Brivaracetam (Briviact): A Novel Adjunctive Therapy for Partial-Onset Seizures.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Khaleghi F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5265234 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Brivaracetam (Briviact): A Novel Adjunctive Therapy for Partial-Onset Seizures.
Khaleghi Farbod F Nemec Eric C EC
P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management 20170201 2
Brivaracetam (Briviact): a novel adjunctive therapy for partial-onset seizures. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background. The relative efficacy and safety of lacosamide as adjunctive therapy compared to other antiepileptic drugs has not been well established. Objective. To determine if lacosamide provides improved efficacy and safety, reduced length of hospital stay and improved quality of life compared with other anti-epileptic therapies for adults with partial-onset seizures. Data Sources. A systematic review of the medical literature using Medline (1946-Week 4, 2012), EMBASE (1980-Week 3, 2012), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 1 of 12, January 2012). Additional studies were identified (through to February 7, 2012) by searching bibliographies, the FDA drug approval files, clinical trial registries and major national and international neurology meeting abstracts. No restrictions on publication status or language were applied. Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials of lacosamide in adults with partial-onset seizures were included. Data Extraction. Study selection, extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two authors. Authors of studies were contacted for missing data. Data Synthesis. All pooled analyses used the random effects model. Results. Three trials (1311 patients) met inclusion criteria. Lacosamide increased the 50% responder rate compared to placebo (RR 1.68 [95% CI 1.36 to 2.08]; I(2) = 0%). Discontinuation due to adverse events was statistically significantly higher in the lacosamide arm (RR3.13 [95% CI 1.94 to 5.06]; I(2) = 0%). Individual adverse events (ataxia, dizziness, fatigue, and nausea) were also significantly higher in the lacosamide group. Limitations. All dosage arms from the included studies were pooled to make a single pair-wise comparison to placebo. Selective reporting of outcomes was found in all of the included RCTs. Conclusions. Lacosamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with partial-onset seizures increases the 50% responder rate but with significantly more adverse events compared to the placebo.
| S-EPMC3740140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The maintenance of seizure control over time is a clinical priority in patients with epilepsy. The aim of this study was to assess the sustained seizure frequency reduction with adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in real-world practice. Patients with focal epilepsy prescribed add-on BRV were identified. Study outcomes included sustained seizure freedom and sustained seizure response, defined as a 100% and a ≥50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency that continued without interruption and without BRV withdrawal through the 12-month follow-up. Nine hundred ninety-four patients with a median age of 45 (interquartile range = 32-56) years were included. During the 1-year study period, sustained seizure freedom was achieved by 142 (14.3%) patients, of whom 72 (50.7%) were seizure-free from Day 1 of BRV treatment. Sustained seizure freedom was maintained for ≥6, ≥9, and 12 months by 14.3%, 11.9%, and 7.2% of patients from the study cohort. Sustained seizure response was reached by 383 (38.5%) patients; 236 of 383 (61.6%) achieved sustained ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency by Day 1, 94 of 383 (24.5%) by Month 4, and 53 of 383 (13.8%) by Month 7 up to Month 12. Adjunctive BRV was associated with sustained seizure frequency reduction from the first day of treatment in a subset of patients with uncontrolled focal epilepsy.
