Time to prerandomization seizure count design sufficiently assessed the safety and tolerability of perampanel for the treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Static assignment of participants in randomized clinical trials to placebo or ineffective treatment confers risk from continued seizures. An alternative trial design of time to exceed prerandomization monthly seizure count (T-PSC) has replicated the efficacy conclusions of traditionally designed trials, with shorter exposure to placebo and ineffective treatment. Trials aim to evaluate efficacy as well as safety and tolerability; therefore, we evaluated whether this T-PSC design also could replicate the trial's safety and tolerability conclusions. METHODS: We retrospectively applied the T-PSC design to analyze treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) from a blinded, placebo-controlled trial of perampanel for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (NCT01393743). The safety analysis set consisted of 81 and 82 participants randomized to perampanel and placebo arms, respectively. We evaluated the incidences of TEAEs, treatment-related TEAEs, serious TEAEs, and TEAEs of special interest that occurred before T-PSC relative to those observed during the full-length trial. RESULTS: Of the 67 and 59 participants who experienced TEAEs in the perampanel and placebo arms during full-length trial, 66 (99%) and 54 (92%) participants experienced TEAEs with onset occurring before T-PSC, respectively. When limited to treatment-related TEAEs, 55 of 56 (98%) and 32 of 37 (86%) participants reported treatment-related TEAEs that occurred before T-PSC in the perampanel and placebo arms, respectively. There were more TEAEs after T-PSC with placebo as compared to perampanel (Fisher exact odds ratio = 8.6, p = .035), which resulted in overestimation of the difference in TEAE rate. There was a numerical reduction in serious TEAEs (3/13 occurred after T-PSC, one in placebo and two in perampanel). SIGNIFICANCE: Almost all TEAEs occurred before T-PSC. More treatment-related TEAEs occurred after T-PSC for participants randomized to placebo than perampanel, which may be due to either a shorter T-PSC or delayed time to TEAE for placebo.

Time to exceed pre-randomization monthly seizure count for perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures: A potential clinical end point.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the exploratory time to exceed pre-randomization seizure count (T-PSC) in the determination of efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in generalized-onset epilepsy. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01393743), participants ≥12 years of age with treatment-resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy were randomized to receive placebo or adjunctive perampanel (≤8 mg/day) across a 17-week double-blind treatment phase (4-week titration; 13-week maintenance). We evaluated the pre-planned exploratory end point of the T-PSC using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. We also re-evaluated the correspondence of the primary end points of median percent seizure frequency change (MPC) and 50% responder rate (50RR) calculated at T-PSC and at the end of the trial. RESULTS: The exploratory end point of median T-PSC on placebo was 43 days and >120 days on perampanel (log-rank p < .001). The primary end points calculated at T-PSC did not differ significantly from the end points at the end of the trial (MPC -31% vs -42% at T-PSC; 50RR 32% vs 51% at T-PSC). After T-PSC was reached, participants had a median (interquartile range) of 5 (3-13) additional seizures on placebo and 5 (2-10) on perampanel. SIGNIFICANCE: The exploratory end point of T-PSC demonstrated the effectiveness of perampanel despite a shorter duration of monitoring. The seizures that occurred after T-PSC did not influence the conclusions of the trial; therefore, T-PSC may be a viable alternative to traditional trial end points that reduces the risk to participants.

Sustained seizure freedom with adjunctive perampanel in patients with convulsive seizures: Post hoc analysis of open-label extension studies 307 and 332.

OBJECTIVE: Since increased mortality rates have been associated with convulsive seizures, it is important to achieve seizure control in these patients. Here, we report post hoc analyses to assess long-term seizure-freedom rates with adjunctive perampanel in patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with refractory focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) who participated in open-label extension (OLEx) studies. METHODS: Patients with focal-onset seizures, with/without FBTCS, who completed double-blind, Phase III Studies 304, 305, or 306 could enter OLEx Study 307 (16-week blinded Conversion; 256-week Maintenance). Patients with GTCS who completed the double-blind phase of Study 332 could enter the OLEx Phase (6-week blinded Conversion; 136-week Maintenance). Maximum perampanel dose: 12 mg/day. Seizure-freedom rates for up to 24 months were assessed in perampanel-treated patients who achieved seizure freedom during the double-blind studies to determine if their seizure-free status was maintained during the OLEx. In addition, to ensure any patients who only achieved seizure freedom during the OLEx were captured, seizure-freedom rates were also assessed in all patients who achieved and maintained a seizure-free status for a period of at least six consecutive months at any time during the double-blind and/or OLEx studies; some of these patients may have received placebo during the double-blind study but only their time on perampanel is included in the seizure-free analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictive factors for achieving seizure freedom for at least 6 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 53.8% (n = 42/78) of patients who received perampanel and were FBTCS free during the double-blind studies remained seizure free for up to 24 months during Study 307, and 31.6% (n = 6/19) of patients who were GTCS free during the double-blind phase of Study 332 remained seizure free for up to 24 months during the OLEx Phase. Over 40% (FBTCS, 41.5% [n = 197/475]; GTCS, 52.9% [n = 73/138]) of patients were seizure free for a period of at least six consecutive months. Multivariate analysis showed that the best predictors of achieving seizure freedom from FBTCS for at least 6 months were lower baseline seizure frequency (p = 0.0014) and absence of enzyme-inducing anti-seizure medications at baseline (p = 0.0056); multivariate analysis was not conducted for GTCS since only one variable was identified as a significant predictor of seizure freedom in the univariate analysis (lower baseline seizure frequency). Perampanel was generally well tolerated with no new safety signals identified. The most common TEAE was dizziness. For both seizure types, 10% or fewer seizure-free patients discontinued perampanel due to TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that adjunctive perampanel may be a suitable long-term treatment option for patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with convulsive seizures to achieve and maintain seizure freedom.

A post-approval observational study to evaluate the safety and tolerability of perampanel as an add-on therapy in adolescent, adult, and elderly patients with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Perampanel is a once-daily oral anti-seizure medication for focal-onset seizures, with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS), and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Study 402 (NCT02033902) collected safety information on clinically important treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) from real-world clinical practice in patients aged ≥12 years with refractory epilepsy who were receiving perampanel as an add-on therapy. METHODS: Study 402 was a multicenter, observational, 52-week cohort study conducted in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Israel, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Safety data were gathered prospectively from patients at clinic visits. The primary endpoint was the incidence of clinically important TEAEs defined as dizziness; blurred vision; somnolence; aggression; balance disorders (including ataxia and falls); weight gain; suicidality; drug abuse, misuse, dependence, and withdrawal; skin photosensitivity; and unintended pregnancy while taking levonorgestrel-containing contraceptives. Off-label use of perampanel and outcomes associated with any suspected drug-drug interaction were also monitored and recorded. Secondary endpoints included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Clinical Global Impression of Change. RESULTS: Of 483 patients in the Safety Analysis Set, mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 38.3 (15.1) years, 48.4% were female, mean (SD) time since diagnosis was 23 (14.8) years, 56.5% had focal impaired awareness seizures, and 48.7% had FBTCS. Overall, 243 (49.3%) patients treated with perampanel completed the study and 227 (46.0%) patients discontinued. The most common primary reason for discontinuation was adverse events (n = 130 [26.4%]). A total of 301 (62.3%) patients reported at least one TEAE, of which 45 (15.0%) patients had severe TEAEs and 256 (85.0%) patients had TEAEs judged as mild to moderate in severity. Overall, 51 (10.6%) patients had serious TEAEs, including two deaths that were judged as not related to perampanel, and 136 (28.2%) patients experienced a TEAE that led to treatment discontinuation. Clinically important TEAEs were reported by 153 (31.7%) patients, with the most common being dizziness (13.9%), balance disorders (5.6%), aggression (5.4%), and weight gain (5.4%). In general, the frequencies of clinically important TEAEs were lower in this study compared with previous interventional clinical studies, except for the incidence of suicidality (2.1% vs 1.0%) and aggression (5.4% vs 5.1%). Mean total HADS scores were similar at the end of the study compared with baseline; at the end of treatment, most (>60%) patients had no shift in HADS score category; ∼15% of patients moved to a worse category vs baseline and ∼20% of patients moved to an improved category vs baseline for both anxiety and depression. Based on investigator assessment, disease severity was improved in 185/415 (44.6%) patients. A subanalysis in elderly patients aged ≥65 years showed similar results to the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The data from this observational study are consistent with the known safety profile of perampanel derived from previous interventional phase II and III clinical studies. No unusual or unexpected TEAEs were observed in this real-world clinical practice setting.

Health-related quality of life in pediatric patients with partial onset seizures or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures receiving adjunctive perampanel.

RATIONALE: Study 311 (E2007-G000-311; NCT02849626) was a Phase 3, multicenter, open-label single-arm study of adjunctive perampanel oral suspension in pediatric patients (aged 4 to <12 years) with partial-onset seizures (POS) (with/without secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures [SGTCS]) or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was an exploratory endpoint initially analyzed through simple descriptive summaries. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to provide a more thorough assessment of HRQoL. METHODS: This analysis focused on EQ-5D-Y data collected at Baseline, Week 23, and Week 52. Individual dimensions, visual analog scale (VAS) and summed misery index (MI) were evaluated at all visits and compared by seizure type (POS versus SGTCS versus PGTCS), age (4 to <7 versus 7 to <12), and use of concomitant enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) (yes versus no). Paretian Classification of Health Change (PCHC) analysis summarized the proportion of patients who showed improvement or deterioration in HRQoL. Waterfall plots assessed changes in EQ-5D-Y scores by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and by reduction in seizure frequency. Health state utility values associated with differing seizure frequency states were estimated using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen patients completed EQ-5D-Y at relevant study visits (Seizure type: POS n = 84 [of which 21 had SGTCS], PGTCS n = 31; Age: 4 to <7 years n = 30, 7 to <12 years n = 85; Concomitant EIAEDs: Yes n = 35, No n = 80). Completion rates out of those expected to complete EQ-5D-Y were high at both timepoints (84.4% at Week 23 and 97.2% at Week 52). Overall, VAS/MI remained stable over time (did not exceed minimal important difference); this was similar according to seizure type, age, and EIAED usage. In patients with 'no problems' on any EQ-5D-Y dimension at Baseline, nearly all retained their full health at Week 23 (94.7%), and all retained it at Week 52 (100.0%). PCHC analysis showed fewer patients with POS experienced deterioration in EQ-5D-Y than patients with PGTCS at Week 23 (24.1% versus 42.1%). Not experiencing a TEAE, or remaining seizure-free, was associated with improvements in VAS score at Week 23 compared to those experiencing TEAEs or seizures, respectively. Health state utility values (HSUVs) were estimated as follows: seizure free (LS Mean 0.914 [95% CIs 0.587, 1.240]), ≥1 seizure per year (0.620 [0.506, 0.734]), ≥1 seizure per month (0.596 [0.338, 0.855]), ≥1 seizure per week (0.284 [-0.014, 0.582]). CONCLUSIONS: An in-depth analysis of EQ-5D-Y data allowed for a more nuanced exploration of HRQoL than previous descriptive summaries. Our findings provide evidence that perampanel as adjunctive therapy did not result in deterioration of patient HRQoL. The association between TEAEs or remaining seizure-free and HRQoL warrants further exploration. Increasing seizure frequency was associated with decreasing HSUVs; these can inform cost-effectiveness modeling of perampanel and other therapies aiming to reduce seizure frequency in pediatric patients.

