Focal-onset seizures

局灶性发作性癫痫
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    尽管使用抗癫痫药物(ASM)进行治疗,但仍有三分之一的癫痫患者将继续出现不受控制的癫痫发作。因此,需要开发新的ASM。Brivaracetam(BRV)是一种ASM,它是在一个主要的药物发现计划中开发的,旨在鉴定选择性,高亲和力突触囊泡蛋白2A(SV2A)配体,左乙拉西坦的靶分子。BRV与SV2A结合的亲和力比左乙拉西坦高15至30倍,选择性更高。BRV在癫痫动物模型中具有广谱抗癫痫活性,良好的药代动力学特征,很少有临床相关的药物-药物相互作用,和快速的大脑渗透。BRV可用于口服和静脉内制剂,并且可以在目标剂量下开始,无需滴定。三项关键III期试验(NCT00490035/NCT00464269/NCT01261325)证明了辅助BRV(50-200mg/天)治疗局灶性发作性癫痫的有效性和安全性,包括以前左乙拉西坦失败的患者。辅助BRV的有效性和安全性也在局灶性发作的成年亚洲患者中得到证实(NCT03083665)。在几个开放标签试验(NCT00150800/NCT00175916/NCT01339559)中,建立了辅助BRV的长期安全性和耐受性,疗效维持长达14年,保留率高。来自日常临床实践的证据强调了特定癫痫患者人群的BRV有效性和耐受性,这些患者具有高度未满足的需求:老年人(≥65岁),儿童(<16岁),认知障碍患者,患有精神病合并症的患者,和特定病因的获得性癫痫患者(卒中后癫痫/脑肿瘤相关癫痫/创伤性脑损伤相关癫痫)。这里,我们从关键试验和最近发表的日常临床实践证据中回顾了BRV的临床前概况和临床获益.
    三分之一的癫痫患者尽管接受了治疗,但仍有癫痫发作。布立西坦是一种用于治疗癫痫患者癫痫发作的药物。它与大脑中的蛋白质(突触囊泡蛋白2A)结合,并在许多不同的癫痫动物模型中有效。布立西坦迅速进入大脑。它与其他药物几乎没有相互作用,这很重要,因为癫痫患者可能正在服用其他药物治疗癫痫或其他疾病。布立西坦可作为片剂,口服溶液,和静脉注射溶液,可以在推荐的目标剂量开始,并且易于使用。在三个III期试验中,每天服用布立西坦50~200mg的局灶性发作性癫痫发作不受控制的患者的癫痫发作少于服用安慰剂的患者.布立西坦耐受性良好。它在许多以前对抗癫痫药物没有反应的人中也很有效。布立西坦治疗的疗效可维持长达14年。布立西坦治疗可减少老年人(≥65岁)的癫痫发作,儿童(<16岁),在有认知或学习障碍的人中,在患有其他精神病的人身上,在患有不同原因的癫痫患者中(中风后癫痫,脑肿瘤相关癫痫,和创伤性脑损伤相关癫痫)。这里,我们回顾了布立拉西坦的特征和癫痫患者在关键临床试验和日常临床实践中的真实世界研究中接受布立拉西坦时的结果.
    One third of patients with epilepsy will continue to have uncontrolled seizures despite treatment with antiseizure medications (ASMs). There is therefore a need to develop novel ASMs. Brivaracetam (BRV) is an ASM that was developed in a major drug discovery program aimed at identifying selective, high-affinity synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligands, the target molecule of levetiracetam. BRV binds to SV2A with 15- to 30-fold higher affinity and greater selectivity than levetiracetam. BRV has broad-spectrum antiseizure activity in animal models of epilepsy, a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, few clinically relevant drug-drug interactions, and rapid brain penetration. BRV is available in oral and intravenous formulations and can be initiated at target dose without titration. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive BRV (50-200 mg/day) treatment of focal-onset seizures was demonstrated in three pivotal phase III trials (NCT00490035/NCT00464269/NCT01261325), including in patients who had previously failed levetiracetam. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive BRV were also demonstrated in adult Asian patients with focal-onset seizures (NCT03083665). In several open-label trials (NCT00150800/NCT00175916/NCT01339559), long-term safety and tolerability of adjunctive BRV was established, with efficacy maintained for up to 14 years, with high retention rates. Evidence from daily clinical practice highlights BRV effectiveness and tolerability in specific epilepsy patient populations with high unmet needs: the elderly (≥ 65 years of age), children (< 16 years of age), patients with cognitive impairment, patients with psychiatric comorbid conditions, and patients with acquired epilepsy of specific etiologies (post-stroke epilepsy/brain tumor related epilepsy/traumatic brain injury-related epilepsy). Here, we review the preclinical profile and clinical benefits of BRV from pivotal trials and recently published evidence from daily clinical practice.
    One in three people with epilepsy continue to have seizures despite treatment. Brivaracetam is a medicine used to treat seizures in people with epilepsy. It binds to a protein in the brain (synaptic vesicle protein 2A) and is effective in many different animal models of epilepsy. Brivaracetam enters the brain quickly. It has few interactions with other medicines, which is important because people with epilepsy may be taking additional medicines for epilepsy or other conditions. Brivaracetam is available as tablets, oral solution, and solution for intravenous injection, can be started at the recommended target dose, and is easy to use. In three phase III trials, people with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures taking brivaracetam 50–200 mg each day had fewer seizures than people taking a placebo. Brivaracetam was tolerated well. It also worked well in many people who had previously not responded to antiseizure medications. The efficacy of brivaracetam treatment is maintained for up to 14 years. Brivaracetam treatment reduces seizures in the elderly (≥ 65 years old), in children (< 16 years old), in people with cognitive or learning disabilities, in people with additional psychiatric conditions, and in people with different causes of epilepsy (post-stroke epilepsy, brain-tumor related epilepsy, and traumatic brain injury-related epilepsy). Here, we review brivaracetam characteristics and the results when people with epilepsy received brivaracetam in key clinical trials and real-world studies in daily clinical practice.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:我们先前分析了三项辅助布立西坦(BRV)成人第11期临床试验的数据,表明药物相关的中枢神经系统治疗引起的不良事件(TEAE)的发生率和患病率在BRV治疗开始后的几周内迅速达到峰值并下降。然而,该分析未评估抗癫痫药物(ASM)治疗可能发生的精神和行为副作用。这里,我们调查了BRV治疗周的精神和行为TEAE的时程,以及如何管理这些TEAE.
    方法:数据来自3项试验(N01252[NCT00490035];N01253[NCT00464269];N01358[NCT01261325])在接受BRV辅助治疗的成年患者(≥16岁)的局灶性发作性癫痫发作。该事后分析报告了在12周治疗期间接受50-200mg/天(无滴定)的BRV剂量或安慰剂(PBO)的患者随时间的药物相关精神病或行为TEAE的发生率和患病率。使用逻辑回归模型来确定精神病或行为合并症是否为药物相关精神病或行为TEAE的预测因子。或BRV因精神病或行为TEAE而停药。
    结果:共有803名患者接受了50-200毫克/天的BRV,459例患者接受PBO。11.0%的患者在辅助性BRV治疗期间报告了药物相关的精神或行为TEAE(PBO:4.8%),在BRV开始后早期发作(至首次药物相关的精神或行为TEAE发作的中位时间:15天)。发病率在第1周达到峰值,并在开始BRV后的前4周内下降。患病率在第4周达到峰值,然后在第5-12周之间保持稳定。在排除合并左乙拉西坦患者的分析中(BRV:n=744;PBO:n=422),药物相关的精神病或行为TEAE的发生率与总体人群的发生率相似.最常见的药物相关精神或行为TEAE是易怒,失眠,抑郁症,和焦虑。只有2%的患者因精神病或行为TEAE而停止BRV(PBO:1.3%),而大多数报告药物相关精神或行为TEAE的BRV患者不需要改变剂量(84.1%;PBO:63.6%).精神病或行为合并症病史(在开始BRV时未持续)与药物相关的精神病或行为TEAE的可能性增加无关,或BRV因精神病或行为TEAE而停药。BRV开始时持续的精神或行为共病状况增加了药物相关精神或行为TEAE的可能性,但不是由于精神病或行为TEAE而停用BRV的可能性。
    结论:药物相关的精神和行为TEAE在BRV治疗早期发生,大多数患者不需要改变BRV剂量.这些数据可以帮助指导临床医生在启动BRV后进行监测和患者预期。
    OBJECTIVE: We previously analyzed data from three phase lll trials of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in adults showing that the incidence and prevalence of drug-related central nervous system treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) quickly peaked and decreased over several weeks following BRV treatment initiation. However, that analysis did not assess psychiatric and behavioral side effects which can occur with antiseizure medication (ASM) treatment. Here, we investigate the time-course of psychiatric and behavioral TEAEs by week of BRV treatment and how these TEAEs were managed.