| S-EPMC9311068 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:There is an unmet need for well-tolerated antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) that effectively control focal onset seizures. This study aimed to evaluate the economic value of new AEDs in the treatment of focal onset seizure, with or without secondary generalization, in Finnish adults and adolescents with epilepsy, comparing brivaracetam with perampanel as adjunctive AEDs. METHODS:Economic value was assessed using cost-utility analysis. Periods of AED initiation, titration, response assessment (seizure freedom,???50% reduction, no response), switching in no response or treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and death were simulated using a discrete-event simulation model. Responses and switching were simulated based on a comprehensive Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary modeled outcome was the 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), payer costs (year 2017 Euro) per patient, and net monetary benefit (NMB) were secondary outcomes. Probabilistic and comprehensive deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS:Brivaracetam was more efficacious and had fewer TEAEs than perampanel and other AEDs. Modeled average 5-year QALYs and costs were 3.671 and €28,297 for brivaracetam and 3.611 and €27,979 for perampanel, respectively. The resulting ICER for brivaracetam versus perampanel was only €5345/QALY gained in a deterministic base case scenario. Brivaracetam had a positive NMB and high probability of cost-effectiveness of €1190 and 71% or €1944 and 80% with the assumed willingness to pay of €25,358 or €38,036/QALY gained, respectively. The primary result was robust, with a positive NMB persistent in all sensitivity analysis scenarios. When switching from brivaracetam to perampanel was excluded from the modeling or switching from perampanel to brivaracetam was included, brivaracetam was cost-saving and more effective than perampanel (dominant). CONCLUSION:These simulated comparisons demonstrated that brivaracetam was more effective and potentially also more affordable than perampanel. Thus, brivaracetam is likely a cost-effective and net beneficial alternative to perampanel for treatment of focal onset seizures. Plain language summary available for this article.
| S-EPMC6979440 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV), a selective, high-affinity ligand for SV2A, for treatment of partial-onset (focal) seizures (POS) in adults.MethodsData were pooled from patients (aged 16-80 years) with POS uncontrolled by 1 to 2 antiepileptic drugs receiving BRV 50, 100, or 200 mg/d or placebo, without titration, in 3 phase III studies of BRV (NCT00490035, NCT00464269, and NCT01261325, ClinicalTrials.gov, funded by UCB Pharma). The studies had an 8-week baseline and a 12-week treatment period. Patients receiving concomitant levetiracetam were excluded from the efficacy pool.ResultsIn the efficacy population (n = 1,160), reduction over placebo (95% confidence interval) in baseline-adjusted POS frequency/28 days was 19.5% (8.0%-29.6%) for 50 mg/d (p = 0.0015), 24.4% (16.8%-31.2%) for 100 mg/d (p < 0.00001), and 24.0% (15.3%-31.8%) for 200 mg/d (p < 0.00001). The ≥50% responder rate was 34.2% (50 mg/d, p = 0.0015), 39.5% (100 mg/d, p < 0.00001), and 37.8% (200 mg/d, p = 0.00003) vs 20.3% for placebo (p < 0.01). Across the safety population groups (n = 1,262), 90.0% to 93.9% completed the studies. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 68.0% BRV overall (n = 803) and 62.1% placebo (n = 459). Serious TEAEs were reported by 3.0% (BRV) and 2.8% (placebo); 3 patients receiving BRV and one patient receiving placebo died. TEAEs in ≥5% patients taking BRV (vs placebo) were somnolence (15.2% vs 8.5%), dizziness (11.2% vs 7.2%), headache (9.6% vs 10.2%), and fatigue (8.7% vs 3.7%).ConclusionsAdjunctive BRV was effective and generally well tolerated in adults with POS.Classification of evidenceThis analysis provides Class I evidence that adjunctive BRV is effective in reducing POS frequency in adults with epilepsy and uncontrolled seizures.
| S-EPMC4955277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Assess cognitive effects of adjunctive perampanel in adolescents.In this double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01161524), patients aged 12 to <18 years with partial-onset seizures despite receiving 1-3 antiepileptic drugs were randomized (2:1) to perampanel or placebo. Perampanel was increased weekly in 2-mg increments to 8-12 mg/day (6-week titration; 13-week maintenance). Changes in neuropsychological outcomes were assessed at end of maintenance: Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (primary end point), five CDR System domain T-scores (secondary end points), letter fluency, category fluency, and Lafayette Grooved Pegboard Test (LGPT).One hundred thirty-three patients were randomized. In the full analysis set, there were no differences of perampanel (n = 79) vs. placebo (n = 44) in CDR System Global Cognition Score (least squares mean change, -0.6 vs. 1.6; p = 0.145), Quality of Working Memory (1.1 vs. 2.0; p = 0.579), or Power of Attention (-6.9 vs. -2.7; p = 0.219). There were small differences with perampanel vs. placebo in other CDR System domains: improvements in Quality of Episodic Memory (3.0 vs. -1.2; p = 0.012), and worsening in Continuity of Attention (-3.3 vs. 1.6; p = 0.013) and Speed of Memory (0.3 vs. 7.0; p = 0.032). Letter fluency, category fluency, and LGPT were not significantly different between groups. The most frequent adverse events with perampanel were dizziness (30.6%) and somnolence (15.3%).Perampanel did not differ from placebo in the global cognitive score, two of five subdomains, and four other cognitive measures. Perampanel was worse on two and better on one subdomain.
