佩兰帕奈在临床实践中用于治疗不同病因的癫痫患者：来自 PERMIT 扩展研究的证据。

IF 3.9 3区医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurology and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-28 DOI:10.1007/s40120-024-00618-5

Adam Strzelczyk, Marta Maschio, Max C Pensel, Antonietta Coppola, Satoru Takahashi, Shuichi Izumoto, Eugen Trinka, Sheri Cappucci, Ricardo Sainz-Fuertes, Vicente Villanueva

{"title":"佩兰帕奈在临床实践中用于治疗不同病因的癫痫患者：来自 PERMIT 扩展研究的证据。","authors":"Adam Strzelczyk, Marta Maschio, Max C Pensel, Antonietta Coppola, Satoru Takahashi, Shuichi Izumoto, Eugen Trinka, Sheri Cappucci, Ricardo Sainz-Fuertes, Vicente Villanueva","doi":"10.1007/s40120-024-00618-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: It is important to assess the effectiveness of an antiseizure medication in treating different epilepsy aetiologies to optimise individualised therapeutic approaches. Data from the PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) Extension study were used to assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice.Methods: A post hoc analysis was conducted of PERMIT Extension data from individuals with a known aetiology. Retention was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included responder rate (≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation.Results: PERMIT Extension included 1945 individuals with structural aetiology, 1012 with genetic aetiology, 93 with an infectious aetiology, and 26 with an immune aetiology. Retention rates at 12 months were 61.1% (structural), 65.9% (genetic), 56.8% (infectious) and 56.5% (immune). At the last visit, responder rates (total seizures) were 43.3% (structural), 68.3% (genetic), 37.0% (infectious) and 20.0% (immune), and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 15.8%, 46.5%, 11.1% and 5.0%, respectively. AE incidence rates were 58.0% (structural), 46.5% (genetic), 51.1% (infectious) and 65.0% (immune), and corresponding rates of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months were 18.9%, 16.4%, 18.5% and 21.7%, respectively. The types of AEs reported were generally consistent across aetiology subgroups, with no idiosyncratic AEs emerging.Conclusion: Although PER was effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice, variability in its effectiveness and tolerability across the subgroups indicates that PER may be particularly useful for individuals with specific epilepsy aetiologies.","PeriodicalId":19216,"journal":{"name":"Neurology and Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11136933/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perampanel for Treatment of People with a Range of Epilepsy Aetiologies in Clinical Practice: Evidence from the PERMIT Extension Study.\",\"authors\":\"Adam Strzelczyk, Marta Maschio, Max C Pensel, Antonietta Coppola, Satoru Takahashi, Shuichi Izumoto, Eugen Trinka, Sheri Cappucci, Ricardo Sainz-Fuertes, Vicente Villanueva\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40120-024-00618-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: It is important to assess the effectiveness of an antiseizure medication in treating different epilepsy aetiologies to optimise individualised therapeutic approaches. Data from the PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) Extension study were used to assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice.Methods: A post hoc analysis was conducted of PERMIT Extension data from individuals with a known aetiology. Retention was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included responder rate (≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation.Results: PERMIT Extension included 1945 individuals with structural aetiology, 1012 with genetic aetiology, 93 with an infectious aetiology, and 26 with an immune aetiology. Retention rates at 12 months were 61.1% (structural), 65.9% (genetic), 56.8% (infectious) and 56.5% (immune). At the last visit, responder rates (total seizures) were 43.3% (structural), 68.3% (genetic), 37.0% (infectious) and 20.0% (immune), and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 15.8%, 46.5%, 11.1% and 5.0%, respectively. AE incidence rates were 58.0% (structural), 46.5% (genetic), 51.1% (infectious) and 65.0% (immune), and corresponding rates of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months were 18.9%, 16.4%, 18.5% and 21.7%, respectively. The types of AEs reported were generally consistent across aetiology subgroups, with no idiosyncratic AEs emerging.Conclusion: Although PER was effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice, variability in its effectiveness and tolerability across the subgroups indicates that PER may be particularly useful for individuals with specific epilepsy aetiologies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology and Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11136933/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-024-00618-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-024-00618-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