    METHODS: Data were pooled from three trials (N01252 [NCT00490035]; N01253 [NCT00464269]; N01358 [NCT01261325]) in adult patients (≥16 years of age) with focal-onset seizures receiving BRV adjunctive therapy. This post hoc analysis reports data on the incidence and prevalence of drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs over time in patients who received BRV doses of 50-200 mg/day (without titration) or placebo (PBO) during the 12-week treatment period. A logistic regression model was used to determine if psychiatric or behavioral comorbid conditions were predictors for drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs, or BRV discontinuation due to psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs.
    RESULTS: A total of 803 patients received BRV 50-200 mg/day, and 459 patients received PBO. Drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs were reported by 11.0 % of patients during adjunctive BRV treatment (PBO: 4.8 %) with onset early after BRV initiation (median time to onset of first drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAE: 15 days). Incidence peaked at week 1 and decreased over the first 4 weeks following BRV initiation. Prevalence peaked at week 4 and then remained stable between weeks 5-12. In an analysis excluding patients on concomitant levetiracetam (BRV: n = 744; PBO: n = 422), the incidence of drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs was similar to the incidence in the overall population. The most common drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs were irritability, insomnia, depression, and anxiety. Only 2 % of patients discontinued BRV due to psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs (PBO: 1.3 %), while most patients on BRV who reported drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs did not require a change in dose (84.1 %; PBO: 63.6 %). A history of psychiatric or behavioral comorbid conditions (not ongoing at BRV initiation) was not associated with an increased likelihood of drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs, or BRV discontinuation due to psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs. Ongoing psychiatric or behavioral comorbid conditions at BRV initiation increased the likelihood of drug-related psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs, but not the likelihood of BRV discontinuation due to psychiatric or behavioral TEAEs.
    CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related psychiatric and behavioral TEAEs occurred early during BRV treatment, and most patients did not require a change in BRV dose. These data can help guide clinician monitoring and patient expectations after starting BRV.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    ELEVATE(研究410;NCT03288129)是第一个前瞻性的,多中心,开放标签,美国≥4岁局灶性发作性癫痫发作或全身性强直阵挛性癫痫发作患者的潘帕奈作为单药或首次辅助治疗的IV期研究。这项研究包括筛查,滴定(≤13周),维护(39周),和随访(4周)期间。在滴定期间,以2mg/天的剂量开始,并在第3周向上滴定至4mg/天。根据反应和耐受性,可选择的向上滴定至最大12mg/天。主要终点是保留率;其他终点包括无癫痫发作率,50%的反应率,以及因治疗引起的不良事件(TEAE)的发生率。在基线,10例(18.5%)患者被分配到单药治疗组,44例(81.5%)患者被分配到第一辅助治疗组。然而,由于在治疗的第一天增加了抗癫痫药物和perampanel,1例患者被排除在单药治疗亚组分析之外.平均perampanel暴露持续时间为39.8周,32例(59.3%)患者完成了研究。12个月(或研究完成)时的保留率为63.0%(单药治疗,77.8%;首次辅助治疗,59.1%)。维持期癫痫发作自由度为32.7%(单药治疗,44.4%;首次辅助治疗,29.5%),50%的应答率为78.7%(单药治疗,85.7%;首次辅助治疗,76.9%)。88.9%(n=48/54)和7.4%(n=4/54)的患者报告了TEAE和严重TEAE,分别。总的来说,perampanel作为单药治疗或首次辅助治疗的有效性和安全性支持使用perampanel作为癫痫的早期一线治疗.
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:比较疗效,安全,和其他较新的抗癫痫药物(ASM),包括brivaracetam的耐受性,艾司利卡西平,拉科沙胺,Perampanel,和唑尼沙胺,批准用于成人癫痫患者的耐药性局灶性发作性癫痫发作(FOS)的辅助治疗。
    方法:进行系统文献综述(SLR)以获得相关疗效,安全,ASM治疗耐药FOS的耐受性数据。所有研究均全面评估异质性的潜在来源,并通过贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(NMA)进行分析。在维持期内,疗效结果为≥50%的应答率和癫痫发作自由度,使用多项贝叶斯NMA同时建模。安全性和耐受性结果是经历至少一个治疗紧急不良事件(TEAE)的患者比例和经历至少一个导致停药的TEAE的患者比例。
    结果:SLR确定了76项研究,其中23个被包括在贝叶斯NMA中。与所有分析的ASM相比,Cenobamate在≥50%的应答率和癫痫发作自由结局方面具有统计学意义的较高比率。点估计表明,与布立拉西坦相比,西诺巴特与经历至少一种TEAE和至少一种TEAE导致停药的更高比率相关。拉科沙胺,和唑尼沙胺;然而,结果无统计学意义.
