Efficacy and safety of perampanel in patients with drug-resistant partial seizures after conversion from double-blind placebo to open-label perampanel

SummaryObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of perampanel in patients with drug-resistant partial seizures after the conversion from double-blind placebo in three phase III studies to open-label perampanel, and to assess the impact of perampanel titration rates through a comparison of weekly vs biweekly dose increases.MethodsPatients who completed the three multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III core studies (studies 304, 305, or 306) were eligible to enroll in the extension study (study 307). Patients completing the double-blind treatment (6-week titration, 13-week maintenance) with placebo (DB-PBO) or perampanel (DB-PER) began the extension study with a 16-week blinded conversion period, during which DB-PBO patients were switched to perampanel. Doses were titrated in 2-mg increments (biweekly) to an individualized maximum tolerated dose of perampanel (up to 12mg/day). Patients then entered a planned, open-label treatment period.ResultsPerampanel treatment during the extension study reduced total seizure frequency/28 days relative to the double-blind prerandomization baseline regardless of prior perampanel or placebo treatment in the core studies. In the DB-PBO patients, median percent reductions in seizure frequency at the end of the double-blind period, at the end of the conversion period, and at Weeks 40–52 in the open-label maintenance period were 18.6%, 44.3%, and 55.0%, respectively. Seizure control was also improved in the DB-PER patients during the extension period compared to the end of the double-blind period. Responder rates were similar between the 2 patient groups at the end of the conversion period. Perampanel was well tolerated, with the most common treatment-emergent adverse events being dizziness, somnolence, weight increase, irritability, fatigue, and headache. For those patients randomized to the 12mg group (DB-PER 12mg), 78.4% reached the daily dose of 10 or 12mg by the end of the 6-week titration period of the double-blind phase. By the end of the 16-week conversion period of the extension study, 64.0% of DB-PBO patients reached the daily dose of 10 or 12mg. Seizure frequency reduction was greater after the first 13-week maintenance period of the extension study in the DB-PBO group compared to patients assigned to DB-PER 12mg during the 13-week maintenance period of the double-blind study.ConclusionPatients who received placebo in the phase III core DB studies and transitioned to perampanel in the open-label extension study (DB-PBO) achieved seizure control at the end of the conversion period similar to that of patients who had been previously exposed to perampanel (DB-PER) as well as comparable safety outcomes. Patients who received perampanel during the core studies and continued with treatment during the extension study (DB-PER) also showed sustained improvements in seizure control with long-term exposure to perampanel

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus proposal: Medical treatment of canine epilepsy in Europe

In Europe, the number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed for dogs has grown considerably over the last years. Nevertheless, the same questions remain, which include, 1) when to start treatment, 2) which drug is best used initially, 3) which adjunctive AED can be advised if treatment with the initial drug is unsatisfactory, and 4) when treatment changes should be considered. In this consensus proposal, an overview is given on the aim of AED treatment, when to start long-term treatment in canine epilepsy and which veterinary AEDs are currently in use for dogs. The consensus proposal for drug treatment protocols, 1) is based on current published evidence-based literature, 2) considers the current legal framework of the cascade regulation for the prescription of veterinary drugs in Europe, and 3) reflects the authors’ experience. With this paper it is aimed to provide a consensus for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy. Furthermore, for the management of structural epilepsy AEDs are inevitable in addition to treating the underlying cause, if possible

Effect of continuous positive airway pressure treatment on seizure control in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and epilepsy.

In patients with epilepsy, improvement in seizure control with treatment of coexisting obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been reported, but there is lack of data on the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compliance on seizure control in these patients. We examined the variability in seizure frequency in patients who were CPAP compliant and those who were not CPAP compliant. We undertook a retrospective review of clinical and polysomnographic data of adult patients with OSA and epilepsy seen at the Boston University Medical Center Epilepsy and Sleep Clinics between 2000 and 2010. Data were reviewed for CPAP compliance and seizure frequency after at least 6 months of CPAP use. Only patients with no changes in antiepileptic drug regimens during CPAP trial were included. Of the 660 patients identified, 41 fulfilled inclusion criteria, of whom 28 were CPAP compliant and 13 were not CPAP compliant. In the compliant group, CPAP use led to decreased seizure frequency from 1.8 per month to 1 per month (p = 0.01). In the noncompliant group, no significant difference in seizure frequency was noted between baseline (2.1 per month) and at follow-up (1.8 per month, p = 0.36). Sixteen of 28 CPAP-compliant subjects were seizure free, whereas only 3 of 13 non-CPAP compliant subjects were seizure free [relative risk (RR) 1.54, p = 0.05]. Patients with epilepsy and OSA not compliant with CPAP treatment are at higher risk of seizures than are CPAP-compliant patients. To validate this observation, further prospective studies are warranted