dosing (AUC(0- τ)), 7540 ng·h/mL. For single- and multiple-dose perampanel, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were dizziness and somnolence. Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of perampanel in healthy Chinese adults revealed rapid perampanel absorption, slow elimination, and a linear relationship with single perampanel doses of 2-8 mg. Findings were consistent with previous studies of perampanel pharmacokinetics in other ethnic/racial populations of healthy subjects. Single and multiple doses of perampanel were generally safe and well tolerated. NCT03424564; registered February 2018.

A Case of Perampanel Overdose Presenting with Respiratory Failure

Perampanel is a novel antiepileptic drug that has been used as an adjunctive treatment for focal-onset seizures. No reports to date have documented respiratory suppression as a side effect of perampanel in adults. Herein, we report a 51-year-old man with focal epilepsy presented with type 2 respiratory failure after accidently consuming of 66 mg of perampanel. Clinicians should consider the possibility of respiratory compromise whenever a high dose of perampanel needs to be administered to patients.

Real-world evaluation of perampanel effectiveness in Japanese adolescents with epilepsy

Real-world data from adolescents treated with perampanel in a routine clinical setting are lacking in Japan. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of perampanel for adolescent patients (aged 12-17 years) with drug-resistant, refractory epilepsy in real-world settings. This was a large-scale, prospective, observational post-marketing study, with a 104-week observation period. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse effects (adverse drug reactions). For efficacy assessments, seizure frequency was compared between the four weeks immediately prior to the last observation and the four weeks before the commencement of perampanel. In total, 519 patients were enrolled; 505 and 484 patients were included in the safety and efficacy analysis sets, respectively. The mean age was 14.4 years. The mean daily dose of perampanel was 4.4 mg/day. The main reasons for discontinuation at 104 weeks were adverse events (48.4%) and inadequate efficacy (46.8%). The retention rate at 104 weeks was 50.5%. Adverse effect and severe adverse effect incidences were 42.2% and 1.8%, respectively. The most common adverse effects were somnolence (13.5%), irritability (8.5%), dizziness (5.1%), and agitation (4.8%). There were significant differences in the occurrence of adverse effects between the initial titration interval of <2 weeks and 2-4 weeks (odds ratio=0.441, p=0.029) and 4-8 weeks (odds ratio=0.462, p=0.027). The median percent change in seizure frequency at the last observation carried forward was −50.0 for focal aware seizures with motor signs, −73.3 for focal aware seizures without motor signs, −28.6 for focal impaired awareness seizures, −62.6 for focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, and −20.0 for generalized tonic-clonic seizures. In adolescent patients, perampanel was well tolerated and efficacious in reducing seizure frequency. No unexpected safety issues were observed, and slow titration may reduce the incidence of adverse effects.

Assessment of the long-term efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel in adolescent patients with epilepsy: Post hoc analysis of open-label extension studies

ObjectiveThis post hoc analysis of four open-label extension (OLEx) studies evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel in adolescent patients (aged 12 to ≤17 years) with focal-onset seizures (FOS), with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS), or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). MethodsPatients who completed one of six double-blind, placebo-controlled studies could enter one of four OLEx studies comprising a blinded Conversion Period (6–16 weeks) followed by a Maintenance Phase (27 to ≤256 weeks; perampanel dose: ≤12 mg/day). Exposure, retention, seizure outcomes, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were analyzed. Efficacy outcomes were analyzed using observed case and last observation carried forward (LOCF) approaches; the latter was used to account for early dropouts. ResultsThe Full Analysis Set comprised 309 adolescents with FOS (FBTCS, n = 109) and 19 with GTCS, and the Safety Analysis Set comprised 311 with FOS (FBTCS, n = 110) and 19 with GTCS. Mean (standard deviation) cumulative duration of perampanel exposure (weeks) was: FOS, 77.7 (58.7); FBTCS, 88.7 (63.8); and GTCS, 97.0 (35.5). Retention rates were maintained for ≤2 years (FOS, 50.0 %; FBTCS, 57.1 %; GTCS, 41.7 %). Seizure control (median percent reduction in seizure frequency/28 days) was sustained for up to 2 years; FOS (59.4 %, n = 113), FBTCS (64.6 %, n = 53), and GTCS (86.5 %, n = 17). At Year 2, 50 % responder rates were: FOS, 58.4 % (n = 66); FBTCS, 54.7 % (n = 29); and GTCS, 82.4 % (n = 14); seizure–freedom rates were: FOS, 5.3 % (n = 6); FBTCS, 24.5 % (n = 13); and GTCS, 35.3 % (n = 6). Long-term seizure control was observed even in LOCF analyses. The incidence of TEAEs was highest during Year 1 (FOS, n = 269 [86.5 %]; FBTCS, n = 95 [86.4 %]; GTCS, n = 15 [78.9 %]), compared with Years 2–4; the most common (≥10 % of patients) were dizziness, somnolence, and nasopharyngitis. No new safety signals emerged with long-term treatment. ConclusionsThis post hoc analysis suggests that long-term (≤2 years) adjunctive perampanel (≤12 mg/day) is efficacious and generally well tolerated in adolescent patients with FOS, with or without FBTCS, or GTCS.