    结论:与所有分析的ASM相比,赛诺巴米特与疗效增加相关。安全性和耐受性结果没有统计学上的显着差异。提出的结果证实了从以前发表的NMA得出的结论,与其他ASM相比,这也突出了西诺坦的显着功效。
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cenobamate with other newer anti-seizure medications (ASMs) including brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, perampanel, and zonisamide, approved for adjunctive treatment of drug-resistant focal-onset seizures (FOS) in adults with epilepsy.
    METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to obtain relevant efficacy, safety, and tolerability data for ASMs for the treatment of drug-resistant FOS. All studies were thoroughly assessed for potential sources of heterogeneity and analysed via Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs). Efficacy outcomes were ≥50 % responder rate and seizure freedom during the maintenance period, which were modelled simultaneously using a multinomial Bayesian NMA. Safety and tolerability outcomes were the proportion of patients who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and the proportion who experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation.
    RESULTS: The SLR identified 76 studies, of which 23 were included in the Bayesian NMAs. Cenobamate was associated with statistically significant higher rates for the ≥50 % responder rate and seizure freedom outcomes compared with all ASMs analysed. The point estimates indicated that cenobamate was associated with higher rates of experiencing at least one TEAE and at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation compared with brivaracetam, lacosamide, and zonisamide; however, no results were statistically significant.
    CONCLUSIONS: Cenobamate was associated with increased efficacy compared with all ASMs analysed. There were no statistically significant differences in the safety and tolerability outcomes. The results presented corroborate the conclusions drawn from previous published NMAs, which also highlight the notable efficacy of cenobamate in comparison with other ASMs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Randomized Controlled Trial
    背景:本文旨在评估辅助布立西坦(BRV)在局灶性发作性癫痫发作的成年人中的疗效和耐受性,这些药物作为治疗方案的一部分服用特定的合并抗癫痫药物(ASM)。
    方法:这是对来自双盲的汇总数据的事后分析,安慰剂对照试验(N01252/NCT00490035,N01253/NCT00464269和N01358/NCT01261325)在试验开始时随机接受BRV(50-200mg/day)或安慰剂治疗的非受控局灶性发作性癫痫患者中进行随机治疗。
    结果:分析了9个伴随的ASM:卡马西平(CBZ),拉莫三嗪(LTG),丙戊酸盐(VPA),奥卡西平(OXC),托吡酯(TPM),苯妥英(PHT),拉科沙胺(LCM),clobazam(CLB),和苯巴比妥(PHB)。与安慰剂相比,每28天BRV的局灶性发作发作发作频率的降低范围为11.7%(伴随的OXC)至33.5%(伴随的PHB)。BRV患者(安慰剂4.4-21.2%),每28天局灶性发作发作频率从基线降低的中位数百分比为25.5%至42.8%;BRV患者(安慰剂11.4-25.2%)的50%应答率范围为31.9%至44.9%。在BRV患者中,癫痫发作自由度为1.4%(伴随PHT)~12.5%(伴随LCM);安慰剂组患者的癫痫发作自由度为0%~1.2%.与安慰剂相比,BRV患者分析的所有疗效终点在数值上始终较高。在BRV(范围为60.8-74.5%)或安慰剂(范围为53.8-66.7%)的患者中,治疗引起的不良事件(TEAE)的总发生率在不同亚组之间通常相似。BRV患者(范围35.2-48.3%)与安慰剂(范围23.9-37.1%)伴随ASM在所有亚组中的药物相关TEAE数字上较高。在BRV患者中,由于TEAE引起的停药范围为2.9%至13.3%,在亚组中服用安慰剂的患者为0-5.7%。
    结论:BRV有效且耐受性良好,无论作为其治疗方案的一部分的特定伴随ASM如何。这些数据表明,在局灶性癫痫发作的患者中,BRV为宽范围的ASM提供额外的功效。
    BACKGROUND: This 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.
