Models of care and relevance of territorial management in assisting persons with epilepsy.

Epilepsy is a widespread social disease that affects people of all ages and often involves both diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties. Beyond seizure control, it is necessary to ensure people with epilepsy a good quality of life and respect for human rights, seeking to increase self-management capacity and break down stigma. People with epilepsy should have privileged access to specialized epilepsy centers, where multidisciplinary care is possible. These centers, organized by different levels of complexity, should be uniformly distributed throughout the country and networked together. The scientific community and health care organizations must therefore design all necessary strategies so that knowledge about epilepsy improves among the general population and the most effective pathways of care are effectively implemented.

Quantitative EEG analysis of brivaracetam in drug-resistant epilepsy: A pharmaco-EEG study.

OBJECTIVE: Brivaracetam (BRV) is a recent antiseizure medication (ASM) approved as an add-on therapy for people with focal epilepsy. BRV has a good efficacy and safety profile compared to other ASMs. However, its specific effects on resting-state EEG activity and connectivity are unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate quantitative EEG changes induced by BRV therapy in a population of adult people with drug-resistant epilepsy (PwE) compared to healthy controls (HC). METHODS: We performed a longitudinal, retrospective, pharmaco-EEG study on a population of 23 PwE and a group of 25 HC. Clinical outcome was dichotomized into drug-responders (i.e., >50% reduction in seizures' frequency; RES) and non-responders (N-RES) after two years of BRV. EEG parameters were compared between PwE and HC at baseline (pre-BRV) and after three months of BRV therapy (post-BRV). We investigated BRV-related variations in EEG connectivity using the phase locking value (PLV). RESULTS: BRV therapy did not induce modifications in power spectrum density across different frequency bands. PwE presented lower PLV connectivity values compared to HC in all frequency bands. RES exhibited lower theta PLV connectivity compared to HC before initiating BRV and experienced an increase after BRV, eliminating the significant difference from HC. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that BRV does not alter the EEG power spectrum in PwE, supporting its favourable neuropsychiatric side-effect profile, and induces the disappearance of EEG connectivity differences between PwE and HC. SIGNIFICANCE: The integration of EEG quantitative analysis in epilepsy can provide insights into the efficacy, mechanism of action, and side effects of ASMs.

Current challenges in focal epilepsy treatment: An Italian Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy, a globally prevalent neurological condition, presents distinct challenges in management, particularly for focal-onset types. This study aimed at addressing the current challenges and perspectives in focal epilepsy management, with focus on the Italian reality. METHODS: Using the Delphi methodology, this research collected and analyzed the level of consensus of a panel of Italian epilepsy experts on key aspects of focal epilepsy care. Areas of focus included patient flow, treatment pathways, controlled versus uncontrolled epilepsy, follow-up protocols, and the relevance of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This method allowed for a comprehensive assessment of consensus and divergences in clinical opinions and practices. RESULTS: The study achieved consensus on 23 out of 26 statements, with three items failing to reach a consensus. There was strong agreement on the importance of timely intervention, individualized treatment plans, regular follow-ups at Epilepsy Centers, and the role of PROs in clinical practice. In cases of uncontrolled focal epilepsy, there was a clear inclination to pursue alternative treatment options following the failure of two previous therapies. Divergent views were evident on the inclusion of epilepsy surgery in treatment for uncontrolled epilepsy and the routine necessity of EEG evaluations in follow-ups. Other key findings included concerns about the lack of pediatric-specific research limiting current therapeutic options in this patient population, insufficient attention to the transition from pediatric to adult care, and need for improved communication. The results highlighted the complexities in managing epilepsy, with broad consensus on patient care aspects, yet notable divergences in specific treatment and management approaches. CONCLUSION: The study offered valuable insights into the current state and complexities of managing focal-onset epilepsy. It highlighted many deficiencies in the therapeutic pathway of focal-onset epilepsy in the Italian reality, while it also underscored the importance of patient-centric care, the necessity of early and appropriate intervention, and individualized treatment approaches. The findings also called for continued research, policy development, and healthcare system improvements to enhance epilepsy management, highlighting the ongoing need for tailored healthcare solutions in this evolving field.

Use, experience and perspectives of high-density EEG among Italian epilepsy centers: a national survey.