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.

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

Background and PurposePerampanel 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). Post hoc analyses of the FAME study assessed potential predictors of response and an in-depth evaluation of the safety and efficacy of perampanel.MethodsEfficacy 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.ResultsMost 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%).ConclusionsPost hoc analyses show that even low doses of perampanel may be effective and TEAEs are usually self-limited or well-tolerated.

153 Perampanel in patients with a history of psychiatric illness: a post hoc analysis

BackgroundPsychiatric safety data from perampanel randomised controlled trials (RCTs; Studies 304/305/306/335) and open-label extensions (OLEx; Studies 307/335 OLEx) in patients with focal epilepsy with/without psychiatric history were analysed.MethodsTreatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were analysed for patients with/without psychi- atric history.ResultsIn RCTs, 352/2187 (16.1%) patients had psychiatric history; psychiatric TEAEs occurred in 73/244 (29.9%) and 21/108 (19.4%) patients with perampanel and placebo, respectively. Psychiatric TEAEs with perampanel 2 and 4 mg/day were 11.1% and 15.4%, respectively, vs placebo (19.4%). In patients without psychiatric history, psychiatric TEAEs were observed in 157/1325 (11.8%) and 47/510 (9.2%) patients with perampanel and placebo, respectively. Psychiatric TEAEs were more frequent in patients with psychiatric history for all combined doses and placebo (both P&lt;0.01). Most common psychiatric TEAEs with peram- panel: anxiety (5.3%)/insomnia and aggression (both 2.0%) with/without psychiatric history.In OLEx, 283/1895 (14.9%) patients had psychiatric history. Psychiatric TEAEs occurred in 151 (53.4%)/521 (32.3%) patients with/without psychiatric history (P&lt;0.01); most common psychiatric TEAE: irritability (16.3%/10.4%, with/without psychiatric history).ConclusionPsychiatric TEAEs were reported by more patients with psychiatric history and were dependent on perampanel dose irrespective of previous psychiatric illness; 2 mg/day and 4 mg/day doses did not increase psychiatric TEAEs.FundingEisai Inc.manoj_malhotra@eisai.com

150 PROVE study 506: Perampanel as adjunctive therapy or monotherapy in real- world care of epilepsy patients

BackgroundWe report an analysis of PROVE Study 506 (NCT03208660) in epilepsy patients who received perampanel (adjunctive or monotherapy) during routine care.MethodsData were from patients initiating perampanel after 01-Jan-2014 (cut-off: 15-Mar-2019). Retention rate (primary endpoint; patients remaining on perampanel at 3/6/12/18/24 months following initiation [Safety Analysis Set (SAS)]), dosing and safety were assessed. Patients received adjunctive perampanel (with concomitant anti-seizure medications [ASMs]) or perampanel monotherapy (primary=without con- comitant ASMs; secondary=conversion to monotherapy).ResultsSAS included 1676 (98.4%) patients receiving adjunctive perampanel and 47 (2.8%) receiving monotherapy. Patients receiving adjunctive perampanel and perampanel monotherapy (primary, n=33/secondary, n=14) are in each relevant group. Most patients on adjunctive perampanel received 1–3 baseline ASMs (77.6%).Overall, 816 (47.9%) patients discontinued (monotherapy, n=23 [48.9%]); most commonly due to adverse event (overall, 22.8%; monotherapy, 14.9%) and inadequate therapeutic effect (overall, 13.2%; mono- therapy, 25.5%).Retention rates (24 months) were: 47.6% (adjunctive); 31.3% (primary monotherapy); 83.3% (secondary monotherapy). Mean (standard deviation) maximum perampanel doses (mg) were: adjunctive, 6.6 (3.2); monotherapy, 7.2 (2.7). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 696 (adjunctive; 41.5%) and 17 (monotherapy; 36.2%) patients; dizziness was most common.ConclusionRetention on perampanel (adjunctive/monotherapy) was favourable for ≤2 years, with similar safety between groups.FundingEisai Inc.manoj_malhotra@eisai.com

Long-term open-label perampanel: Generalized tonic-clonic seizures in idiopathic generalized epilepsy.

