Volume 62(7); July

< Previous     Next >

Article Contents

Clin Exp Pediatr > Volume 62(7); 2019
Kim and Kim: Perampanel is also a useful adjunctive treatment option in refractory epilepsy in children
Approximately one-third of children with epilepsy continue to experience seizures despite adequate administration of conventional anti-seizure medications [1]. Children with medically refractory epilepsy are greatly affected by cognitive dysfunction, behavioral problems, mental disorders, and overall compromised quality of life [2]. Thus, effective novel therapies are needed in these patients. Over the past two decades, numerous new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been formulated to achieve seizure freedom.
Among the novel AEDs, perampanel (PER) is the first highly selective, noncompetitive antagonist of the AMPA (α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid) glutamate receptor. It has been approved for monotherapy or adjunctive treatment of focal seizures, with or without secondarily generalized seizures, and adjunctive treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in patients with epilepsy, aged 12 years and older [3]. Clinical efficacy and safety of PER have been established in several randomized controlled trials (randomized controlled trials [RCTs], ≥50% responder rate, 28.5%–37.6% in focal seizures, and 64.2% in PGTC seizures; adverse events of somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, and behavioral changes) [4,5]. Efficacy of PER among the adolescent patients (age 12–17 years, ≥50% responder rate 40.9%–45.0%) is similar to that in adults [4]. Although, PER has been extensively studied in the real-world clinical practice with similar reports of efficacy and safety in RCTs, data on the effects of PER in children and adolescents are relatively scarce [2]. Especially, there is lack of data with respect to the use of PER in children under 12 years.
Yun et al. [6] investigated the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive PER treatment in children under 12 years of age with refractory epilepsy. A total 22 patients, aged 3.1–11.4 years showed responder rate of 68% (≥50% seizure reduction), wherein 23% showed seizure freedom. Nine patients (41%) experienced at least one adverse event, which was mostly resolved after drug withdrawal or dose adjustment; however, some respiratory depression was retained in bedridden patients. Compared to the previous studies involving the same age group, this report showed better response (responder rate 68% vs. 31%–50%) and similar tolerability (41% vs. 30.6%–60.6%) [7-9].
As per the authors' comments, this report had several important limitations. First, this was a retrospective observational study conducted in a relatively small number of patients over a short follow-up duration. Another possible limitation included the lack of information regarding the titrating schedule, the optimal dosage of PER, and relationship with concomitant enzyme-inducing AEDs. Despite these limitations, this report has great significance, as it was the first to study children younger than 12 years of age in the real-world clinical setting. It can be concluded that PER is effective for the treatment of medically refractory epilepsy in pediatric population with a satisfactory tolerability profile. It is indicated through this report, that the use of PER in the young age group can be effective, if careful attempts are made. This effort is expected to help expand the indications for PER treatment.

Conflicts of interest

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article was reported.

References

1. Kwan P, Brodie MJ. Early identification of refractory epilepsy. N Engl J Med 2000;342:314–9.
crossref pmid
2. Lin KL, Lin JJ, Chou ML, Hung PC, Hsieh MY, Chou IJ, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with pharmacoresistant epilepsy: the first real-world evaluation in Asian pediatric neurology clinics. Epilepsy Behav 2018;85:188–94.
crossref pmid
3. Tsai JJ, Wu T, Leung H, Desudchit T, Tiamkao S, Lim KS, et al. Perampanel, an AMPA receptor antagonist: from clinical research to practice in clinical settings. Acta Neurol Scand 2018;137:378–91.
crossref pmid
4. Steinhoff BJ, Ben-Menachem E, Ryvlin P, Shorvon S, Kramer L, Satlin A, et al. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive perampanel for the treatment of refractory partial seizures: a pooled analysis of three phase III studies. Epilepsia 2013;54:1481–9.
crossref pmid
5. French JA, Krauss GL, Wechsler RT, Wang XF, DiVentura B, Brandt C, et al. Perampanel for tonic-clonic seizures in idiopathic generalized epilepsy A randomized trial. Neurology 2015;85:950–7.
crossref pmid pmc
6. Yun Y, Kim D, Lee YJ, Kwon S, Hwang SK. Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive perampanel treatment in children under 12 years of age with refractory epilepsy. Korean J Pediatr 2018;Dec 26 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.3345/kjp.2018.06863.
crossref pdf
7. Biró A, Stephani U, Tarallo T, Bast T, Schlachter K, Fleger M, et al. Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies: first experiences. Neuropediatrics 2015;46:110–6.
crossref pmid pdf
8. De Liso P, Vigevano F, Specchio N, De Palma L, Bonanni P, Osanni E, et al. Effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel in children and adolescents with refractory epilepsies-An Italian observational multicenter study. Epilepsy Res 2016;127:93–100.
crossref pmid
9. Heyman E, Lahat E, Levin N, Epstein O, Lazinger M, Berkovitch M, et al. Tolerability and efficacy of perampanel in children with refractory epilepsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2017;59:441–4.
crossref pmid
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •  0 Scopus
  • 4,206 View
  • 182 Download


Close layer
prev next