Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Perampanel (PER) in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies in daily clinical practice conditions. Patients and methods This Italian multicenter retrospective observational study was performed in 16 paediatric epilepsy centres. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ≤18 years of age, (ii) history of refractory epilepsy, (iii) a follow-up ≥5 months of PER add-on therapy. Exclusion criteria were: (i) a diagnosis of primary idiopathic generalized epilepsy, (ii) variation of concomitant AEDs during the previous 4 weeks. Response was defined as a ≥50% reduction in monthly seizure frequency compared with the baseline. Results 62 patients suffering from various refractory epilepsies were included in this study: 53% were males, the mean age was 14.2 years (range 6–18 years), 8 patients aged <12 years. Mean age at epilepsy onset was 3.4 years and the mean duration of epilepsy was 10.8 years (range 1–16), which ranged from 2 seizures per-month up to several seizures per-day (mean number = 96.5). Symptomatic focal epilepsy was reported in 62.9% of cases. Mean number of AEDs used in the past was 7.1; mean number of concomitant AEDs was 2.48, with carbamazepine used in 43.5% of patients. Mean PER daily dose was 7.1 mg (2–12 mg). After an average of 6.6 months of follow-up (5–13 months), the retention rate was 77.4% (48/62). The response rate was 50%; 16% of patients achieved ≥75% seizure frequency reduction and 5% became completely seizure free. Seizure aggravation was observed in 9.7% of patients. Adverse events were reported in 19 patients (30.6%) and led to PER discontinuation in 4 patients (6.5%). The most common adverse events were behaviour disturbance (irritability and aggressiveness), dizziness, sedation and fatigue. Conclusion PER was found to be a safe and effective treatment when used as adjunctive therapy in paediatric patients with uncontrolled epilepsy.

Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies-An Italian observational multicenter study / DE LISO, Paola; Vigevano, F; Specchio, N; De Palma, L; Bonanni, P; Osanni, E; Coppola, G; Parisi, Pasquale; Grosso, S; Verrotti, A; Spalice, Alberto; Nicita, Francesco; Zamponi, N; Siliquini, S; Giordano, L; Martelli, P; Guerrini, R; Rosati, A; Ilvento, L; Belcastro, V; Striano, P; Vari, M. S; Capovilla, G; Beccaria, F; Bruni, Oliviero; Luchetti, Anna; Gobbi, G; Russo, A; Pruna, D; Tozzi, A. E; Cusmai, R.. - In: EPILEPSY RESEARCH. - ISSN 0920-1211. - STAMPA. - 127:(2016), pp. 93-100. [10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2016.08.021]

Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies-An Italian observational multicenter study

DE LISO, PAOLA;PARISI, Pasquale;SPALICE, ALBERTO;NICITA, Francesco;BRUNI, Oliviero;LUCHETTI, ANNA;
2016

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Perampanel (PER) in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies in daily clinical practice conditions. Patients and methods This Italian multicenter retrospective observational study was performed in 16 paediatric epilepsy centres. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ≤18 years of age, (ii) history of refractory epilepsy, (iii) a follow-up ≥5 months of PER add-on therapy. Exclusion criteria were: (i) a diagnosis of primary idiopathic generalized epilepsy, (ii) variation of concomitant AEDs during the previous 4 weeks. Response was defined as a ≥50% reduction in monthly seizure frequency compared with the baseline. Results 62 patients suffering from various refractory epilepsies were included in this study: 53% were males, the mean age was 14.2 years (range 6–18 years), 8 patients aged <12 years. Mean age at epilepsy onset was 3.4 years and the mean duration of epilepsy was 10.8 years (range 1–16), which ranged from 2 seizures per-month up to several seizures per-day (mean number = 96.5). Symptomatic focal epilepsy was reported in 62.9% of cases. Mean number of AEDs used in the past was 7.1; mean number of concomitant AEDs was 2.48, with carbamazepine used in 43.5% of patients. Mean PER daily dose was 7.1 mg (2–12 mg). After an average of 6.6 months of follow-up (5–13 months), the retention rate was 77.4% (48/62). The response rate was 50%; 16% of patients achieved ≥75% seizure frequency reduction and 5% became completely seizure free. Seizure aggravation was observed in 9.7% of patients. Adverse events were reported in 19 patients (30.6%) and led to PER discontinuation in 4 patients (6.5%). The most common adverse events were behaviour disturbance (irritability and aggressiveness), dizziness, sedation and fatigue. Conclusion PER was found to be a safe and effective treatment when used as adjunctive therapy in paediatric patients with uncontrolled epilepsy.
2016
adolescents; antiepileptic drug; children; perampanel; refractory epilepsy; treatment outcome
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies-An Italian observational multicenter study / DE LISO, Paola; Vigevano, F; Specchio, N; De Palma, L; Bonanni, P; Osanni, E; Coppola, G; Parisi, Pasquale; Grosso, S; Verrotti, A; Spalice, Alberto; Nicita, Francesco; Zamponi, N; Siliquini, S; Giordano, L; Martelli, P; Guerrini, R; Rosati, A; Ilvento, L; Belcastro, V; Striano, P; Vari, M. S; Capovilla, G; Beccaria, F; Bruni, Oliviero; Luchetti, Anna; Gobbi, G; Russo, A; Pruna, D; Tozzi, A. E; Cusmai, R.. - In: EPILEPSY RESEARCH. - ISSN 0920-1211. - STAMPA. - 127:(2016), pp. 93-100. [10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2016.08.021]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
DeLiso_Effectiveness_2016.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 534.63 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
534.63 kB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/905427
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 17
  • Scopus 64
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 55
social impact