ObjectiveAssess the longer‐term efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel (up to 12 mg/day) in patients aged ≥12 years with generalized tonic–clonic (GTC) seizures from the Open‐label Extension (OLEx) Phase of Study 332 to determine whether responses obtained during the Core Study are maintained during long‐term treatment.MethodsPatients with GTC seizures previously enrolled in a randomized placebo‐controlled trial of perampanel could enter an OLEx Phase comprising 6‐week blinded conversion (during which patients previously randomized to placebo‐switched to perampanel) and up to 136‐week maintenance periods (maximum perampanel dose of 12 mg/day). A 4‐week follow‐up period was completed by all patients after the last on‐treatment visit during the OLEx. We assessed seizure frequency outcomes from preperampanel baseline and the Core Study Pre‐randomization Phase, retention rates, doses selected, and treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs).ResultsOverall, 138 patients entered the OLEx. Median percent reductions in GTC seizures per 28 days from preperampanel were 77% (Weeks 1‐13) and 90% (Weeks 40‐52). Retention rates were 88% (6 months) and 75% (12 months). Seizure‐freedom rates were maintained for at least 2 years regardless of prior treatment received during the Core Study. Most common modal daily dose was >4‐8 mg/day (n = 93). Across the Core and OLEx Phases, 120 (87%) patients experienced TEAEs; the most common was dizziness.SignificancePerampanel was generally well‐tolerated, and the TEAEs reported here are consistent with the known safety profile of perampanel. Perampanel offers a long‐term treatment option for patients (aged ≥12 years) with GTC seizures.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of perampanel in population with pharmacoresistant focal seizures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundFocal seizures are associated with various co-morbidities. Seizure disorders also affect the quality of life of the patients. A huge proportion of patients continue to have uncontrolled seizures despite the availability of numerous antiepileptic drugs. Novel therapeutic targets too, have failed to overcome this problem. Therefore, drugs acting on conventional targets are being explored. Perampanel is one such drug. The present study aimed to assess its efficacy, safety, and effect on quality of life and cognition in patients aged 12 years and above. MethodsDatabase search was conducted using keywords perampanel, partial seizures and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Single and double blinded RCTs were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes assessed were 50% responder rate and seizure freedom rates. Secondary outcomes assessed were Improvement in Clinical Global Improvement for Change (CGI-C), number of patients who experienced adverse events, number of patients who withdrew from trials, adverse drug reaction (ADR) profile from Vigibase, long term safety, quality of Life (QoL) assessment and cognitive assessment, especially in adolescents. The Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for these parameters. Results24 full text articles were obtained out of a total 421 studies. From these seven double blind randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Perampanel treated patients showed higher 50% responder rates than those treated with placebo. The Risk Ratios (RRs) were 1.39 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08–1.79], 1.83 [95% CI 1.51 – 2.22] and 1.81 [95% CI 1.45–2.27] for the 4 mg per day, 8 mg once daily and 12 mg once daily subgroups of perampanel respectively. The RRs for the seizure freedom rates were 4.52 [95% CI 1.30–15.73], 3.65 [95% CI 1.40–9.52] and 2.14 [95% CI 1.11–4.11] for 4 mg per day, 8 mg once daily and 12 mg once daily subgroups of perampanel respectively. There was a significantly higher risk of TEAEs with the 8 mg and 12 mg doses of perampanel as compared to that with placebo. Number of patients who withdrew from the trials due to adverse events was statistically significant in only the 12 mg subgroup of perampanel in comparison to that with placebo group. ConclusionPerampanel was observed to be an effective add on drug for treating pharmacoresistant focal seizures. The patients achieved higher 50% response rates and freedom from seizures with its use. Tolerability of perampanel was more at lower doses.