Search

• Intravenous brivaracetam for urgent seizures was effective and well-tolerated in our study. • 77.6% of patients responded to IV BRV, with a sustained response in 62.8% of them. • A high loading dose of 163.0 ± 73.0 mg was given and fast bolus infusion was related with a better response. • A prior use of IV LEV in the acute episode was related with a worse outcome. • An early use of IV BRV could be recommended although studies with larger series of patients are needed. Urgent seizures are a medical emergency for which new therapies are still needed. This study evaluated the use of intravenous brivaracetam (IV-BRV) in an emergency setting in clinical practice. BRIV-IV was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study. It included patients ≥18 years old who were diagnosed with urgent seizures (including status epilepticus (SE), acute repetitive seizures, and high-risk seizures) and who were treated with IV-BRV according to clinical practice in 14 hospital centers. Information was extracted from clinical charts and included in an electronic database. Primary effectiveness endpoints included the rate of IV-BRV responder patients, the rate of patients with a sustained response without seizure relapse in 12 h, and the time between IV-BRV administration and clinical response. Primary safety endpoints were comprised the percentage of patients with adverse events and those with adverse events leading to discontinuation. A total of 156 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 57.7 ± 21.5 years old with a prior diagnosis of epilepsy for 57.1% of patients. The most frequent etiologies were brain tumor-related (18.1%) and vascular (11.2%) epilepsy. SE was diagnosed in 55.3% of patients. The median time from urgent seizure onset to IV treatment administration was 60.0 min (range: 15.0–360.0), and the median time from IV treatment to IV-BRV was 90.0 min (range: 30.0–2400.0). Regarding dosage, the mean bolus infusion was 163.0 ± 73.0 mg and the mean daily dosage was 195.0 ± 87.0 mg. A total of 77.6% of patients responded to IV-BRV (66.3% with SE vs. 91% other urgent seizures) with a median response time of 30.0 min (range: 10.0–60.0). A sustained response was achieved in 62.8% of patients. However, adverse events were reported in 14.7%, which were predominantly somnolence and fatigue, with 4.5% leading to discontinuation. Eighty-six percent of patients were discharged with oral brivaracetam. IV-BRV in emergency settings was effective, and tolerability was good for most patients. However, a larger series is needed to confirm the outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Cenobamate represents the most efficacy ASM vs third-generation ASMs. • Cenobamate at DDD represents the most efficient ASM vs third-generation ASMs. • Determining efficiency in terms of cost per NNT helps to inform decision-making. Epilepsy is a serious neurological disease, ranking high in the top causes of disability. The main goal of its treatment is to achieve seizure freedom without intolerable adverse effects. However, approximately 40% of patients suffer from Drug-Resistant Epilepsy (DRE) despite the availability of the latest options called third-generation Anti-Seizure Medications(ASMs). Cenobamate is the first ASM approved in Spain for the adjunctive treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures (FOS) in adult patients with DRE. The introduction of a new drug increases the number of therapeutic options available, making it important to compare it with existing alternatives in terms of clinical benefit and efficiency. This study aimed to compare the clinical benefit, in terms of the Number Needed to Treat (NNT), and the efficiency, in terms of Cost per NNT (CNT), associated with cenobamate versus third-generation ASMs used in Spain for the adjunctive treatment of FOS in patients with DRE. The Number Needed to Treat data was calculated based on the ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom endpoints (defined as the percentage of patients achieving 50% and 100% reduction in seizure frequency, respectively), obtained from pivotal clinical trials performed with cenobamate, brivaracetam, perampanel, lacosamide, and eslicarbazepine acetate. The NNT was established as the inverse of the treatment responder rate minus the placebo responder rate and was calculated based on the minimum, mid-range Daily Defined Dose (DDD), and maximum doses studied in the pivotal clinical trials of each ASM. CNT was calculated by multiplying the annual treatment cost by NNT values for each treatment option. In terms of NNT, cenobamate was the ASM associated with the lowest values at all doses for both ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom compared with the alternatives. In terms of CNT, for ≥50% responder rate, cenobamate was the ASM associated with the lowest CNT values at DDD and lacosamide and eslicarbazepine acetate at the minimum and maximum dose, respectively. For seizure freedom, cenobamate was associated with the lowest CNT value at DDD and the maximum dose and lacosamide at the minimum dose. Cenobamate could represent the most effective ASM in all doses studied compared to the third-generation ASMs and the most efficient option at DDD for both ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom. This study could represent an important contribution towards informed decision-making regarding the selection of the most appropriate therapy for FOS in adult patients with DRE from a clinical and economical perspective in Spain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The choice of antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy in patients with brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is complicated, and there are a lack of robust clinical trial data to date. Methods The NEOPLASM (Neuroncologic Patients treated with LAcoSaMide) study was a 6-month, multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients with BTRE treated with lacosamide. Patients were started on lacosamide because of a lack of efficacy or adverse events (AEs) with prior AEDs or suitability versus other AEDs, according to clinical practice. The primary efficacy variable was the seizure-free rate at 6 months. Safety variables included the proportion of patients with an AE and the proportion with an AE that led to discontinuation. Results Overall, 105 patients from 14 hospital centers were included in the analysis. Treatment with lacosamide for 6 months resulted in a 30.8% seizure-free rate, and 66.3% of patients had a ≥ 50% seizure reduction (responders). In the subset of patients included because of a lack of efficacy with prior AEDs, seizure-free rates were 28.0%, and 66.7% of patients were responders. No statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed according to the mechanism of action or enzyme-inducing properties of concomitant AEDs. Adverse events were reported by 41.9% of patients at 6 months, and 4.7% of them led to discontinuation. The most common AEs were somnolence/fatigue and dizziness. Notably, 57.1% of the patients who were switched to lacosamide because of AEs with their previous therapy did not report any AE at 6-month follow-up. Conclusions In this open-label, observational study, lacosamide appeared to be effective and well tolerated in a large population of patients with BTRE. Lacosamide may therefore be a promising option for the treatment of patients with BTRE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Cannabidiol is a licensed antiseizure medication for specific rare epilepsies. • Outcomes of an expanded access program were evaluated in one hundred and two patients. • Mean treatment retention time was 10.3 months. • The median number of total seizures per month reduced by 47.6%. • Adverse events occurred in 66.7% of the evaluated population. To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of cannabidiol (CBD) in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies, including Dravet syndrome (DS), and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), in a Spanish Expanded Access Program (EAP). This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study of patients treated with purified CBD in 14 hospitals across Spain. Patients with (1) written informed consent and (2) at least 6 months follow-up before the closure of the database were included. Primary effectiveness endpoints included reductions (100 %, ≥75 %, ≥50 %, ≥25 %, or 0 %) or worsening in seizure frequency (all seizure types and most disabling seizures) at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month visits and at the last visit, and median relative seizure reduction between baseline and last visit. Secondary effectiveness endpoints included retention rate, reduction in seizure severity, status epilepticus, healthcare utilization, and quality of life. Primary safety endpoints included rates of adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation. One hundred and two patients (DS 12 %; LGS 59 %; other epilepsy syndromes 29 %) with a mean age of 15.9 years were enrolled. Patients were highly refractory to antiseizure medications (ASMs); mean number of prior failed ASMs was 7.5 (SD 3.7). The mean CBD dose was 13.0 mg/kg/day at the last visit. The proportion of patients with ≥50 % reduction in the total number of seizures from baseline was 44.9 % at 6 months and 38.9 % at 12 months. The median number of total seizures per month reduced by 47.6 % from baseline to the last visit. At 12 months, seizure severity was lower in 33/54 patients (61.1 %) and unchanged in 17/54 patients (31.5 %). Quality of life, based on the CAVE scale, increased from a mean score of 17.9 ± 4.7 (n = 54) at baseline to 21.7 ± 5.5 (n = 51) at the last patient visit (21.2 % improvement). The mean treatment retention time was 10.3 months. There were no statistically significant changes in the number of status epilepticus episodes, but lower healthcare utilization was observed. Adverse events occurred in sixty-eight patients (66.7 %), and the most common were somnolence (34.3 %) and diarrhea (12.7 %). Cannabidiol was discontinued exclusively due to AEs in 7.8 % of patients, increasing to 25.5 % when both lack of efficacy and AEs were considered together. Cannabidiol demonstrated promising effectiveness and tolerability in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies taking part in a Spanish EAP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Post hoc analysis of four open-label extension studies of adjunctive perampanel. • Evaluation of long-term perampanel in adolescent patients with epilepsy. • Seizure control up to 2 years: focal-onset and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. • Long-term perampanel was generally well tolerated and no new safety signals emerged. • Perampanel may be a viable long-term treatment option for adolescents with epilepsy. This 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). Patients 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. The 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. This 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Status epilepticus (SE) and acute repetitive seizures (ARSs) frequently result in emergency visits. Wide variations in response are seen with standard antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Oral and intravenous (IV) formulations of lacosamide are approved as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial-onset seizures in adults and adolescents. The aim of the retrospective multicenter observational study (LACO-IV) was to analyze data from a large cohort of patients with SE or ARSs of varying severity and etiology, who received IV lacosamide in the emergency setting. Patient clinical data were entered into a database; lacosamide use and efficacy and tolerability variables were analyzed. In SE, IV lacosamide tended to be used mainly in nonconvulsive status epilepticus as second- or third-line treatment. The proportion of patients with no seizures when IV lacosamide was the last drug administered was 76.5% (70.9% SE and 83.7% ARSs). The rate of seizure cessation ≤24 h after IV lacosamide administration was 57.1% (49.1% SE and 67.4% ARSs). Of the factors analyzed, a shorter latency from seizure onset to IV lacosamide infusion influenced treatment response significantly. A nonsignificant tendency towards a higher response was seen with lacosamide dose >200 mg versus ≤200 mg. Analysis of response according to mechanism of action showed no significant differences in response to IV lacosamide in patients receiving prior sodium channel blocker (SCB) or non-SCB AEDs in the overall or SE population; however, in ARSs, a tendency towards a higher response was observed in those receiving non-SCB AEDs. The frequency and nature of adverse events observed were in line with those reported in other studies (somnolence being the most frequent). In the absence of randomized prospective controlled studies of IV lacosamide, our observations suggest that IV lacosamide may be a potential alternative for treatment of SE/ARSs when seizures fail to improve with standard AEDs or when AEDs are contraindicated or not recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Lacosamide is approved as adjunctive therapy for focal epilepsies. The number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) tried is associated with prognosis. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study (LACO-EXP) in Spain in 500 adult patients with focal epilepsies examined the efficacy and tolerability of add-on lacosamide. Factors associated with better efficacy/tolerability were analyzed. After 12months, the responder rate (≥50% reduction in seizure frequency) was 57.1%, and the seizure-free rate was 14.9%. Efficacy was better when lacosamide was the first or second add-on AED, although there was a small chance to be seizure-free even for patients who had received ≤10 prior AEDs. The mechanism of action of concomitant AEDs is important in all the stages, but differences are smaller in the early stages. Lacosamide was generally well tolerated. A slower dosage–titration schedule was associated with a lower adverse event rate. Further investigation of the timing of initiation of lacosamide add-on therapy and ideal combinations of AEDs is required. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: There has been little long-term success with polytherapy for patients with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. The rational combination of antiepileptic drugs based on their mechanism of action may help improve treatment efficacy and tolerability. Lacosamide, a novel sodium channel blocker (SCB), was investigated in 158 patients with partial-onset epilepsy in the prospective, multicenter, observational, RELACOVA cohort study conducted in Spain. After 12months'' treatment with lacosamide, 47% of patients were responders (≥50% reduction in seizure frequency) and 24% were seizure free. Lacosamide was well tolerated; dizziness was the most frequent adverse event. Efficacy was better (responder rate, 65% vs 38%; seizure free rate, 35% vs 17%) and there was a lower adverse event rate (33% vs 58%) in patients receiving non-SCBs (n=49) versus those receiving SCBs (n=104) as concomitant therapy at baseline. Further investigation of lacosamide combination therapy is warranted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Drug-resistant epilepsy is considered a severe condition. • Drug-resistant epilepsy affects approximately 40% of epileptic patients. • Drug-resistant epilepsy represents an important burden for patients and caregivers. • In Spain, drug-resistant epilepsy is associated with important unmet needs. • Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis helps to assess value in drug-resistant epilepsy. Epilepsy is a serious neurological disease, ranking high in the top causes of disability. Approximately 40% of patients with epilepsy are pharmacoresistant after their seizures failed at least two antiseizure medications (ASMs). Adult patients experiencing focal-onset seizures (FOS) account for approximately 60% of all patients with epilepsy and they are more likely to become drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) than those with generalized onset. Drug-resistant epilepsy is associated with mortality, morbidity, and reduced quality of life. The information available on the clinical management, health outcomes, and unmet needs of the disease within the Spanish healthcare environment is very limited. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) allows determination of what represents value in a given indication considering all relevant criteria for healthcare decision-making in a transparent and systematic manner and from the perspective of relevant stakeholders. The aim of this study was to identify the burden of DRE (clinical, quality of life, and economic) and the unmet needs in Spain and to determine what represents value in the treatment of FOS in DRE patients from the perspective of Spanish epileptologists. The steps taken to carry out the MCDA were based on previously published good methodological practices. A systematic literature review (combining biomedical databases and gray literature sources) was performed between March and April 2020. Results were reviewed and validated with three epileptologists in June 2020 and used to develop a MCDA value framework, adapted for FOS in DRE, composed of 12 quantitative criteria and 3 contextual criteria. A group of six Spanish epileptologists from four Spanish regions were trained in MCDA methodology before individually validating value criteria (and their definitions based on literature review findings) and assigned relative weights using an ordinal 6-points scale. Results were analyzed and discussed in a group meeting through reflective MCDA discussion methodology. Drug-resistant epilepsy is considered a very severe health problem with important unmet needs affecting a considerably sized population. While safety and impact on quality of life of available ASMs are considered adequate, efficacy remains insufficient for patients to achieve seizure freedom and maintain it over time. Hence, the therapeutic benefit of pharmacological treatments currently used is regarded as suboptimal. Drug-resistant epilepsy management is associated with moderate pharmacological, relevant direct medical and high indirect costs. Quality of evidence available for current treatments is moderate. It is considered that DRE does not currently stand as a key priority for the Spanish healthcare system. Drug-resistant epilepsy is considered a very severe health problem associated with relevant unmet needs. These include the lack of availability of specific treatment protocols, the need to improve early diagnosis by increasing the number of referrals to specialized epilepsy units and the availability of specific ASMs with improved efficacy and safety profiles, allowing to reach treatment objectives. Reflective MCDA provided a standardized, transparent approach to evaluate multiple criteria ascertaining what represents value from a holistic point of view and from the perspective of clinical experts, facilitating decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• New epilepsy definition is considered to treatment decision-making process. • There was not enough evidence on antiseizure monotherapy in all clinical situations. • We present an expert consensus guideline recommendation for the treatment of epilepsy. • Type of epilepsy, age, sex, childbearing potential, and comorbidities are considered. Following publication in 2014 of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) official report changing the definition of epilepsy, a number of questions remain unresolved in regard to deciding when to start treatment and to the choice of a particular antiseizure medication (ASM). This study uses a Delphi method to update consensus among a panel of experts on the initiation of epilepsy treatment in order to provide insight regarding those questions. The study was undertaken in four phases. Firstly, a multi-center steering committee met to review relevant bibliography and to draft a questionnaire. Secondly, a panel of neurologists specialized in epilepsy was selected and convened. Thirdly, an online survey was carried out in two rounds. Fourthly, the final results were discussed at a face-to-face meeting of the steering committee to draw conclusions. The final questionnaire focused on three independent sections: the decision to commence ASM in different clinical situations, the choice of initial monotherapy depending on the type of epilepsy and the patient's age/sex (including childbearing potential), and the choice of initial monotherapy depending on comorbidity. In these two latter sections, fourteen ASMs approved for monotherapy use by the EMA and available in Spain were considered. Regarding the decision as to when to commence treatment, the results show agreement exists to initiate treatment following a first generalized tonic-clonic seizure or a focal seizure if the electroencephalography (EEG) reveals epileptiform activity, if the MRI reveals a lesion, or when it occurs in elderly patients. With respect to the choice of initial monotherapy depending on the type of epilepsy and the patient's age/sex profile, it is agreed to avoid valproic acid (VPA) in women with childbearing potential, with levetiracetam (LEV) and lamotrigine (LTG) being the preferable options in generalized epilepsy. In focal epilepsy, the options are broader, particularly in men, and include the most recent ASMs approved for monotherapy. In the elderly, LEV, lacosamide (LCM), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) and LTG are considered the most suitable drugs for initiating treatment. With regard to comorbidities, the recommendation is to avoid enzyme inducing ASMs, with LEV, the most recent ASMs approved for monotherapy and LTG being the preferred options. In conclusion, as the ILAE definition states, there are different situations that lead to treatment initiation after a first seizure. When choosing the first ASM, the type of epilepsy, childbearing potential and drug–drug interaction are key factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition, efficacy, growth, safety, and tolerability in adolescents with inadequately controlled partial seizures. Methods Study 235, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, Phase II study with an open-label extension phase ( NCT01161524 ), was primarily designed to assess the effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition. Patients (aged ≥ 12 to < 18 years) had a diagnosis of epilepsy with inadequately controlled partial seizures, with or without secondary generalization, despite receiving 1–3 antiepileptic drugs. During the double-blind phase, adjunctive perampanel or placebo was administered over a 6-week titration period and a 13-week maintenance period up to 12 mg/day. During the extension phase, all patients received perampanel. Data from the extension phase are presented here. Study endpoints included change from baseline in Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) measures of cognition, seizure frequency, growth, development, the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and laboratory values. Results A total of 114 patients entered the extension phase (prior double-blind treatment: placebo, n = 41; perampanel, n = 73). Perampanel had no effect on the CDR system global cognition score, continuity of attention, quality of episodic memory, quality of working memory, or speed of memory but was associated with a significant decline in power of attention at end of treatment compared with baseline ( p = 0.03). There were no effects on language skills or manual dexterity from baseline to end of treatment. At Weeks 40–52, median reduction in seizure frequency was 74.1%, and 50% responder rate was 66.0%. There were no clinically relevant effects of perampanel on growth or development at end of treatment compared with baseline. Overall, 84.2% of patients experienced at least one TEAE and 70.2% experienced at least one treatment-related TEAE. The most common TEAEs were dizziness (29.8%) and somnolence (19.3%). The TEAEs resulted in the discontinuation of treatment in 6.1% of patients. Conclusions In keeping with the 19-week double-blind phase, long-term adjunctive treatment with perampanel did not have any significant overall effects on the CDR system global cognition score in adolescent patients with inadequately controlled partial seizures. Similar trends were observed across the individual CDR system domains. Adjunctive perampanel showed sustained long-term seizure control and had a safety and tolerability profile similar to that observed in prior clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Planned subgroup analysis of patients (pts) with epilepsy in a real-world study. • Brivaracetam (BRV) was effective and well tolerated in pts aged ≥65 and ≥16–<65 yrs. • BRV was well tolerated in pts ≥65 yrs with and without psychiatric comorbidities. • BRV was well tolerated in pts ≥65 yrs switching from levetiracetam or other ASMs. • Data confirm BRV is effective and well tolerated among older pts in the real world. This analysis assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in older (≥65 years of age) and younger (≥16 to <65 years of age) adults with epilepsy. This was a subgroup analysis from EXPERIENCE/EPD332, a pooled analysis of individual patient records from multiple independent, non-interventional studies of patients with epilepsy starting BRV in Australia, Europe, and the United States. Included patients had ≥6 months of follow-up data. Outcomes included responders (≥50 % reduction from baseline in seizure frequency), seizure freedom (no seizures within 3 months before the time point), and continuous seizure freedom (no seizures from baseline) at 12 months; BRV discontinuation during the whole study follow-up; and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Patients with missing data after BRV discontinuation were deemed non-responders/not seizure-free. Analysis populations included the Full Analysis Set (FAS; patients who received ≥1 BRV dose and had seizure type and age documented at baseline) and the modified FAS (FAS patients who had ≥1 seizure recorded during baseline). The FAS was used for all outcomes except seizure reduction. The FAS included 147 (8.9 %) patients aged ≥65 years and 1497 (91.1 %) aged ≥16 to <65 years. Compared with the younger subgroup, patients aged ≥65 years had a longer median epilepsy duration (33.0 years [n = 144] vs 17.0 years [n = 1460]) and lower median seizure frequency at index (2.0 seizures/28 days [n = 129] vs 4.0 seizures/28 days [n = 1256]), and less commonly had >1 prior antiseizure medication (106/141 [75.2 %] vs 1265/1479 [85.5 %]). At 12 months, a numerically higher percentage of patients aged ≥65 years versus the younger subgroup achieved ≥50 % seizure reduction (46.5 % [n = 71] vs 36.0 % [n = 751]), seizure freedom (26.0 % [n = 100] vs 13.9 % [n = 1011]), and continuous seizure freedom (22.0 % [n = 100] vs 10.7 % [n = 1011]). During the whole study follow-up, 43/147 (29.3 %) patients aged ≥65 years and 508/1492 (34.0 %) aged ≥16 to <65 years discontinued BRV. The incidence of TEAEs since the prior visit was similar in both subgroups at 3 months (≥65 years vs ≥16 to <65 years: 38/138 [27.5 %] vs 356/1404 [25.4 %]), 6 months (19/119 [16.0 %] vs 176/1257 [14.0 %]), and 12 months (8/104 [7.7 %] vs 107/1128 [9.5 %]). This real-world analysis suggests BRV was effective in patients aged ≥65 years and ≥16 to <65 years, with numerically higher effectiveness in the older subgroup. BRV was well tolerated in both subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Epitrack total score significantly contributes to better QOL composite score. • Epitrack total score contributes to perceived energy and cognitive self-rating. • The number of ASMs mediates the relationship between cognitive deficits and QOL. • The DDD of ASMs does not mediate the association between cognition and QOL. To assess whether cognitive performance predicts quality of life (QOL) in patients with drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), using the Epitrack cognitive screening tool, while considering the mediating role of the number of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and controlling for seizure-related, social, and emotional factors. Seventy-five adult patients with drug-resistant TLE (mean age = 39.76 years, SD = 11.66) underwent a presurgical neuropsychological assessment. Main Outcome Measures: Cognitive performance (Epitrack), depression (BDI-II), trait anxiety (STAI); and QOL (QOLIE-31) were assessed. Adjusting for seizure-related, social, and emotional factors, the Epitrack total score significantly contributed to QOL composite score, and energy and cognitive self-rating subscales. We found a significant indirect effect of the Epitrack total score on QOL composite score and seizure worry and social functioning subscales via the number of ASMs. Our findings underline the relevance of cognitive functioning on QOL and the clinical utility of Epitrack to track cognitive side effects of ASMs and, consequently, to predict and manage QOL in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Perampanel was assessed in 6,822 people with epilepsy treated in clinical practice. • At 12 months, 59% of participants responded to treatment and 24% were seizure free. • No new or unexpected adverse events were observed following long-term treatment. • Perampanel was effective and generally well tolerated regardless of age category. • Perampanel's effectiveness and tolerability were best in subjects aged ≥65 years. To assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) in people with epilepsy (PWE) treated in everyday clinical practice for focal and generalized seizures, both in the total cohort and by age group. The PERMIT Extension study was a pooled analysis of data from PWE included in two large previous clinical practice studies (PERMIT and PROVE). Retention was assessed over 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed based on total seizures and by seizure type (focal and generalized) after 3, 6, and 12 months of PER treatment and at final follow-up (last observation carried forward; "last visit"); assessments included responder rate (≥50% seizure frequency reduction from baseline) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the previous visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed throughout PER treatment by evaluating adverse events (AEs). All assessments were conducted for the total population and by age category (<12, ≥12 to <18, ≥18 to <65, and ≥65 years at baseline). Full Analysis Set included 6,822 PWE (51.1% female; mean age, 36.9 years; mean duration of epilepsy 21.4 years) with 6,433, 4,648, and 6,233 PWE assessed for retention, effectiveness, and safety/tolerability, respectively. The majority of PWE (81.1%) were aged 18–64 at baseline, with 4.5% aged <12 years, 8.4% aged 12–17 years, and 5.9% aged ≥65 years. In the overall population, retention rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 88.0%, 77.6%, and 61.4%, respectively; responder rates at 12 months were 58.5% for total seizures, 54.6% for focal seizures, and 77.7% for generalized seizures, and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 23.6%, 19.0%, and 51.3%, respectively. PER was effective regardless of age category, although effectiveness was greatest in PWE aged ≥65 years, for both focal and generalized seizures. In the overall population, the incidence of AEs was 49.2% and the most frequent AEs (≥5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (13.4%), somnolence (8.8%), irritability (7.3%), and behavioral disorders (5.3%); AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 18.3% of PWE over 12 months. The incidence of AEs and the discontinuation rate due to AEs increased with increasing age (55.0% and 23.9%, respectively, in PWE aged ≥65 years). In this study, the largest pooled analysis of PER clinical practice data conducted to date, PER was shown to be effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat people with focal or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice, regardless of age category. No new or unexpected side effects emerged following long-term use in the real-world setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract People with drug-resistant epilepsy are exposed to unpredictable and uncontrollable seizures, which can be considered as a chronic stress condition. Additionally, these patients present memory deficits and a high prevalence of depression and anxiety. Cortisol, the main stress hormone, has a modulatory role on memory in healthy individuals and patients with emotional disorders, but its role in memory and emotional processes remains unclear in people with epilepsy. This study analyzes the differences in cortisol levels in people with epilepsy with high and low memory performance, and the relationships among cortisol levels, epilepsy-related factors, memory, anxiety, and depression. Fifty-two adults with drug-resistant epilepsy underwent a neuropsychological evaluation, in which nine saliva samples were collected to analyze the ability of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis to descend in accordance with the circadian rhythm. Cortisol area under the curve (AUC) was computed to study the global cortisol changes. Patients with low immediate and delayed memory performance and left-hemisphere focus showed higher cortisol levels. Additionally, patients with low memory scores had higher cortisol AUC, and therefore slower declining levels in the afternoon. Memory performance was negatively related to the cortisol AUC and trait anxiety, being both reliable predictors of memory performance, especially in patients with left-hemisphere focus. These results suggest that memory deficits in people with drug-resistant epilepsy may be influenced by exposure to cortisol derived from chronic stress. Additionally, trait anxiety could contribute to increasing the vulnerability to stress. Highlights • Patients with left-hemisphere focus and poor memory have higher cortisol levels. • Patients with low memory scores have higher cortisol AUC i. • Memory performance is negatively related to the cortisol AUC i and trait anxiety. • Cortisol AUC i and trait anxiety are reliable predictors of memory performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Stimulation-evoked focal to bilateral tonic–clonic seizure (FBTCS) can be a stressful and possibly harmful adverse event for patients during cortical stimulation (CS). We evaluated if drug load reduction of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) during CS increases the risk of stimulation-evoked FBTCS. Material and methods In this retrospective cohort study, we searched our local database for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who underwent invasive video-EEG monitoring and CS in the University Hospital la Fe Valencia from January 2006 to November 2016. The AED drug load was calculated with the defined daily dose. We applied a uni- and multivariate logistic regression model to estimate the risk of stimulation-evoked FBTCS and evaluate possible influencing factors. Furthermore, we compared patients whose AEDs were completely withdrawn with those whose AEDs were not. Results Fifty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Stimulating 3806 electrode contact pairs, 152 seizures were evoked in 28 patients (48.3%). Ten seizures (6.6%) in seven patients (12.1%) evolved to FBTCS. In the univariate and multivariate analysis, a 10% reduction in drug load was associated with an increase of the odds ratio (OR) of stimulation-evoked FBTCS by 1.9 (95%-CI 1.2, 4.0, p-value = 0.04) and 1.9 (95%-CI 1.2, 4.6, p-value = 0.04), respectively. In patients, whose AEDs were completely withdrawn the OR of FBTCS increased by 9.1 (95%CI 1.7, 69.9, p-value = 0.01) compared with patients whose AEDs were not completely withdrawn. No other factor (implantation type, maximum stimulus intensity, number of stimulated contacts, history of FBTCS, age, gender, or epilepsy type) appears to have a significant effect on the risk of stimulation-evoked FBTCS. Conclusions The overall risk of stimulation-evoked FBTCS during CS is relatively low. However, a stronger reduction and, especially, a complete withdrawal of AEDs are associated with an increased risk of stimulation-evoked FBTCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychiatric symptoms must be considered in patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy after epilepsy surgery. The main objectives of our study were to describe clinical and socio-demographical characteristics of a cohort of patients with pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy who underwent temporal lobe epilepsy surgery, and moreover, to evaluate possible risk factors for developing psychiatric symptoms. In order to achieve those goals, we conducted a prospective evaluation of psychopathology throughout the first year after surgery in a clinical sample of 72 patients, by means of three clinical rated measures; the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). The psychopathological evaluations were performed by an experienced psychiatrist. A presurgical evaluation was done by a multidisciplinary team (that includes neurologist, psychiatrist, neurosurgeon, neurophysiologist, radiologists, and nuclear medicine specialist) in all patients. The decision to proceed to surgery was taken after a surgical meeting of all members of the Multidisciplinary Epilepsy Unit team. The psychiatrist conducted two postoperative assessments at 6 months and 12 months after surgery. The main finding was that past history of mental illness (patients who were receiving psychiatric treatment prior to the baseline evaluation) was a risk factor for anxiety, depression, and psychosis after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) surgery is an effective procedure that can produce cognitive changes. However, the prognostic factors related with cognitive outcomes need to be better understood. The aim of the present study is to know if age at surgery is a reliable predictor of verbal memory competence and considering factors such as: hemisphere; type of surgery; pre-surgical seizure frequency; and epilepsy duration. Sixty-one typically dominant patients with drug-resistant TLE (34 with left TLE [L-TLE] and 27 with right TLE [R-TLE]) underwent a neuropsychological assessment before and a year after surgery. Results showed that R-TLE patients had better evolution in short- and long-term verbal memory and naming than L-TLE patients (for all, p > .04). L-TLE patients also more frequently showed a strong and reliable decline in these functions than R-TLE patients. No effects for gender or type of surgery were found. From a multivariate approach, patients with improvements in verbal competence underwent surgery at earlier ages and suffered epilepsy for less time (for all, p < 0.4). The relevance of age at surgery was confirmed as a predictor of long-term verbal memory changes, although the frequency of partial seizures also explains, at least partially, these changes. In addition, the frequency of partial seizures explains short-term verbal memory changes. These results emphasize the importance of early intervention, independently of the resected hemisphere, in order to minimize the cognitive side-effects of epilepsy treatment, as well the need to consider cognitive functions as related processes and network dependent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is currently a lack of guidance on methodology and special considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine (OXC) or carbamazepine (CBZ) to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), if deemed clinically necessary. An advisory panel of epilepsy experts was convened to share their experience on the use of adjunctive ESL in clinical practice and to provide practical recommendations to help address this gap. When changing over from OXC to ESL, an OXC:ESL dose ratio of 1:1 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and the changeover can take place overnight. No changes to comedication are required. Since CBZ has a different mechanism of action to ESL and is a stronger inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, the transitioning of patients from CBZ to ESL requires careful consideration on a patient-by-patient basis. In general, a CBZ:ESL dose ratio of 1:1.3 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and patients should be transitioned over a minimum period of 1–2 weeks. Special considerations include adjustment of titration schedule and target dose in elderly patients and those with hepatic or renal impairment and potential adjustment of comedications metabolized by CYP enzymes. In summary, due to structural distinctions between ESL, OXC, and CBZ, which affect mechanism of action and tolerability, there are clinical situations in which it may be appropriate to consider transitioning patients from OXC or CBZ to ESL. Changing patients over from OXC to ESL is generally more straightforward than transitioning patients from CBZ to ESL, which requires careful consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A European observational cross-sectional study, ESPERA, was conducted in France and Spain in 2010. A random sample of neurologists, including specialists in epilepsy, prospectively enrolled adult patients treated for focal epilepsy with at least two antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in combination. Investigators were asked to classify AED responsiveness of each enrolled patient according to the new 2009 ILAE criteria. These classifications were then reviewed by three experts. Potential factors of misclassification were then analyzed in order to evaluate the applicability of the new ILAE criteria for antiepileptic drug resistance in current clinical practice. Because of their complexity, use of the new ILAE criteria needs to be supported by relevant information and training to be adequately applied by neurologists in everyday practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Behavioral adverse events (BAEs) are associated with BRV, LEV, PER, and TPM. • Randomized controlled trials may underestimate BAEs in real-world practice. • Incidences of BAEs of irritability, anger, and aggression vary in clinical practice. • Switching from LEV to BRV may improve BAEs. To understand the currently available post-marketing real-world evidence of the incidences of and discontinuations due to the BAEs of irritability, anger, and aggression in people with epilepsy (PWE) treated with the anti-seizure medications (ASMs) brivaracetam (BRV), levetiracetam (LEV), perampanel (PER), and topiramate (TPM), as well as behavioral adverse events (BAEs) in PWE switching from LEV to BRV. A systematic review of published literature using the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase was performed to identify retrospective and prospective observational studies reporting the incidence of irritability, anger, or aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, or TPM in PWE. The incidences of these BAEs and the rates of discontinuation due to each were categorized by ASM, and where possible, weighted means were calculated but not statistically assessed. Behavioral and psychiatric adverse events in PWE switching from LEV to BRV were summarized descriptively. A total of 1500 records were identified in the searches. Of these, 44 published articles reporting 42 studies met the study criteria and were included in the data synthesis, 7 studies were identified in the clinical trial database, and 5 studies included PWE switching from LEV to BRV. Studies included a variety of methods, study populations, and definitions of BAEs. While a wide range of results was reported across studies, weighted mean incidences were 5.6% for BRV, 9.9% for LEV, 12.3% for PER, and 3.1% for TPM for irritability; 3.3%* for BRV, 2.5% for LEV, 2.0% for PER, and 0.2%* for TPM for anger; and 2.5% for BRV, 2.6% for LEV, 4.4% for PER, and 0.5%* for TPM for aggression. Weighted mean discontinuation rates were 0.8%* for BRV, 3.4% for LEV, 3.0% for PER, and 2.2% for TPM for irritability and 0.8%* for BRV, 2.4% for LEV, 9.2% for PER, and 1.2%* for TPM for aggression. There were no discontinuations for anger. Switching from LEV to BRV led to improvement in BAEs in 33.3% to 83.0% of patients (weighted mean, 66.6%). *Denotes only 1 study. This systematic review characterizes the incidences of irritability, anger, and aggression with BRV, LEV, PER, and TPM, and it provides robust real-world evidence demonstrating that switching from LEV to BRV may improve BAEs. While additional data remain valuable due to differences in methodology (which make comparisons difficult), these results improve understanding of the real-world incidences of discontinuations due to these BAEs in clinical practice and can aid in discussions and treatment decision-making with PWE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This post hoc analysis of six randomized, double-blind, Phase II and III studies evaluated efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel (2–12 mg/day) in adolescent patients (aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 17 years) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures, with or without secondarily generalized (SG) seizures, or primary generalized tonic–clonic (PGTC) seizures. Adolescent patients from Studies 304 (NCT00699972), 305 (NCT00699582), 306 (NCT00700310), 335 (NCT01618695), 235 (NCT01161524), and 332 (NCT01393743) were included. Efficacy assessments (split by seizure type) included median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline and seizure-freedom rates. Safety assessments (all seizure types combined) included monitoring of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The Safety Analysis Set included 372 adolescent patients (placebo, n = 114; perampanel, n = 258); the Full Analysis Set included 346 patients with partial-onset seizures (placebo, n = 103; perampanel, n = 243), of whom 125 experienced SG seizures during baseline (placebo, n = 37; perampanel, n = 88), and 22 with PGTC seizures (placebo, n = 9; perampanel, n = 13). Compared with placebo, perampanel 8 and 12 mg/day conferred greater median percent reductions in seizure frequency per 28 days for partial-onset seizures (18.0% vs 35.9% and 53.8% [both P < 0.01]) and SG seizures (24.4% vs 72.8% [ P < 0.001] and 57.8% [ P < 0.01]), and greater seizure-freedom rates (partial-onset: 7.8% vs 13.2% and 11.8% [not statistically significant]; SG: 8.1% vs 40.7% [ P < 0.001] and 41.7% [ P < 0.01]). For PGTC seizures, and compared with placebo, perampanel 8 mg/day was also associated with greater median percent reductions in seizure frequency per 28 days (29.8% vs 88.0%) and greater seizure-freedom rates (11.1% vs 23.1%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 76 (66.7%) placebo- and 192 (74.4%) perampanel-treated patients (most common: dizziness, somnolence, headache, and nasopharyngitis). Serious TEAEs occurred in 5 (4.4%) placebo- and 11 (4.3%) perampanel-treated patients. Adjunctive perampanel was efficacious and generally well tolerated in adolescent patients with partial-onset, SG, or PGTC seizures and represents a potentially beneficial treatment option for adolescents with uncontrolled epilepsy. • Post hoc analysis of adjunctive perampanel in adolescents (aged ≥ 12 to ≤ 17 years) • Perampanel was efficacious for partial-onset and PGTC seizures vs placebo. • Perampanel was generally well tolerated in adolescent patients. • Perampanel may be a suitable treatment option for adolescent patients with epilepsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]