INTRODUCTION: High-density EEG (hdEEG) is a validated tool in presurgical evaluation of people with epilepsy. The aim of this national survey is to estimate diffusion and knowledge of hdEEG to develop a network among Italian epilepsy centers. METHODS: A survey of 16 items (and 15 additional items) was distributed nationwide by email to all members of the Italian League Against Epilepsy and the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology. The data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 104 respondents were collected from 85 centers, 82% from the Centre-North of Italy; 27% of the respondents had a hdEEG. The main applications were for epileptogenic focus characterization in the pre-surgical evaluation (35%), biomarker research (35%) and scientific activity (30%). The greatest obstacles to hdEEG were economic resources (35%), acquisition of dedicated personnel (30%) and finding expertise (17%). Dissemination was limited by difficulties in finding expertise and dedicated personnel (74%) more than buying devices (9%); 43% of the respondents have already published hdEEG data, and 91% of centers were available to participate in multicenter hdEEG studies, helping in both pre-processing and analysis. Eighty-nine percent of respondents would be interested in referring patients to centers with established experience for clinical and research purposes. CONCLUSIONS: In Italy, hdEEG is mainly used in third-level epilepsy centers for research and clinical purposes. HdEEG diffusion is limited not only by costs but also by lack of trained personnel. Italian centers demonstrated a high interest in educational initiatives on hdEEG as well as in clinical and research collaborations.

Adjunctive brivaracetam and sustained seizure frequency reduction in very active focal epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of brivaracetam (BRV) according to baseline seizure frequency and past treatment history in subjects with focal epilepsy who were included in the Brivaracetam Add-On First Italian Network Study (BRIVAFIRST). METHODS: BRIVAFIRST was a 12-month retrospective, multicenter study including adults prescribed adjunctive BRV. Study outcomes included sustained seizure response (SSR), sustained seizure freedom (SSF), and the rates of treatment discontinuation and adverse events (AEs). Baseline seizure frequency was stratified as <5, 5-20, and >20 seizures per month, and the number of prior antiseizure medications (ASMs) as <5 and ≥6. RESULTS: A total of 994 participants were included. During the 1-year study period, SSR was reached by 45.8%, 39.3%, and 22.6% of subjects with a baseline frequency of <5, 5-20, and >20 seizures per month (p < .001); the corresponding figures for the SSF were 23.4%, 9.8%, and 2.8% (p < .001). SSR was reached by 51.2% and 26.5% participants with a history of 1-5 and ≥6 ASMs (p < .001); the corresponding rates of SSF were 24.7% and 4.5% (p < .001). Treatment discontinuation due to lack of efficacy was more common in participants with >20 seizures compared to those with <5 seizures per month (25.8% vs. 9.3%, p < .001), and in participants with history of ≥6 prior ASMs compared to those with history of 1-5 ASMs (19.6% vs. 12.2%, p = .002). There were no differences in the rates of BRV withdrawal due to AEs and the rates of AEs across the groups of participants defined according to the number of seizures at baseline and the number of prior ASMs. SIGNIFICANCE: The baseline seizure frequency and the number of previous ASMs were predictors of sustained seizure frequency reduction with adjunctive BRV in subjects with focal epilepsy.

Unmet needs and perspectives in management of drug resistant focal epilepsy: An Italian study.

This study aimed to evaluate the consensus level between a representative group of Italian neurologists and people with Drug-Resistant Epilepsy (DRE) regarding a series of statements about different aspects involved in the management of epilepsy to identify the unmet needs of the People with Epilepsy (PwE) and the future perspectives for the management of this disease. This observational study was conducted using a classic Delphi technique. A 19-statement questionnaire was administered anonymously through an online platform to a panel of expert clinicians and a panel of PwE, analyzing three main topics of interest: drug resistance, access to care, and PwE's experience. The consensus was achieved on 8 of the 19 statements administered to the panel of medical experts and on 4 of the 14 submitted to the panel of PwE, particularly on the definition of DRE and its consequences on treatment, Quality of Life (QoL), and autonomy of PwE. Most of the items, however, did not reach a consensus and highlighted the lack of a shared univocal view on some topics, such as accessibility to care throughout the country and the role of emerging tools such as telemedicine, narrative medicine, and digital devices. In many cases, the two panels expressed different views on the statements. The results outlined many fields of possible intervention, such as the need for educational initiatives targeted at physicians and PwE - for example, regarding telemedicine, digital devices, and narrative medicine - as well as the spread of better knowledge about epilepsy among the general population, in order to reduce epilepsy stigma. Institutions, moreover, could take a cue from this survey to develop facilities aimed at enhancing PwE's autonomy and promoting more equal access to care throughout the country.

Do changes in SSEP amplitude over time predict the outcome of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest?

AIM: To assess if the amplitude of the N20 wave (N20Amp) of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) changes between 12-24 h and 72 h from the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after cardiac arrest and if an N20Amp decrease predicts poor neurological outcome (CPC 3-5) at six months. SETTING: Retrospective analysis of the ProNeCA multicentre prognostication study dataset. (NCT03849911). METHODS: In adult comatose cardiac arrest survivors whose SSEPs were recorded at both 12-24 h and 72 h after ROSC, we measured the median N20Amp at each timepoint and the individual change in N20Amp across the two timepoints. We identified their cutoffs for predicting poor outcome with 0% false positive rate (FPR) and compared their sensitivities. RESULTS: We included 236 patients. The median [IQR] N20Amp increased from 1.90 [0.78-4.22] µV to 2.86 [1.52-5.10] µV between 12-24 h and 72 h (p = 0.0019). The N20Amp cutoff for 0% FPR increased from 0.6 µV at 12-24 h to 1.23 µV at 72 h, and its sensitivity increased from 56[48-64]% to 71[63-77]%. Between 12-24 h and 72 h, an N20Amp decrease > 53% predicted poor outcome with 0[0-5]% FPR and 26[19-35]% sensitivity. Its combination with an N20Amp < 1.23 µV at 72 h increased sensitivity by 1% to 72[64-79]%. CONCLUSION: In comatose cardiac arrest survivors, the median N20Amp and its cutoff for predicting poor neurological outcome increase between 12-24 and 72 h after ROSC. An N20Amp decrease greater than 53% between these two timepoints predicts poor outcome with 0% FPR, confirming the unfavourable prognostic signal of a low N20Amp at 72 h.

Brivaracetam as Early Add-On Treatment in Patients with Focal Seizures: A Retrospective, Multicenter, Real-World Study.

INTRODUCTION: In randomized controlled trials, add-on brivaracetam (BRV) reduced seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Most real-world research on BRV has focused on refractory epilepsy. The aim of this analysis was to assess the 12-month effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive BRV when used as early or late adjunctive treatment in patients included in the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk Study (BRIVAFIRST). METHODS: BRIVAFIRST was a 12-month retrospective, multicenter study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive BRV. Effectiveness outcomes included the rates of sustained seizure response, sustained seizure freedom, and treatment discontinuation. Safety and tolerability outcomes included the rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) and the incidence of AEs. Data were compared for patients treated with add-on BRV after 1-2 (early add-on) and ≥ 3 (late add-on) prior antiseizure medications. RESULTS: A total of 1029 patients with focal epilepsy were included in the study, of whom 176 (17.1%) received BRV as early add-on treatment. The median daily dose of BRV at 12 months was 125 (100-200) mg in the early add-on group and 200 (100-200) in the late add-on group (p < 0.001). Sustained seizure response was reached by 97/161 (60.3%) of patients in the early add-on group and 286/833 (34.3%) of patients in the late add-on group (p < 0.001). Sustained seizure freedom was achieved by 51/161 (31.7%) of patients in the early add-on group and 91/833 (10.9%) of patients in the late add-on group (p < 0.001). During the 1-year study period, 29 (16.5%) patients in the early add-on group and 241 (28.3%) in the late add-on group discontinued BRV (p = 0.001). Adverse events were reported by 38.7% and 28.5% (p = 0.017) of patients who received BRV as early and late add-on treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION: Brivaracetam was effective and well tolerated both as first add-on and late adjunctive treatment in patients with focal epilepsy.

Levetiracetam Modulates EEG Microstates in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy.

To determine the effects of Levetiracetam (LEV) therapy using EEG microstates analysis in a population of newly diagnosed Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE) patients. We hypothesized that the impact of LEV therapy on the electrical activity of the brain can be globally explored using EEG microstates. Twenty-seven patients with TLE were examined. We performed resting-state microstate EEG analysis and compared microstate metrics between the EEG performed at baseline (EEGpre) and after 3 months of LEV therapy (EEGpost). The microstates A, B, C and D emerged as the most stable. LEV induced a reduction of microstate B and D mean duration and occurrence per second (p < 0.01). Additionally, LEV treatment increased the directional predominance of microstate A to C and microstate B to D (p = 0.01). LEV treatment induces a modulation of resting-state EEG microstates in newly diagnosed TLE patients. Microstates analysis has the potential to identify a neurophysiological indicator of LEV therapeutic activity. This study of EEG microstates in people with epilepsy opens an interesting path to identify potential LEV activity biomarkers that may involve increased neuronal inhibition of the epileptic network.

The 50th anniversary of the Italian League against epilepsy (Lega Italiana Contro l'Epilessia).