Open-label study to investigate the safety and efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients (4 to <12 years) with inadequately controlled focal seizures or generalized tonic-clonic seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Study 311 (NCT02849626) was a global, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study that assessed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of once-daily adjunctive perampanel oral suspension in pediatric patients (aged 4 to <12 years) with focal seizures (FS) (with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures [FBTCS]) or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). METHODS: In the 311 Core Study, a 4-week Pre-treatment Period (Screening/Baseline) preceded a 23-week Treatment Period (11-week Titration; 12-week Maintenance) and 4-week Follow-up. Endpoints included safety/tolerability (primary endpoint), median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days from Baseline (Treatment Period), and 50% responder and seizure-freedom rates (Maintenance Period). Patients were stratified by age (4 to <7; 7 to <12 years) and concomitant enzyme-inducing anti-seizure drug (EIASD) use. RESULTS: One hundred eighty patients were enrolled (FS, n = 149; FBTCS, n = 54; GTCS, n = 31). The Core Study was completed by 146 patients (81%); the most common primary reason for discontinuation was adverse event (AE) (n = 14 [8%]). Mean (standard deviation) daily perampanel dose was 7.0 (2.6) mg/day and median (interquartile range) duration of exposure was 22.9 (2.0) weeks. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs; 89%) was similar between patients with FS (with/without FBTCS) and GTCS. The most common TEAEs were somnolence (26%) and nasopharyngitis (19%). There were no clinically important changes observed for cognitive function, laboratory, or electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters or vital signs. Median percent reductions in seizure frequency per 28 days from Baseline were as follows: 40% (FS), 59% (FBTCS), and 69% (GTCS). Corresponding 50% responder and seizure-freedom rates were as follows: FS, 47% and 12%; FBTCS, 65% and 19%; and GTCS, 64% and 55%, respectively. Improvements in response/seizure frequency from Baseline were seen regardless of age or concomitant EIASD use. SIGNIFICANCE: Results from the 311 Core Study suggest that daily oral doses of adjunctive perampanel are generally safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in children age 4 to <12 years with FS (with/without FBTCS) or GTCS.

Perampanel as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy in pediatric and adult patients with epilepsy: the first United States-based phase IV open-label ELEVATE study.

ELEVATE (Study 410; NCT03288129) is the first prospective, multicenter, open-label, Phase IV study of perampanel as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy in patients aged ≥ 4 years with focal-onset seizures or generalized tonic-clonic seizures in the United States. The study included Screening, Titration (≤ 13 weeks), Maintenance (39 weeks), and Follow-up (4 weeks) Periods. During Titration, perampanel was initiated at 2 mg/day and up-titrated to 4 mg/day at Week 3. Depending on response and tolerability, optional up-titrations to a maximum of 12 mg/day occurred. The primary endpoint was retention rate; additional endpoints included seizure-freedom rate, 50% responder rate, and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). At baseline, 10 (18.5%) patients were assigned to the monotherapy group and 44 (81.5%) patients to the first adjunctive therapy group. However, due to the addition of an anti-seizure medication along with perampanel on the first day of treatment, one patient was excluded from the monotherapy subgroup analyses. The mean perampanel exposure duration was 39.8 weeks and 32 (59.3%) patients completed the study. Retention rate at 12 months (or study completion) was 63.0% (monotherapy, 77.8%; first adjunctive therapy, 59.1%). Seizure-freedom rate during the Maintenance Period was 32.7% (monotherapy, 44.4%; first adjunctive therapy, 29.5%) and the 50% responder rate was 78.7% (monotherapy, 85.7%; first adjunctive therapy, 76.9%). TEAEs and serious TEAEs were reported by 88.9% (n = 48/54) and 7.4% (n = 4/54) of patients, respectively. Overall, the efficacy and safety of perampanel as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy support the use of perampanel as early-line treatment for epilepsy.

A controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin in multifocal motor neuropathy.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has become the standard treatment for multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) based on limited data. To critically assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 10% liquid IVIG (IVIG), 44 adults with MMN were randomized 1 : 1 to either double-blind treatment of IVIG followed by placebo for 12 weeks each or the reverse. Open-label IVIG was administered for 12 weeks at the beginning and end of the study for clinical stabilization, and between double-blinded periods to prevent a carry-over effect. To avoid potential worsening, switching to open-label IVIG was permitted if deterioration occurred during blinded treatment. Mean maximal grip strength of the more affected hand declined 31.38% during placebo and increased 3.75% during IVIG (p = 0.005). In 35.7% of participants, Guy's Neurological Disability scores for upper limbs worsened during placebo and not during IVIG, whereas the converse was true in 11.9% (p = 0.021). Sixty-nine percent (69.0%) switched prematurely from placebo to open-label IVIG and 2.4% switched from blinded to open-label IVIG (p < 0.001). One serious adverse reaction (pulmonary embolism) and 100 non-serious reactions (69 mild, 20 moderate, and 11 severe) to IVIG occurred. IVIG was effective in improving disability and muscle strength, and was safe and well tolerated in adults with MMN.

Open-label study to investigate the safety and efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in pediatric patients (aged 4 to <12 years) with inadequately controlled focal-onset seizures: Japanese subgroup analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel in a Japanese subpopulation of Study 311 (NCT02849626), which was a global, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study of children (aged 4 to <12 years) with inadequately controlled focal-onset seizures (FOS), with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). METHODS: Study 311 comprised a Core Study, Extension A, and Extension B; this report focuses on the Japanese patient subgroup in the Core Study only. In the Core Study, Japanese patients (FOS only) received adjunctive perampanel ≤12 mg/day in a 23-week Treatment Phase. Endpoints included safety/tolerability (primary) and median percent change in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline. Patients were stratified by age and concomitant enzyme-inducing anti-seizure medication (EIASM) use. RESULTS: Of 65 enrolled Japanese patients, 56 completed the Core Study and nine withdrew. The most common reason for discontinuation was adverse events (AEs) (n = 4 [6.2%]). The mean (standard deviation) daily dose of perampanel in Japanese FOS patients was 5.8 (2.2) mg/day. During the Core Study, treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported by 89% of Japanese patients, most commonly nasopharyngitis (28%) and somnolence (28%). The median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline was 37% and the lower limit of the 95% CI was greater than 10.5%, satisfying the pre-defined efficacy criteria. Perampanel was effective regardless of age or concomitant EIASM use. CONCLUSION: Perampanel as adjunctive therapy is generally safe, well-tolerated, and efficacious in Japanese children aged 4 to <12 years with FOS (with/without FBTCS).

Intravenous perampanel as an alternative to the oral formulations in Japanese patients with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Perampanel is an oral anti-seizure medication, which is approved in Japan for focal-onset seizures, with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, as monotherapy/adjunctive therapy in patients aged 4 years and older. Treatment for generalized tonic-clonic seizures as adjunctive therapy in patients aged 12 years and older is approved as well. We evaluated the feasibility of intravenous (IV) administration of perampanel as an alternative to oral administration. METHODS: Study 240 (NCT03754582) was an uncontrolled, open-label study of IV perampanel, conducted in 21 Japanese patients with epilepsy who received a stable dose of 8-12 mg/day of oral perampanel. Patients received 30-minute IV infusions at equivalent daily doses of oral perampanel for 4 days, then were switched back to oral perampanel. Safety, tolerability, plasma concentration, and maintenance of efficacy throughout the transition between IV and oral dosing of perampanel were assessed. As supportive data, a subgroup analysis was also conducted using data from healthy Japanese subjects (n = 18) who were enrolled in Study 050 (NCT03376997) investigating the pharmacokinetics and safety of IV perampanel in healthy subjects who received an IV infusion (30-, 60-, or 90-minute) of perampanel 12 mg and a single oral administration of perampanel 12-mg tablet. RESULTS: In Study 240, the transition between 30-minute IV and oral perampanel dosing was associated with a ≤1.4-fold increase in the mean change in maximum observed concentration of perampanel. Seizure outcomes demonstrated no considerable changes in efficacy before, during, or after 30-minute IV dosing of perampanel. The safety profiles were similar between IV and oral formulations. In Study 050, the pharmacokinetics of 30- or 60-minute IV infusion of perampanel further support the interchangeability between oral and IV formulations in the Japanese subjects. SIGNIFICANCE: These results support that 30-minute IV perampanel may be a potential short-term alternative to oral formulations for patients with epilepsy.

Intravenous Perampanel as an Interchangeable Alternative to Oral Perampanel: A Randomized, Crossover, Phase I Pharmacokinetic and Safety Study.

Intravenous (IV) drug administration enables treatment of epilepsy when oral administration is temporarily not feasible. Perampanel is a once-daily antiseizure medication currently available as oral formulations. Study 050 (NCT03376997) was an open-label, randomized, single-dose, crossover study to evaluate the interchangeability of oral and IV perampanel in healthy subjects (N = 48). Bioequivalence of single 12-mg doses of IV (30-, 60-, or 90-minute infusion) and oral perampanel, ≥6 weeks apart, was assessed. Analyses indicated bioequivalence of area under the plasma concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity for 30- and 60-minute IV infusions and oral perampanel doses (geometric mean ratio [90% confidence interval], 0.93 [0.84-1.02] and 1.03 [0.97-1.09], respectively); however, IV maximum observed drug concentration (Cmax ) values were 1.35- to 1.61-fold higher than Cmax . Simulated plasma concentration-time profiles using pooled pharmacokinetic data further supported oral and IV perampanel interchangeability in two scenarios: 12-mg per day IV dosing during a temporary 7-day switch from oral steady-state maintenance therapy, and treatment initiation with 2-mg perampanel. Thirty-four (70.8%) subjects experienced treatment-related adverse events. The IV perampanel safety profile was similar to that of oral perampanel without new safety concerns. Perampanel IV infusions may be a suitable temporary alternative to oral perampanel for treatment maintenance and/or initiation.

Experience of perampanel monotherapy beyond initial titration to achieve seizure freedom in patients with focal-onset seizures with newly diagnosed or currently untreated recurrent epilepsy: A post hoc analysis of the open-label Study 342 (FREEDOM).

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis evaluated whether continued treatment with perampanel monotherapy beyond initial titration may be appropriate for patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with currently untreated epilepsy to achieve seizure freedom with an effective dose. METHODS: Study 342 (NCT03201900; FREEDOM) is a single-arm, open-label, Phase III study of perampanel monotherapy. Patients aged ≥12 years with untreated FOS received perampanel 4 mg/d in a 32-week Treatment Phase (6-week Titration and 26-week Maintenance Periods); in case of seizure(s) during Maintenance Period, patients could enter a 30-week Treatment Phase (4-week Titration and 26-week Maintenance Periods) to be up-titrated to perampanel 8 mg/d. The primary endpoint was seizure-freedom rate during Maintenance Period in the modified Intent-to-Treat (mITT) Analysis Set (patients who had ≥1 post-dose efficacy measurement during Maintenance Period); safety was monitored. This analysis of 4-mg/d efficacy data assessed the proportion of patients achieving seizure freedom during the Maintenance Period (responders) relative to patients with an early/later response (depending on seizure status during the Titration Period). RESULTS: In the mITT population (n = 73), 46 patients were 4-mg/d responders; of whom, 37 (80.4%) were early responders and nine (19.6%) were later responders. The mean (standard deviation) percent reductions in FOS frequency from baseline at the end of the 4-mg/d Titration Period were 100.0% (0.0%; early responders) and 46.3% (97.3%; later responders). Among the 27 4-mg/d nonresponders, nine (33.3%) patients who had an early response experienced seizure(s) during the subsequent 4-mg/d Maintenance Period. Safety outcomes were similar, regardless of responder status, without new safety concerns. SIGNIFICANCE: Some patients with untreated FOS may benefit from continued treatment beyond initial titration of perampanel monotherapy to achieve seizure freedom, suggesting that it may not be appropriate to make treatment decisions to discontinue or switch from perampanel monotherapy solely based on seizure response before an effective dose has been reached.