    METHODS: This 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.
    RESULTS: Nine 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.
    CONCLUSIONS: BRV 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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:Cenobamate(CNB)是一种抗癫痫药物(ASM),于2021年在欧洲获得批准,用于辅助治疗成人局灶性发作性癫痫发作,这些成人先前至少有两次ASM未得到充分控制。方法:癫痫发作结果,治疗引起的不良事件,神经心理学简介,在CNB早期接入计划的背景下,在两个不同的意大利癫痫中心的真实世界环境中分析了CNB和伴随的ASM的血液水平。所有患者进行了一般认知评估,而32例患者在基线和CNB治疗后6个月接受了一系列神经心理学测试。我们以100-400mg/天的不同剂量对31名患者的血浆中的CNB进行了定量(65次测量)。结果:我们纳入了54例患者,中位年龄为27.9岁。平均随访时间为10.7个月。多数(91%)完成了功效剖析。在最后一次随访中,中位癫痫发作减少69.5%.32例患者(59.2%)的癫痫发作减少≥50%,其中20例(42.0%)的癫痫发作减少≥75%,10例(20.2%)患者无癫痫发作。最常见的不良事件是嗜睡(53.1%),头晕(28.1%)和复视(12.5%)。CNB剂量与血药浓度的相关性,显示出显著的线性相关(r=0.86,p<0.0001),服用或不服用至少一种诱导剂的患者之间的平均血浆浓度/给药剂量比(C/D比)存在显着差异(0.10±0.04[(μg/mL)/(mg/天)];n=47vs.0.13±0.05[(μg/mL)/(mg/天)];n=18,p=0.04)。CNB剂量与卡马西平血液水平的C/D比率呈负相关(r=-0.31,p=0.02)。并且与活性Clobazam代谢物N-去甲基氯巴嗪的血浆浓度升高呈正相关(r=0.74,p<0.0001)。一般焦虑症-7显示得分从基线评估6.82到随访6个月评估4.53(p=0.03)的显着改善。结论:在这项现实世界的研究中,我们发现,在大多数患者中,服用CNB后癫痫发作频率有临床意义的降低,同时患者的耐受性良好.CNB治疗与焦虑评分的症状严重程度的降低相关。血浆水平测量证实,CNB既是药物-药物相互作用的“受害者”又是“犯罪者”。
    Background: Cenobamate (CNB) is an anti-seizure medication (ASM) approved in 2021 in Europe for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults who were not adequately controlled with at least two previous ASMs. Methods: seizure outcome, treatment-emergent adverse events, neuropsychological profile, and blood levels of CNB and concomitant ASM were analyzed in a real world setting in two different Italian epilepsy centers in the context of CNB early access program. All patients performed a general cognitive evaluation, while 32 patients underwent the administration of a battery of neuropsychological tests at baseline and 6 months after CNB treatment. We performed CNB quantification in plasma in 31 patients at different doses in the range of 100-400 mg/day (65 measures). Results: we enrolled 54 patients with a median age of 27.9 years. The mean follow-up was 10.7 months. Most (91%) completed the efficacy analysis. At last follow-up visit, a 69.5% median seizure reduction was registered. Thirty-two patients (59.2%) had a ≥50% reduction of seizures that was ≥75% in 20 (42.0%) cases, whilst 10 (20.2%) patients were seizure-free. The most common adverse events were somnolence (53.1%), dizziness (28.1%) and diplopia (12.5%). The correlation between CNB dose and plasma concentration, revealed a significant linear correlation (r = 0.86, p < 0.0001), and there was a significant difference in mean plasma concentration/dose administered ratio (C/D ratio) between patients taking or not at least one inducer (0.10 ± 0.04 [(μg/mL)/(mg/day)]; n = 47 vs. 0.13 ± 0.05 [(μg/mL)/(mg/day)]; n = 18, p = 0.04). CNB dose was inversely correlated (r = -0.31, p = 0.02) to the C/D ratio of Carbamazepine blood levels. and positively correlated (r = 0.74, p < 0.0001) with an increased plasma concentration of the active Clobazam metabolite N-desmethylclobazam. General Anxiety Disorder-7 showed a significant improvement of score from baseline evaluation of 6.82 to follow-up 6 months evaluation of 4.53 (p = 0.03). Conclusion: In this real-world study, we registered a clinically meaningful reduction in seizure frequency after CNB administration in most patients along with a good tolerability profile. CNB treatment is correlate to a reduction in symptom severity of anxiety score. Plasma levels measurements confirm that CNB acts both as \"victim\" and as \"perpetrator\" of drug-drug interactions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    神经节胶质瘤(GG)是一种WHO1级神经胶质细胞肿瘤。它分化良好,生长缓慢,由肿瘤神经节和神经胶质细胞组合组成。间变性神经节胶质瘤(AGG)是一种极其罕见的恶性变异型神经节胶质瘤,这不包括在新的世卫组织分类中;然而,该术语用于讨论具有恶性肿瘤数据的神经节胶质瘤。AGG通常发生在儿童和年轻人中,并且与高复发率和死亡率相关。作者描述了一名62岁女性患有AGG的病例。她提出了cacosmia,眩晕,恶心,和局灶性发作性癫痫发作并伴有继发性泛化。磁共振成像(MRI)显示左颞叶轴内病变。她接受了皮质脑电图(ECoG)引导的显微外科手术切除,并根据显微形态学和免疫组织化学分析获得了AGG的诊断。手术后几天她出院,病灶部分切除,没有额外的神经缺陷,和适当的癫痫控制。AGG是一种非常罕见且研究不足的实体。目前,这是一个有争议的术语,用于指代具有恶性肿瘤迹象的神经节胶质瘤。它主要发生在患有颞叶癫痫的儿童和年轻人中。全切除是最好的预后因素,放疗和化疗的疗效未知。在我们的案例中,患者是一名成年女性,接受了次全切除,然后进行了同步放疗和化疗,获得与文献报道相似的平均生存率,因此,可以认为尽管对病变进行了次全切除,但化疗和放疗仍可获得益处。需要进一步的研究来建立明确的AGG诊断标准,多中心的AGGs数据库对于更好地了解病理学并提供最佳治疗和预后是必要的。
    Ganglioglioma (GG) is a WHO-grade 1 glioneuronal neoplasm. It is well differentiated with a slow-growing pattern and is composed of a combination of neoplastic ganglion and glial cells. Anaplastic ganglioglioma (AGG) is an extremely rare malignant variant of ganglioglioma, which is not included in the new WHO classification; however, the term is used to talk about gangliogliomas with data of malignancy. AGGs usually occur in children and young adults and are associated with high recurrence and mortality. The authors describe the case of a 62-year-old woman with AGG. She presented with cacosmia, vertigo, nausea, and focal-onset seizures with secondary generalization. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed an intra-axial lesion in the left temporal lobe. She underwent microsurgical resection guided by electrocorticography (ECoG), and a diagnosis of AGG based on microscopic morphology and immunohistochemical analysis was obtained. She was discharged a few days after surgery with subtotal resection of the lesion, no additional neurological deficit, and adequate seizure control. AGG is a very rare and poorly studied entity. It is currently a controversial term used to refer to gangliogliomas with signs of malignancy. It occurs mainly in children and young adults with temporal lobe epilepsy. Total resection is the best prognostic factor, given the unknown efficacy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. In our case, the patient was an adult woman with a subtotal resection followed by concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, obtaining a mean survival similar to that reported in the literature, so it can be thought that there is a benefit obtained with chemotherapy and radiotherapy despite having performed a subtotal resection of the lesion. Further studies are needed to establish clear diagnostic criteria for AGG, and a multicenter database of AGGs is necessary for a better understanding of the pathology and to offer the best treatment and prognosis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在中国尚未进行干预性研究来评估perampanel治疗中国癫痫患者的疗效和安全性,在中国也没有任何关于潘帕内早期附加疗法的研究。这项介入性研究旨在评估中国患者在局灶性发作性癫痫发作(FOS)伴或不伴局灶性至双侧强直阵挛性癫痫发作(FBTCS)的早期附加治疗的疗效和安全性。
    在这个多中心中,开放标签,单臂,第四期介入研究,纳入来自中国15家医院的抗癫痫药物(ASM)单药治疗失败的≥12岁的FOS患者,有或没有FBTCS患者,并接受了Perampanel附加疗法(8周滴定,然后24周维持)。主要终点是50%的应答者率。次要终点包括癫痫发作自由度和癫痫发作频率相对于基线的变化。记录治疗引起的不良事件(TEAE)和药物相关的TEAE。
    完整的分析集包括150名患者。平均维持剂量为5.9±1.5mg/天,8个月保留率为72%。维持期间所有患者的50%应答率和癫痫发作自由度分别为67.9%和30.5%,分别。FBTCS患者在维持期间有较高的50%应答率(96.0%)和无癫痫发作率(76.0%)。同时服用丙戊酸钠的患者的癫痫发作自由度明显高于同时服用奥卡西平的患者。八六(55.1%)患者经历了与治疗相关的TEAE,最常见的TEAE是头晕(36.5%),失眠症(11.5%),头痛(3.9%),嗜睡(3.2%),和烦躁(3.2%)。14.7%的患者因TEAE而戒断。
    Perampanel早期加药治疗中国≥12岁FOS伴或不伴FBTCS患者是有效和安全的。临床试验注册www.chictr.org.cn,标识符ChiCTR2000039510。
    UNASSIGNED: No interventional study has been conducted in China to assess efficacy and safety of perampanel in treating Chinese patients with epilepsy, nor has there been any study on perampanel early add-on therapy in China. This interventional study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of perampanel as an early add-on treatment of focal-onset seizures (FOS) with or without focal-to-bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS) in Chinese patients.