This article was prepared to outline the article collection submitted on behalf of Lega Italiana Contro l'Epilepsia, or LICE, for the 50th anniversary of the founding of the ILAE Italian Chapter, and provides a brief summary of the history, with its landmark achievements and challenges. LICE is a multidisciplinary, inclusive, educational, informative and multifaceted organization. Initially in 1955 and then formally in 1972, LICE was born in Milano, with the mission to devote itself to people suffering with epilepsy and by promoting appropriate treatment and care, integration into society, to promote and pursue all kinds of activities designed to achieve those aims. The LICE is currently composed of more than 1000 members including neurologists, pediatric neurologists, neurosurgeons, neurophysiologists, and neuropsychologists who function throughout Italy dealing mainly or exclusively with the diagnosis and treatment of people with epilepsy.

Sustained seizure freedom with adjunctive brivaracetam in patients with focal onset seizures.

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.

Adjunctive Brivaracetam in Older Patients with Focal Seizures: Evidence from the BRIVAracetam add­on First Italian netwoRk Study (BRIVAFIRST).

BACKGROUND: The management of epilepsy in older adults has become part of daily practice because of an aging population. Older patients with epilepsy represent a distinct and more vulnerable clinical group as compared with younger patients, and they are generally under-represented in randomized placebo-controlled trials. Real-world studies can therefore be a useful complement to characterize the drug's profile. Brivaracetam is a rationally developed compound characterized by high-affinity binding to synaptic vesicle protein 2A and approved as adjunctive therapy for focal seizures in adults with epilepsy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the 12-month effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in older patients (≥65 years of age) with epilepsy treated in a real-world setting. METHODS: The BRIVAFIRST (BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy) was a 12-month retrospective multicenter study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive brivaracetam. Effectiveness outcomes included the rates of seizure response (≥50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), seizure freedom, and treatment discontinuation. Safety and tolerability outcomes included the rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events and the incidence of adverse events. Data were compared for patients aged ≥65 years of age ('older') vs those aged <65 years ('younger'). RESULTS: There were 1029 patients with focal epilepsy included in the study, of whom 111 (10.8%) were aged ≥65 years. The median daily dose of brivaracetam at 3 months was 100 [interquartile range, 100-175] mg in the older group and 100 [100-200] mg in the younger group (p = 0.036); it was 150 [100-200] mg in both groups either at 6 months (p = 0.095) or 12 months (p = 0.140). At 12 months, 49 (44.1%) older and 334 (36.4%) younger patients had a reduction in their baseline seizure frequency by at least 50% (p = 0.110), and the seizure freedom rates were 35/111 (31.5%) and 134/918 (14.6%) in older and younger groups, respectively (p < 0.001). During the 1-year study period, 20 (18.0%) patients in the older group and 245 (26.7%) patients in the younger group discontinued brivaracetam (p = 0.048). Treatment withdrawal because of insufficient efficacy was less common in older than younger patients [older: n = 7 (6.3%), younger: n = 152 (16.6%); p = 0.005]. Adverse events were reported by 24.2% of older patients and 30.8% of younger patients (p = 0.185); the most common adverse events were somnolence, nervousness and/or agitation, vertigo, and fatigue in both study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive brivaracetam was efficacious, had good tolerability, and no new or unexpected safety signals emerged when used to treat older patients with uncontrolled focal seizures in clinical practice. Adjunctive brivaracetam can be a suitable therapeutic option in this special population.

Brivaracetam as add-on treatment in patients with post-stroke epilepsy: real-world data from the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk Study (BRIVAFIRST).

OBJECTIVE: Post-stroke epilepsy (PSE) is one of the most common causes of acquired epilepsy and accounts for about 10-15% of all newly diagnosed epilepsy cases. However, evidence about the clinical profile of antiseizure medications in the PSE setting is currently limited. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a rationally developed compound characterized by high-affinity binding to synaptic vesicle protein 2A. The aim of this study was to assess the 12-month effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive BRV in patients with PSE treated in a real-world setting. METHODS: This was a subgroup analysis of patients with PSE included in the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk Study (BRIVAFIRST). The BRIVAFIRST was a 12-month retrospective, multicentre study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive BRV. Effectiveness outcomes included the rates of seizure response (≥50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), seizure-freedom, and treatment discontinuation. Safety and tolerability outcomes included the rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) and the incidence of AEs. RESULTS: Patients with PSE included in the BRIVAFIRST were 75 and had a median age of 57 (interquartile range, 42-66) years. The median daily doses of BRV at 3, 6, and 12 months from starting treatment were 100 (100-150) mg, 125 (100-200) mg and 100 (100-200) mg, respectively. At 12 months, 32 (42.7%) patients had a reduction in their baseline seizure frequency by at least 50%, and the seizure freedom rates was 26/75 (34.7%). During the 1-year study period, 10 (13.3%) patients discontinued BRV. The reasons of treatment withdrawal were insufficient efficacy in 6 (8.0%) patients and poor tolerability in 4 (5.3%) patients. Adverse events were reported by 13 (20.3%) patients and were rated as mild in 84.6% and moderate in 15.4% of cases. SIGNIFICANCE: Adjunctive BRV was efficacious and generally well-tolerated when used in patients with PSE in clinical practice. Adjunctive BRV can be a suitable therapeutic option for patients with PSE.

