Project description:IntroductionThis article aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in adults with focal-onset seizures on specific concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) taken as part of their treatment regimen.MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (N01252/NCT00490035, N01253/NCT00464269, and N01358/NCT01261325) in patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures randomized to BRV (50-200 mg/day) or placebo on the most common concomitant ASMs at trial initiation.ResultsNine concomitant ASMs were analyzed: carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG), valproate (VPA), oxcarbazepine (OXC), topiramate (TPM), phenytoin (PHT), lacosamide (LCM), clobazam (CLB), and phenobarbital (PHB). Reduction over placebo in focal-onset seizure frequency per 28 days with BRV ranged from 11.7% (concomitant OXC) to 33.5% (concomitant PHB). The median percentage reduction from baseline in focal-onset seizure frequency per 28 days ranged from 25.5% to 42.8% in patients on BRV (placebo 4.4-21.2%); 50% responder rates ranged from 31.9% to 44.9% in patients on BRV (placebo 11.4-25.2%). In patients on BRV, seizure freedom ranged from 1.4% (concomitant PHT) to 12.5% (concomitant LCM); seizure freedom ranged from 0% to 1.2% in patients on placebo. All efficacy endpoints analyzed were consistently numerically higher in patients on BRV versus placebo. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was generally similar across subgroups by specific concomitant ASMs in patients on BRV (range 60.8-74.5%) or placebo (range 53.8-66.7%). Drug-related TEAEs were numerically higher across all subgroups by concomitant ASM in patients on BRV (range 35.2-48.3%) versus placebo (range 23.9-37.1%). Discontinuations due to TEAEs ranged from 2.9% to 13.3% in patients on BRV and was 0-5.7% for patients taking placebo across subgroups.ConclusionBRV was efficacious and well tolerated regardless of the specific concomitant ASMs used as part of their treatment regimen. These data show that in patients with focal-onset seizures, BRV provides additional efficacy to a broad range of ASMs.

Project description:BackgroundBrivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures. So far, no randomised controlled trial directly compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs.ObjectiveWe estimated the comparative efficacy and safety of these ASMs for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with epilepsy using a network meta-analysis (NMA).MethodsWe systematically searched (June week 4, 2021) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomised, double-blinded, controlled, parallel-group, add-on studies that compared oral BRV, CNB, ESL, LCM, and PER versus any comparator over maintenance periods of at least 12 weeks and included adult patients with focal seizures uncontrolled by concomitant ASMs were identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes were the proportions of participants who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework. The hierarchy of competing interventions was established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).ResultsSixteen trials (BRV: n = 3, CNB: n = 1, ESL: n = 4, LCM: n = 4, PER: n = 4) were included, overall enrolling 4507 patients randomised to add-on active treatments (BRV = 803, CNB = 221, ESL =9 90, LCM = 1104, and PER = 1389) and 2246 to add-on placebo. Cenobamate was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction than BRV [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.66], ESL (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07-3.48), LCM (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04-3.32), and PER (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.16-3.70). There was a not statistically significant trend favouring CNB over ESL, LCM and PER for the seizure freedom outcome. Brivaracetam (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.86) and LCM (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.88) were associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing TEAEs compared to ESL, and patients treated with PER were associated with a higher risk to experience at least one TEAE (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.96) than BRV. According to SUCRA, CNB had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction, and BRV and LCM had the highest probabilities of being the best-tolerated treatments.ConclusionsCenobamate ranked best for efficacy, and BRV and LCM were best tolerated over the other comparators. Although NMAs cannot replace direct comparisons, they may support physicians in clinical decision making.

