{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Efficacy of perampanel by etiology in Japanese patients with epilepsy-subpopulation analysis of a prospective post-marketing observational study.
{Author}: Nakai M;Nishimoto S;Higashibeppu Y;Inoue Y;
{Journal}: Epilepsia Open
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Jul 4
{Factor}: 4.026
{DOI}: 10.1002/epi4.13002
{Abstract}: <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>To examine the efficacy and safety of perampanel (PER) in patients with post-stroke epilepsy (PSE), brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE), and post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE) using Japanese real-world data.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>The prospective post-marketing observational study included patients with focal seizures with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures who received PER combination therapy. The observation period was 24 or 52 weeks after the initial PER administration. The safety and efficacy analysis included 3716 and 3272 patients, respectively. This post hoc analysis examined responder rate (50% reduction in seizure frequency), seizure-free rate (proportion of patients who achieved seizure-free), and safety in patients included in the post-marketing study who had PSE, BTRE, and PTE in the 4 weeks prior to the last observation.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Overall, 402, 272, and 186 patients were included in the PSE, BTRE, and PTE subpopulations, and 2867 controls in the "Other" population (etiologies other than PSE, BTRE, or PTE). Mean modal dose (the most frequently administered dose) values at 52 weeks were 3.38, 3.36, 3.64, and 4.04 mg/day for PSE, BTRE, PTE, and "Other," respectively; PER retention rates were 56.2%, 54.0%, 52.6%, and 59.7%, respectively. Responder rates (% [95% confidence interval]) were 82% (76.3%-86.5%), 78% (70.8%-83.7%), 67% (56.8%-75.6%), and 50% (47.9%-52.7%) for PSE, BTRE, PTE, and "Other," respectively, and seizure-free rates were 71% (64.5%-76.5%), 62% (54.1%-69.0%), 50% (40.6%-60.4%), and 28% (25.8%-30.1%), respectively. Adverse drug reactions tended to occur less frequently in the PSE (14.7%), BTRE (16.5%), and PTE (16.7%) subpopulations than in the "Other" population (26.3%).<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>In real-world clinical conditions, efficacy and tolerability for PER combination therapy were observed at low PER doses for the PSE, BTRE, and PTE subpopulations.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>To find out how well the medication perampanel works and whether it is safe for people who have epilepsy after having had a stroke, brain tumor, or head injury, we used information from real-life medical situations in Japan. We looked at the data of about 3700 Japanese patients with epilepsy who were treated with perampanel. We found that perampanel was used at lower doses and better at controlling seizures, and had fewer side effects for patients with epilepsy caused by these etiologies than the control group.