Perampanel as first add-on choice on the treatment of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: an observational real-life study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Perampanel as first add-on choice on the treatment of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: an observational real-life study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Labate, Angelo (AUTHOR), Fortunato, Francesco (AUTHOR), Giugno, Alessia (AUTHOR), Martino, Iolanda (AUTHOR), Caligiuri, Maria Eugenia (AUTHOR), Gambardella, Antonio (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Neurological Sciences. Apr2021, Vol. 42 Issue 4, p1389-1394. 6p. 3 Charts, 2 Graphs. |
| Subjects: | Temporal lobe epilepsy, Scientific observation, Perampanel |
| Abstract: | Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of perampanel (PER) in patients with a diagnosis of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) taking PER as first add-on option due to inefficacy of first antiepileptic drug (AED), rather than late add-on choice. Methods: Thirty-seven MTLE patients aged ≥ 12 years were recruited consecutively with a minimum duration of follow-up of 1 year and intermediate follow-up of 3 months. Patients were divided into two groups: 20/37 taking PER as first add-on due to inefficacy of first AED (first group) and 17/37 taking PER as late add-on due to inefficacy of ≥ 2 AEDs (second group). Efficacy, retention rate, and safety were evaluated. Results: At 3 months, the 70% of the first group had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency, with six patients becoming also seizure free, while in the second group, only the 23.5% had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency and none became seizure free (p = 0.005). Six patients of first group were also switched to a monotherapy of PER and five out of six remained seizure free at 12 months. At 1 year of follow-up, efficacy of PER was 70% for the first group, while only of 29.4% for the second group (p = 0.014). Retention rate of the first group at 3 months and 1 year was 85%, while for the second group was, respectively, 82.3% and 64.7%. Conclusion: PER was significantly successful and tolerated in MTLE patients when used as first add-on option rather than as late add-on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Neurological Sciences is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of perampanel (PER) in patients with a diagnosis of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) taking PER as first add-on option due to inefficacy of first antiepileptic drug (AED), rather than late add-on choice. Methods: Thirty-seven MTLE patients aged ≥ 12 years were recruited consecutively with a minimum duration of follow-up of 1 year and intermediate follow-up of 3 months. Patients were divided into two groups: 20/37 taking PER as first add-on due to inefficacy of first AED (first group) and 17/37 taking PER as late add-on due to inefficacy of ≥ 2 AEDs (second group). Efficacy, retention rate, and safety were evaluated. Results: At 3 months, the 70% of the first group had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency, with six patients becoming also seizure free, while in the second group, only the 23.5% had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency and none became seizure free (p = 0.005). Six patients of first group were also switched to a monotherapy of PER and five out of six remained seizure free at 12 months. At 1 year of follow-up, efficacy of PER was 70% for the first group, while only of 29.4% for the second group (p = 0.014). Retention rate of the first group at 3 months and 1 year was 85%, while for the second group was, respectively, 82.3% and 64.7%. Conclusion: PER was significantly successful and tolerated in MTLE patients when used as first add-on option rather than as late add-on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 15901874 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10072-020-04636-7 |