Project description:ObjectiveSeveral antiseizure medications (ASMs) have been approved for the treatment of focal epilepsy. However, there is a paucity of evidence on direct comparison of ASMs. We evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of all approved add-on ASMs for the treatment of focal epilepsy using network meta-analysis.MethodsData through extensive literature search was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrial.gov databases using predefined search terms from inception through March 2023. PRISMA reporting guidelines (CRD42023403450) were followed in this study. Efficacy outcomes assessed were ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% responder rates. Patient retention rate and safety outcomes such as overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and individual TEAEs were assessed. "Gemtc" 4.0.4 package was used to perform Bayesian analysis. Outcomes are reported as relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsLiterature search retrieved 5807 studies of which, 75 studies were included in the analysis. All ASMs showed significantly higher ≥50% responder rate compared with placebo. Except the ≥75% seizure frequency reduction for zonisamide (2.23; 95% CI: 1.00-5.70) and 100% for rufinamide (2.03; 95% CI: 0.54-11.00), all other interventions showed significantly higher ≥75% and 100% responder rates compared with placebo. Among treatments, significantly higher 100% responder rate was observed with cenobamate compared to eslicarbazepine (10.71; 95% CI: 1.56-323.9) and zonisamide (10.63; 95% CI: 1.37-261.2). All ASMs showed a lower patient retention rate compared to placebo, with the least significant value observed for oxcarbazepine (0.77; 95% CI: 0.7-0.84). Levetiracetam showed a lower risk of incidence (1.0; 95%CI: 0.94-1.1; SUCRA: 0.885067) for overall TEAE compared with other medications.SignificanceAll approved ASMs were effective as add-on treatment for focal epilepsy. Of the ASMs included, cenobamate had the greatest likelihood of allowing patients to attain seizure freedom.Plain language summaryThis article compares the efficacy and safety of antiseizure medications (ASMs) currently available to neurologists in the treatment of epileptic patients. Several newer generation ASMs that have been developed may be as effective or better than the older medications. We included 75 studies in the analysis. In comparison, all drugs improved ≥50%, ≥75% and 100% responder rates compared to control, except for Zonisamide and Rufinamide in the ≥75% and 100% responder rate categories. Retention of patients undergoing treatment was lower in drugs than placebo. All drugs were tolerated, the levetiracetam showed the best tolerability. Cenobamate more likely help completely to reduce seizures.

Project description:ObjectiveRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of novel treatments for epilepsy. However, there have been concerning increases in the placebo responder rate over time. To understand these trends, we evaluated features associated with increased placebo responder rate.MethodsUsing individual-level data from 20 focal-onset seizure trials provided by seven pharmaceutical companies, we evaluated associations with change in seizure frequency in participants randomized to placebo. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate participant and study factors associated with differing rates of 50% reduction in seizure frequency during blinded placebo treatment, as compared to pre-randomization baseline seizure frequency. In addition, we focused on the association of placebo responder rate with pre-randomization baseline seizure frequency and country of recruitment.ResultsIn the pooled analysis of 1674 participants randomized to placebo, a higher 50% responder rate (50RR) was associated with a shorter duration of epilepsy (p = .006), lower baseline seizure rate (p = .002), fewer concomitant antiseizure medications (p = .004), absence of adverse events (p < .001), more trial arms (p = .006), and geographic region (p < .001). Mixture modeling indicated a significantly higher 50RR in Bulgaria, Croatia, India, and Canada (42% in the higher group vs 22% in the lower group comprising all 40 other countries, p < 10-15). In addition, there was a significantly higher 50RR in participants with a baseline seizure frequency of six or fewer seizures per 28 days (29% vs 21%, p = .00018).SignificanceThese results can assist future RCTs in estimating the expected placebo responder rate, which may lead to more reliable power estimates. Higher placebo responder rate was associated with markers of less-refractory epilepsy. There were concerning significant differences in placebo responder rate by country and geographic region as well as an elevated placebo responder rate in participants with baseline seizure frequency close to the minimum eligibility criteria.