    UNASSIGNED: In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 4 interventional study, Chinese patients ≥ 12 years old with FOS with or without FBTCS who failed anti-seizure medication (ASM) monotherapy from 15 hospitals in China were enrolled and treated with perampanel add-on therapy (8-week titration followed by 24-week maintenance). The primary endpoint was 50% responder rate. Secondary endpoints included seizure-freedom rate and changes in seizure frequency from baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and drug-related TEAEs were recorded.
    UNASSIGNED: The full analysis set included 150 patients. The mean maintenance perampanel dose was 5.9 ± 1.5 mg/day and the 8-month retention rate was 72%. The 50% responder rate and seizure-freedom rate for all patients during maintenance were 67.9 and 30.5%, respectively. Patients with FBTCS had higher 50% responder rate (96.0%) and seizure-freedom rate (76.0%) during maintenance. Patients on concomitant sodium valproate had a significantly higher seizure-freedom rate than those on concomitant oxcarbazepine. Eight-six (55.1%) patients experienced treatment-related TEAEs, and the most common TEAEs were dizziness (36.5%), hypersomnia (11.5%), headache (3.9%), somnolence (3.2%), and irritability (3.2%). Withdrawal due to TEAEs occurred to 14.7% of the patients.
    UNASSIGNED: Perampanel early add-on was effective and safe in treating Chinese patients≥12 years old with FOS with or without FBTCS.Clinical trial registrationwww.chictr.org.cn, Identifier ChiCTR2000039510.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:探讨围产期缺氧缺血性脑病(HIE)所致基底节区和丘脑病变(BGTL)所致运动障碍型脑瘫(DCP)足月患儿儿童期发作癫痫的发生率、转归及相关因素。
    方法:我们研究了104例足月出生的BGTL诱导的DCP患者(男性63例,女性41例,2-22岁),以调查癫痫的发生率及其发展相关因素。我们使用多变量分析来评估围产期因素,粗大运动功能,以及脑部病变的程度。我们还调查了癫痫发作,临床课程,和脑电图(EEG)特征。
    结果:累积癫痫发生率为36%。多因素logistic回归分析显示,深部脑白质病变是癫痫的独立危险因素。确认的癫痫发作类型包括癫痫性痉挛(ES,n=13),肌阵挛性癫痫发作(MS,n=6),和局灶性发作性癫痫(FS,n=24)。只有深部白质病变的患者表现为ES或MS。FS的症状类似于具有中央颞部尖峰的自限性癫痫。但是,只有一半的患者在调查时达到缓解,尽管接受了适当的药物治疗,但4例患者每月癫痫发作一次以上。不仅在FS患者中,而且在一半的无癫痫患者中也检测到了rolandic周围区域的局灶性尖峰。
    结论:三分之一的由围产期HIE引起的BGTL诱导的DCP的足月出生患者发展为癫痫,和深部白质病变增加了癫痫的可能性。早发性ES的准备,MS,和随后的FS是有益的。
    OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the incidence and outcomes of childhood-onset epilepsy and associated factors in term-born patients with basal ganglia and thalamic lesion (BGTL)-induced dyskinetic cerebral palsy (DCP) caused by perinatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE).
    METHODS: We studied 104 term-born patients with BGTL-induced DCP (63 males and 41 females, aged 2-22 years) to investigate the incidence of epilepsy and the factors related to its development. We used multivariate analysis to assess perinatal factors, gross motor function, and the extent of brain lesions. We also investigated the seizure onset, clinical course, and electroencephalography (EEG) characteristics.
    RESULTS: The cumulative epilepsy incidence was 36%. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that deep white matter lesions were the only independent risk factor for epilepsy. The confirmed seizure types included epileptic spasms (ES, n = 13), myoclonic seizures (MS, n = 6), and focal-onset seizures (FS, n = 24). Only patients with deep white matter lesions exhibited ES or MS. The symptoms of FS resembled those of self-limited epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes; however, only half of the patients reached remission by the time of investigation, and four patients had more than one seizure per month despite appropriate drug therapy. Focal spikes in the peri-rolandic area were detected not only in patients with FS but also in half of the patients without epilepsy.
    CONCLUSIONS: One-third of term-born patients with BGTL-induced DCP caused by perinatal HIE develop epilepsy, and deep white matter lesions increase the likelihood of epilepsy. Preparation for early-onset ES, MS, and subsequent FS is beneficial.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    目的:在中国,对潘帕奈尔单药治疗局灶性发作性癫痫(FOS)的疗效和安全性研究很少。这项观察性研究旨在评估perampanel单药治疗中国FOS患者的疗效和安全性。
    方法:这种单中心,prospective,真实世界观察性研究纳入2020年1月至2021年12月在南京医科大学附属南京脑科医院门诊就诊的年龄≥4岁FOS患者.所有患者均接受perampanel单药治疗。计算治疗6个月和12个月后的癫痫发作自由率。记录不良事件(AE)。
    结果:纳入了70例FOS患者。平均维持剂量为4.64±1.55mg/天。Perampanel单药治疗6个月和12个月的保留率分别为78.6%(55/70)和70.0%(49/70),分别。6个月和12个月的癫痫发作自由率分别为69.84%(44/63)和65.08%(41/63),分别。局灶性至双侧强直阵挛性癫痫发作的患者6个月和12个月的癫痫发作自由率明显高于局灶性意识受损的患者(分别为P=0.046和P=0.204)。26例(37.1%)患者出现治疗紧急不良事件,最常见的AE是头晕。4例(5.7%)患者因不良事件退出研究。没有观察到新的安全问题。
    结论:这是第一个关于潘帕奈尔单药治疗中国FOS患者的疗效和安全性的前瞻性研究,在治疗年龄≥4岁的FOS长达12个月的中国患者时,潘帕奈尔单药治疗是有效且安全的。更多多多中心,需要大样本量和更长时间随访的真实世界研究来进一步评估perampanel单药治疗的长期疗效和安全性.
    OBJECTIVE: Efficacy and safety of perampanel monotherapy for treating focal-onset seizures (FOS) has been barely studied in China. This observational study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perampanel monotherapy in treating Chinese patients with FOS.
    METHODS: This single-center, prospective, real-world observational study enrolled patients aged ≥4 years with FOS who visited the Epilepsy Out-Patient Clinic of Nanjing Brain Hospital affiliated to Nanjing Medical University from January 2020 to December 2021. All patients were treated with perampanel monotherapy. Seizure-freedom rates after 6 and 12 months of treatment were calculated. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded.
    RESULTS: Seventy patients with FOS were enrolled. The mean maintenance perampanel dose was 4.64 ± 1.55 mg/day. The 6- and 12-month retention rates of perampanel monotherapy were 78.6% (55/70) and 70.0% (49/70), respectively. The 6- and 12-month seizure-freedom rates were 69.84% (44/63) and 65.08% (41/63), respectively. Patients with focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures had significantly higher 6-month and numerically higher 12-month seizure freedom rates than patients with focal impaired awareness seizures (P = 0.046 and P = 0.204, respectively). Twenty-six (37.1%) patients experienced treatment-emergent AEs, and the most common AE was dizziness. Four (5.7%) patients withdrew from the study due to AEs. No new safety concern was observed.
    CONCLUSIONS: This is the first prospective study on the efficacy and safety of perampanel monotherapy in treating Chinese patients with FOS, and perampanel monotherapy was effective and safe in treating Chinese patients aged ≥4 years with FOS up to 12 months. More multicenter, real-world studies with large sample sizes and longer follow-ups are needed to further evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of perampanel monotherapy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号