简介评估抗癫痫药物治疗不同癫痫病因的有效性对于优化个体化治疗方法非常重要。我们利用PERaMpanel疗效和耐受性汇总分析（PERMIT）扩展研究的数据来评估perampanel（PER）在临床实践中用于治疗各种不同病因的癫痫患者时的有效性和安全性/耐受性：对已知病因的患者的 PERMIT 扩展研究数据进行了事后分析。3个月、6个月和12个月后对保留率进行评估。疗效在 3、6 和 12 个月后以及最后一次就诊时进行评估（最后一次观察结转）。疗效评估包括应答率（发作频率减少≥50%）和无发作率（至少自上次就诊以来无发作）。安全性/耐受性通过评估不良事件（AE）和导致停药的AE进行评估：PERMIT 推广项目包括 1945 名结构性病因患者、1012 名遗传性病因患者、93 名感染性病因患者和 26 名免疫性病因患者。12个月的保留率分别为61.1%（结构性）、65.9%（遗传性）、56.8%（感染性）和56.5%（免疫性）。在最后一次就诊时，应答率（癫痫发作总数）分别为43.3%（结构性）、68.3%（遗传性）、37.0%（感染性）和20.0%（免疫性），相应的癫痫无发作率分别为15.8%、46.5%、11.1%和5.0%。AE发生率分别为58.0%（结构性）、46.5%（遗传性）、51.1%（感染性）和65.0%（免疫性），12个月内因AE而停药的相应比率分别为18.9%、16.4%、18.5%和21.7%。不同病因亚组报告的不良反应类型基本一致，没有出现特异性不良反应：尽管在临床实践中，PER 用于治疗各种病因引起的癫痫患者都很有效，而且耐受性普遍良好，但其有效性和耐受性在各亚组间的差异表明，PER 可能对特定病因引起的癫痫患者特别有用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Perampanel for Treatment of People with a Range of Epilepsy Aetiologies in Clinical Practice: Evidence from the PERMIT Extension Study.

Introduction: It is important to assess the effectiveness of an antiseizure medication in treating different epilepsy aetiologies to optimise individualised therapeutic approaches. Data from the PERaMpanel pooled analysIs of effecTiveness and tolerability (PERMIT) Extension study were used to assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice.

Methods: A post hoc analysis was conducted of PERMIT Extension data from individuals with a known aetiology. Retention was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months and at the last visit (last observation carried forward). Effectiveness assessments included responder rate (≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to discontinuation.

Results: PERMIT Extension included 1945 individuals with structural aetiology, 1012 with genetic aetiology, 93 with an infectious aetiology, and 26 with an immune aetiology. Retention rates at 12 months were 61.1% (structural), 65.9% (genetic), 56.8% (infectious) and 56.5% (immune). At the last visit, responder rates (total seizures) were 43.3% (structural), 68.3% (genetic), 37.0% (infectious) and 20.0% (immune), and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 15.8%, 46.5%, 11.1% and 5.0%, respectively. AE incidence rates were 58.0% (structural), 46.5% (genetic), 51.1% (infectious) and 65.0% (immune), and corresponding rates of discontinuation due to AEs over 12 months were 18.9%, 16.4%, 18.5% and 21.7%, respectively. The types of AEs reported were generally consistent across aetiology subgroups, with no idiosyncratic AEs emerging.

Conclusion: Although PER was effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat individuals with a range of epilepsy aetiologies in clinical practice, variability in its effectiveness and tolerability across the subgroups indicates that PER may be particularly useful for individuals with specific epilepsy aetiologies.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Neurology and Therapy CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

8.10%

发文量

103

审稿时长

6 weeks

期刊介绍： Aims and Scope Neurology and Therapy aims to provide reliable and inclusive, rapid publication for all therapy related research for neurological indications, supporting the timely dissemination of research with a global reach, to help advance scientific discovery and support clinical practice. Neurology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of neurological and psychiatric therapies, (also covering surgery and devices). Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also welcomed. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial designs, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Neurology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research. Rapid Publication The journal’s rapid publication timelines aim for a peer review decision within 2 weeks of submission. If an article is accepted, it will be published online 3-4 weeks from acceptance. These rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who closely manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with rapid peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model, this allows for the rapid and efficient communication of the latest research and reviews to support scientific discovery and clinical practice. Open Access All articles published by Neurology and Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning that authors will always have a personal point of contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. We also encourage pre-submission enquiries and are always happy to provide a confidential assessment of manuscripts. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Neurology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5250/$6000/£4300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case-by-case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviews conflict, an Editorial Board Member will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed. Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised, it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor, and authors are welcome to make rebuttals against individual reviewer comments, if appropriate. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors'' or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Please see here for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Neurology and Therapy is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact managing editor Lydia Alborn at lydia.alborn@springer.com.