Project description:ImportanceTolerability is a key determinant of the effectiveness of epilepsy treatment. It is important to evaluate whether the overall tolerability has improved.ObjectiveTo identify factors associated with poor tolerability of antiseizure medications (ASMs) and examine temporal changes in tolerability.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a longitudinal cohort study at a specialist clinic in Glasgow, Scotland. Patients with newly diagnosed and treated epilepsy between July 1982 and October 2012 were included from 2282 eligible individuals. They were followed up until April 2016 or death. Data analysis was completed in August 2019.ExposuresAntiseizure medications.Main outcomes and measuresUnivariable and multivariable survival analyses were performed to examine associations between potential risk factors and development of intolerable adverse effects (AEs). Intolerable AE rates of the ASMs as the initial monotherapy were compared between 3 epochs (July 1982-June 1992, July 1992-June 2002, and July 2002-April 2016).ResultsOf 1795 patients, 969 (54.0%) were male, and the median (interquartile range) age was 33 (21-50) years. A total of 3241 ASMs were prescribed during the period, of which 504 (15.6%) were discontinued within 6 months owing to intolerable AEs. Children younger than 18 years had lower intolerable AE rates than adults (vs aged 18-64 years: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.07-2.32; vs aged ≥65 years: aHR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.19-3.02) while female individuals (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.30-1.96) and those who had more than 5 pretreatment seizures (aHR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.49) were associated with having higher risk. For each ASM trial, the risk of intolerable AEs increased with the number of previous drug withdrawals due to AEs (aHR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.28) and the number of concomitant ASMs (aHR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.64). The proportion of second-generation ASMs prescribed as the initial monotherapy increased from 22.3% (33 of 148) in the first epoch to 68.7% (645 of 939) in the last (P < .001). Although differences in intolerable AE rates and types of AEs were found between the ASMs, there was no difference in the overall intolerable AEs rates to the initial monotherapy across the 3 epochs (first: 10.1% [15 of 148]; second: 13.8% [98 of 708]; third: 14.0% [131 of 939]; P = .41).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, the increased use of the second-generation ASMs had not improved overall treatment tolerability. Greater effort to improve tolerability in ASM development is needed.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study was undertaken to evaluate safety/tolerability and efficacy of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in patients on one or two concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) and in patients on one specific concomitant ASM.MethodsPost hoc analysis was made of double-blind trials (N01252/NCT00490035, N01253/NCT00464269, and N01358/NCT01261325) in adults with focal seizures randomized to BRV (50-200 mg/day; approved therapeutic dose range for adults) or placebo with concomitant ASM regimen unchanged throughout a 12-week evaluation period. Outcomes were analyzed in patients on one or two concomitant ASMs, and those on concomitant carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG), oxcarbazepine (OXC), or valproate (VPA) only.ResultsPatients randomized to BRV with one or two concomitant ASMs, respectively (n = 181/557), reported similar incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; 68.0%/66.4%), drug-related TEAEs (41.4%/41.5%), and TEAEs leading to discontinuation (6.6%/5.4%). Respective values for patients randomized to placebo with one or two concomitant ASMs (n = 95/331) were 60.0%/60.7% (TEAEs), 32.6%/30.2% (drug-related TEAEs), and 2.1%/4.5% (TEAEs leading to discontinuation). The incidences of TEAEs, drug-related TEAEs, and TEAEs leading to discontinuation by specific concomitant ASM (CBZ, LTG, OXC, VPA) were similar to the overall incidences in patients taking one concomitant ASM. In patients on one or two concomitant ASMs, respectively, 50% responder rates were numerically higher on BRV (42.3%/36.8% [n = 175/511]) versus placebo (18.3%/19.5% [n = 93/298]). Patients with one or two ASMs on BRV (n = 175/509) versus placebo (n = 92/298) also had numerically higher 100% responder rates (BRV, 9.1%/4.5%; placebo, 1.1%/.3%) and seizure freedom (6.9%/3.7%; 1.1%/0). For patients taking concomitant CBZ, LTG, OXC, or VPA, efficacy was numerically higher with BRV (n = 54/30/27/27) versus placebo (n = 34/13/10/14-15; 50% responder rates: BRV, 31.5%/30.0%/40.7%/70.4%; placebo, 17.6%/7.7%/20.0%/33.3%; 100% responder rates: BRV, 5.6%/10.0%/11.1%/11.1%; placebo, 0 for all; seizure freedom: BRV, 3.7%/6.7%/7.4%/11.1%; placebo, 0 for all).SignificanceTherapeutic doses of BRV were efficacious and well tolerated regardless of the number of concomitant ASMs (one or two) or specific concomitant ASM (CBZ, LTG, OXC, VPA).

Project description:Background and objectivesPathogenic variants in PRRT2, encoding for the proline-rich transmembrane protein 2, were identified as the main cause of self-limiting sporadic and familial infantile epilepsy. Reported data on treatment response to antiseizure medications (ASMs) in defined monogenic epilepsies are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment response of ASMs in children with monogenic PRRT2-associated infantile epilepsy.MethodsA multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study was conducted according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology criteria. Inclusion criteria were occurrence of infantile seizures and genetic diagnosis of likely pathogenic/pathogenic PRRT2 variants.ResultsTreatment response data from 52 individuals with PRRT2-associated infantile epilepsy with a total of 79 treatments (defined as each use of an ASM in an individual) were analyzed. Ninety-six percent (50/52) of all individuals received ASMs. Levetiracetam (LEV), oxcarbazepine (OXC), valproate (VPA), and phenobarbital (PB) were most frequently administered. Sodium channel blockers were used in 22 individuals and resulted in seizure freedom in all but 1 child, who showed a reduction of more than 50% in seizure frequency. By contrast, treatment with LEV was associated with worsening of seizure activity in 2/25 (8%) treatments and no effect in 10/25 (40%) of treatments. LEV was rated significantly less effective also compared with VPA and PB. The retention rate for LEV was significantly lower compared with all aforementioned ASMs. No severe adverse events were reported, and no discontinuation of treatment was reported because of side effects.DiscussionIn conclusion, a favorable effect of most ASMs, especially sodium channel blockers such as carbamezepine and OXC, was observed, whereas the efficacy and the retention rate of LEV was lower in PRRT2-associated childhood epilepsy. Tolerability in these young children was good for all ASMs reported in the cohort.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class IV evidence that in individuals with PRRT2-associated infantile epilepsy, sodium channel blockers are associated with reduced seizure frequency but levetiracetam is not.

Dataset Information

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of add-on third-generation antiseizure medications in treating focal seizures worldwide: a network meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled trials

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets