Affiliation:
1. Kork Epilepsy Center Kehl‐Kork Germany
2. Medical Faculty University of Freiburg Germany
3. Eisai GmbH Frankfurt am Main Germany
4. Mainz Comprehensive Epilepsy and Sleep Medicine Center, Department of Neurology University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Germany
5. Department of Neurology Philipps‐University Marburg Germany
Abstract
AbstractObjectiveTo report the interim results of the PERPRISE study (Study 509; NCT04202159), which is evaluating perampanel as the only adjunctive anti‐seizure medication (ASM) in adults with focal to bilateral tonic‐clonic seizures (FBTCS) or primary generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS).MethodsPERPRISE is an ongoing 12‐month multicenter, prospective, observational, non‐interventional study of perampanel in a real‐world setting in Germany. Patients are aged ≥18 years with FBTCS or GTCS due to focal or idiopathic generalized epilepsy. Perampanel, as an adjunctive therapy to ASM monotherapy (‘add‐on therapy’) or as a substitute for one ASM in dual therapy (‘substitution therapy’), is prescribed in line with its SmPC. The Interim Analysis Set comprises the first 100 patients who received ≥1 dose of perampanel and attended or discontinued prior to the ~6‐month visit. Interim endpoints include retention rate, measures of effects on seizure frequency, and treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs).Results100 patients were included in the Interim Analysis Set (add‐on, n=43 [43.0%]; substitution, n=55 [55.0%]; unknown, n=2). The 6‐month retention rate was 78.0% (add‐on, 83.7%; substitution, 72.7%). For the overall population with GTCS and/or FBTCS, seizure‐freedom rate at 6 months was 58.8% (add‐on, 72.2%; substitution, 47.9%) and 50% responder rate at 6 months was 82.6% (add‐on, 89.2%; substitution, 76.6%). Retention rates and seizure outcomes were better with perampanel as an early‐line treatment than as a late‐line treatment. TEAEs were reported by 48 patients (48.0%), most commonly dizziness (n=9), fatigue (n=7), and irritability (n=7). Sixteen patients (16.0%) withdrew from perampanel treatment due to TEAEs.SignificanceThe interim analysis of PERPRISE offers insight into the real‐world use of perampanel in Germany, including for the first time, clinical practice data from patients with GTCS and switching ASMs within a dual therapy. Further data from PERPRISE will be of value to inform clinical decision‐making in this patient cohort.
Subject
Neurology (clinical),Neurology