Use of cenobamate for the treatment of focal epilepsy: an Italian expert opinion paper.

INTRODUCTION: Cenobamate is a new antiseizure medication (ASM) recently introduced in the USA for the treatment of adults with focal-onset seizures. In March 2021, the European Commission authorized its use for the adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization (focal seizures with or without progression to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, according to current ILAE terminology) in adults with epilepsy not adequately controlled despite the treatment with at least two ASMs. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the mechanism of action, efficacy, and safety of Cenobamate. The authors provide their expert opinions on the use of this drug. EXPERT OPINION: The aim of this paper is to report on the Italian preliminary experience with the use of cenobamate, focusing on treatment goals, optimal dosing and titration schedules, strategies to minimize adverse effects, and identification of suitable candidates for treatment. There was agreement that slow titration may improve tolerability, and that clinically significant benefit can be achieved in many patients at relatively low doses. A favorable response to relatively low doses of cenobamate could be an early predictor of ultimate responsiveness. Overall, cenobamate is a welcome new treatment for adults with focal seizures resistant to conventional ASMs.

Machine learning for predicting levetiracetam treatment response in temporal lobe epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the predictive power for seizure-freedom of 19-channels EEG, measured both before and after three months the initiation of the use of Levetiracetam (LEV), in a cohort of people after a new diagnosis of temporal-lobe epilepsy (TLE) using a machine-learning approach. METHODS: Twenty-three individuals with TLE were examined. We dichotomized clinical outcome into seizure-free (SF) and non-seizure-free (NSF) after two years of LEV. EEG effective power in different frequency bands was compared using baseline EEG (T0) and the EEG after three months of LEV therapy (T1) between SF and NSF patients. Partial Least Square (PLS) analysis was used to test and validate the prediction of the model for clinical outcome. RESULTS: A total of 152 features were extracted from the EEG recordings. When considering only the features calculated at T1, a predictive power for seizure-freedom (AUC = 0.750) was obtained. When employing both T0 and T1 features, an AUC = 0.800 was obtained. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a proof-of-concept pipeline for predicting the clinical response to anti-seizure medications in people with epilepsy. SIGNIFICANCE: Future studies may benefit from the pipeline proposed in this study in order to develop a model that can match each patient to the most effective anti-seizure medication.

Adjunctive Brivaracetam in Focal Epilepsy: Real-World Evidence from the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy (BRIVAFIRST).

BACKGROUND: In randomized controlled trials, add-on brivaracetam (BRV) reduced seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Studies performed in a naturalistic setting are a useful complement to characterize the drug profile. OBJECTIVE: This multicentre study assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive BRV in a large population of patients with focal epilepsy in the context of real-world clinical practice. METHODS: The BRIVAFIRST (BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy) was a retrospective, multicentre study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive BRV. Patients with focal epilepsy and 12-month follow-up were considered. Main outcomes included the rates of seizure-freedom, seizure response (≥ 50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), and treatment discontinuation. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was also considered. Analyses by levetiracetam (LEV) status and concomitant use of strong enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EiASMs) and sodium channel blockers (SCBs) were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1029 patients with a median age of 45 years (33-56) was included. At 12 months, 169 (16.4%) patients were seizure-free and 383 (37.2%) were seizure responders. The rate of seizure freedom was 22.3% in LEV-naive patients, 7.1% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to insufficient efficacy, and 31.2% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to AEs (p < 0.001); the corresponding values for ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction were 47.9%, 29.7%, and 42.8% (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in seizure freedom and seizure response rates by use of strong EiASMs. The rates of seizure freedom (20.0% vs. 16.6%;  p = 0.341) and seizure response (39.7% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.006) were higher in patients receiving SCBs than those not receiving SCBs; 265 (25.8%) patients discontinued BRV. AEs were reported by 30.1% of patients, and were less common in patients treated with BRV and concomitant SCBs than those not treated with SCBs (28.9% vs. 39.8%; p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: The BRIVAFIRST provided real-world evidence on the effectiveness of BRV in patients with focal epilepsy irrespective of LEV history and concomitant ASMs, and suggested favourable therapeutic combinations.