| S-EPMC4785606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess efficacy and safety of once-daily 8 or 12 mg perampanel, a noncompetitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist, when added to concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in the treatment of drug-resistant partial-onset seizures.MethodsThis was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00699972). Patients (≥12 years, with ongoing seizures despite 1-3 AEDs) were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily perampanel 8 mg, 12 mg, or placebo. Following baseline (6 weeks), patients entered a 19-week double-blind phase: 6-week titration (2 mg/week increments to target dose) followed by a 13-week maintenance period. Percent change in seizure frequency was the primary endpoint; 50% responder rate was the primary endpoint for EU registration.ResultsOf 388 patients randomized and treated, 387 provided seizure frequency data. Using this intent-to-treat population over the double-blind phase, the median percent change in seizure frequency was -21.0%, -26.3%, and -34.5% for placebo and perampanel 8 and 12 mg, respectively (p = 0.0261 and p = 0.0158 for 8 and 12 mg vs placebo, respectively). Fifty percent responder rates during the maintenance period were 26.4%, 37.6%, and 36.1%, respectively, for placebo, perampanel 8 mg, and perampanel 12 mg; these differences were not statistically significant for 8 mg (p = 0.0760) or 12 mg (p = 0.0914). Sixty-eight (17.5%) patients discontinued, including 40 (10.3%) for adverse events. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events were dizziness, somnolence, irritability, headache, fall, and ataxia.ConclusionsThis trial demonstrated that once-daily, adjunctive perampanel at doses of 8 or 12 mg improved seizure control in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures. Doses of perampanel 8 and 12 mg were safe, and tolerability was acceptable.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class I evidence that once-daily 8 and 12 mg doses of adjunctive perampanel are effective in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures.
| S-EPMC3413761 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of retigabine (ezogabine, US adopted name) in the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures in adults. Retigabine is the first anticonvulsant in its class, decreasing neuronal excitability by opening voltage-gated potassium channels.MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched using search terms retigabine and ezogabine for randomized controlled trials published from 1980 through August 17, 2013. Additionally, articles relating to pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, tolerability and interactions were examined for inclusion. Published abstracts and websites of the Food and Drug Administration and European Medication Agency were reviewed for additional relevant information.One phase IIb and two phase III trials were identified. Retigabine has been reported to have dose dependent efficacy in adjunctive treatment of resistant partial-onset seizures in adults in doses of 600, 900 and 1200 mg/day. Similar to other anticonvulsants, the most common adverse events were central nervous system related. Retigabine has several unique adverse events compared to other anticonvulsants: urinary retention and, with extended use, pigment changes to the skin and retina. Retigabine is metabolized by glucuronidation and acetylation. There are few drug interactions with retigabine.Retigabine has been shown to have efficacy when used as adjunctive therapy in partial-onset seizures. It has a novel mechanism of action, activation of voltage-gated potassium channels. It has less drug interactions than many other anticonvulsants because it is not metabolized through the P-450 system. Its place in therapy has yet to be determined, especially with recent reports of pigment discoloration of skin and the retina with extended use.
| S-EPMC3825677 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of USL255, Qudexy(™) XR (topiramate) extended-release capsules, as an adjunctive treatment for refractory partial-onset seizures (POS) in adults taking one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs.MethodsIn this global phase III study (PREVAIL; NCT01142193), 249 adults with POS were randomized 1:1 to once-daily USL255 (200 mg/day) or placebo. The primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints were median percent reduction in weekly POS frequency and responder rate (proportion of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency). Seizure freedom was also assessed. Safety (adverse events, clinical and laboratory findings), as well as treatment effects on quality of life (QOLIE-31-P) and clinical global impression of change (CGI-C), were evaluated.ResultsAcross the entire 11-week treatment phase, USL255 significantly reduced the median percent seizure frequency and significantly improved responder rate compared with placebo. Efficacy over placebo was observed early in treatment, in patients with highly refractory POS, and in those with the most debilitating seizure types (i.e., complex partial, partial secondarily generalized). USL255 was safe and generally well tolerated with a low incidence of neurocognitive adverse events. USL255 was associated with significant clinical improvement without adversely affecting quality of life.SignificanceThe PREVAIL phase III clinical study demonstrated that once-daily USL255 (200 mg/day) significantly improved seizure control and was safe and generally well tolerated with few neurocognitive side effects.
| S-EPMC4143954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive topiramate (sprinkle capsules or oral liquid) in reducing daily rates of partial-onset seizures (POS) in infants with refractory POS.MethodsIn this double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, international study, infants (n = 149) with clinical or EEG evidence of refractory POS were randomly allocated (1:1:1:1) to receive adjunctive topiramate 5, 15, or 25 mg/kg/d or placebo for 20 days. The primary variable was the median percentage reductions in daily POS rate from baseline to final assessment as recorded on a 48-hour video-EEG.ResultsOf the 149 infants (mean age 12 months) included in the intent-to-treat analysis set, 130 completed the study. Median percentage reduction from baseline in daily POS rate was not significantly different (p = 0.97) between topiramate 25 mg/kg (20.4%) and placebo (13.1%). Lower doses were not formally tested, but nominal p values for comparisons with placebo were not significant (15-mg/kg/d dose: p = 0.97; 5-mg/kg/d dose: p = 0.91). Treatment-emergent fever, diarrhea, vomiting, anorexia, weight decrease, somnolence, and viral infection occurred more frequently (> or = 10% difference) with topiramate than with placebo.ConclusionIn infants aged 1-24 months, topiramate 5, 15, or 25 mg/kg/d was not effective as adjunctive treatment for refractory partial-onset seizures. No new safety concerns associated with topiramate use were noted.Classification of evidenceThis interventional study provides Class I evidence that topiramate 5, 15, or 25 mg/kg/d compared with placebo does not significantly reduce seizure rates in infants aged 1 month to 2 years with refractory partial-onset seizures.
| S-EPMC2836871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are more than 12 new antiepileptic drugs approved in the last 2 decades. Even with these newer agents, seizure remission is still unachievable in around 30% of patients with partial-onset seizures (POS). Brivaracetam (BRV) is chemically related to levetiracetam (LEV) and possesses a strong binding affinity for the synaptic vesicle protein 2A tenfold above that of LEV, and other possible modes of antiepileptic actions. BRV is now under Phase III development for POS, but data from one Phase III trial also suggested its potential efficacy for primary generalized seizures. The purpose of this review is to provide updated information on the mechanisms of action of the available antiepileptic drugs, with a focus on BRV to assess its pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability in patients with uncontrolled POS. To date, six Phase IIb and III clinical trials have been performed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of BRV as an adjunctive treatment for patients with POS. Generally, BRV was well tolerated and did not show significant difference in safety profile, compared to placebo. The efficacy outcomes of BRV, although not consistent across trials, did indicate that BRV was a promising add-on therapy for patients with POS. In conclusion, the many favorable attributes of BRV, like its high oral efficacy, good tolerability, dosing regimen, and minimal drug interaction, make it a promising antiepileptic therapy for patients with uncontrolled partial-onset epilepsy.
| S-EPMC4863588 | biostudies-literature