Adjunctive perampanel and myoclonic and absence seizures: Post hoc analysis of data from study 332 in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy.

PURPOSE: This post hoc analysis assessed the effects of adjunctive perampanel on myoclonic and absence seizure outcomes in patients (aged ≥12 years) with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) and generalized tonic-clonic seizures during the double-blind (up to 8 mg/day) and open-label extension (OLEx; up to 12 mg/day) phases of Study 332. METHODS: Patients experiencing myoclonic and/or absence seizures during study baseline were included. Assessments for myoclonic and absence seizures included: median percent change in seizure frequency, number of seizure days and seizure-free days (all per 28 days), 50 % and 75 % responder rates, seizure-freedom rates, seizure worsening, and monitoring of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: During the double-blind phase, myoclonic and/or absence seizures were reported in 47/163 and 60/163 patients, respectively. Median percent reductions in seizure frequency per 28 days from study baseline were 52.5% and 24.5% (myoclonic seizures) and 7.6 % and 41.2 % (absence seizures) for placebo and perampanel, respectively; seizure-freedom rates were 13.0 % and 16.7 % (myoclonic seizures) and 12.1 % and 22.2 % (absence seizures), respectively. During the OLEx phase, 46/138 and 52/138 patients experienced myoclonic and/or absence seizures, respectively. Responses during the double-blind phase were maintained during long-term (>104 weeks) adjunctive perampanel treatment. The frequency/type of TEAEs was consistent with the known safety profile of perampanel. CONCLUSION: In this post hoc analysis, adjunctive perampanel was not associated with any overall worsening of absence seizures. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of adjunctive perampanel in IGE patients with myoclonic and/or absence seizures.

An international, multicenter, prospective study of a prothrombin complex concentrate, Prothromplex Total®, in anticoagulant reversal.

INTRODUCTION: Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) are a common treatment option for the reversal of oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). This study assessed efficacy and safety of Prothromplex Total®. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (≥18 years) with acquired prothrombin complex coagulation factor deficiency (international normalized ratio [INR] ≥ 2 at screening) due to oral VKAs, requiring reversal of anticoagulation, were treated with 25, 35, or 50 IU/kg BW PCC. After infusion, efficacy was assessed for 72 ± 4 hours. Adverse events (AEs) were captured for 15 days. RESULTS: Sixty-one subjects, 48 requiring interventional procedures and 13 with acute bleeds, received a single infusion of PCC. Of 59 subjects analyzed, all achieved normalization of INR (≤ 1.3) within 30 ± 5 minutes of infusion, demonstrating effective anticoagulant reversal. IVRs of factors II, VII, IX, and X ranged from 1.12-2.03 IU/dL:IU/kg. Median INRs remained between 1.00 and 1.18 for up to 6 hours. Overall efficacy of treatment was rated "excellent" for 60 subjects. Three AEs were deemed possibly related to treatment: 1 serious AE (SAE) of acute myocardial infarction (rated severe), 1 SAE of deep vein thrombosis (rated mild), and 1 AE of pyrexia (rated mild). Thrombotic adverse events (2/61, 3.3%) reported here are comparable to rates observed in other PCC studies. CONCLUSIONS: While there is a risk of thromboembolic events following treatment with PCC products, the number of events reported here was low and could have occurred without PCC treatment. The individualized, INR-based dosing of PCC used here for VKA anticoagulant reversal produces rapid normalization of INR to ≤ 1.3 within 30 minutes.