Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun 30;12(1):13-20.
doi: 10.14581/jer.22003. eCollection 2022 Jun.

Perampanel as First Add-On Therapy in Patients with Focal-Onset Seizures in the FAME Trial: Post hoc Analyses of Efficacy and Safety Related to Maintenance Dose and Background Antiepileptic Drug Therapy

Affiliations

Perampanel as First Add-On Therapy in Patients with Focal-Onset Seizures in the FAME Trial: Post hoc Analyses of Efficacy and Safety Related to Maintenance Dose and Background Antiepileptic Drug Therapy

Ji Hyun Kim et al. J Epilepsy Res. .

Abstract

Background and purpose: FAME (Fycompa® as first Add-on to Monotherapy in patients with Epilepsy; NCT02726074), a previously reported single-arm, phase IV study, showed that perampanel improved seizure control as first add-on to failed anti-seizure medication (ASM) monotherapy in 85 South Korean patients aged ≥12 years with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures. We present results of three post hoc analyses of FAME that further assessed the efficacy and safety of perampanel.

Methods: Patients were stratified by low- (4, 6 mg/day) versus high- (8, 10, 12 mg/day) dose maintenance perampanel, perampanel added to first- versus second-line ASM monotherapy, and concomitant background ASM monotherapy and perampanel dose. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in total seizure frequency during the 24-week maintenance period. Safety was assessed by the descriptive incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

Results: In post hoc analyses, 50% responder rates were significantly higher for low- versus high-dose maintenance perampanel (88.6% vs. 40.0%; p<0.001) and when added to first- versus second-line ASM monotherapy (83.5% vs. 33.3%; p=0.013). By concomitant background ASM and perampanel maintenance dose, 50% responder rates were 100% for perampanel 4 mg/day added to carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, or valproic acid, and 85% when added to levetiracetam. Add-on perampanel improved 75% and seizure-free responder rates, and median percent changes from baseline seizure frequency per 28 days. Perampanel was well tolerated when added to ASM monotherapy, with dizziness being the most common TEAE.

Conclusions: Post hoc analyses of FAME provide supportive data for the use of perampanel as an effective and well-tolerated first add-on treatment to a broad spectrum of ASM monotherapies in patients with FOS.

Keywords: AMPA receptor; Perampanel; Seizures; focal; generalized.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Ji Woong Lee and Min Young Kim are employees of Eisai Korea Inc. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Seizure-control outcomes in perampanel recipients stratified by perampanel daily maintenance dose (low vs. high), full analysis set (n=85). (A) Responder rates (50%, 75%, and seizure-free) and (B) median percentage reduction from baseline seizure frequency per 28 days.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Seizure-control outcomes in perampanel recipients stratified by first and second anti-seizure medication (ASM) monotherapy use at baseline, full analysis set (n=85). (A) Responder rates (50%, 75%, and seizure-free) and (B) median percent reduction from baseline seizure frequency per 28 days.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Seizure-control outcomes in perampanel recipients stratified by baseline concomitant anti-seizure medication and daily perampanel maintenance dose, full analysis set (n=83). (A) 50% responder rates, (B) seizure-free responder rate, and (C) median percentage reduction from baseline seizure frequency per 28 days. aBased on data from 19/20 patients.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. GBD 2016 Neurology Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:459–80. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee SY, Chung SE, Kim DW, et al. Estimating the prevalence of treated epilepsy using administrative health data and its validity: ESSENCE study. J Clin Neurol. 2016;12:434–40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Epilepsies: diagnosis and management [Internet] London: NICE; 2012. [cited 2021 May 12]. Available at : https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG137 . - PubMed
    1. Byun JI, Kim DW, Kim KT, et al. Treatment of epilepsy in adults: expert opinion in South Korea. Epilepsy Behav. 2020;105:106942. - PubMed
    1. Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the International League Against Epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE commission for classification and terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58:522–30. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources