Real-life experience with brivaracetam in 101 patients with difficult-to-treat epilepsy—A monocenter survey. (May 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Steinhoff, Bernhard J.; Bacher, Matthias; Bucurenciu, Iancu; Hillenbrand, Barbara; Intravooth, Tassanai; Kornmeier, Reinhold; Kurth, Christoph; Stockinger, Jakob; Staack, Anke M.
• Is Part Of: Seizure. Volume 48(2017)
• Page Start: 11
• Page End: 14
• Publication Date: 2017-05
• Subjects: Brivaracetam -- Antiepileptic drugs -- Epilepsy -- Real world experience; Epilepsy -- Periodicals; Epilepsy -- Periodicals; Seizures -- Periodicals; Épilepsie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 616.853
• DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2017.03.010
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1059-1311

Abstract

Highlights: Real-world monocenter experience. Early clinical impressions. Efficacy and tolerability of brivaracetam in the setting of tertiary referral epilepsy center. First experiences with the with from levetiracetam to brivaracetam and back. Abstract: Purpose: To assess the efficiency of brivaracetam under real-world conditions in a tertiary referral epilepsy center. Methods: We consecutively collected patients treated at our center with brivaracetam (BRV). After a minimum observation period of six months we retrospectively analyzed the efficiency of BRV. Results: Data of 101 patients (mean age 42 years, range 18–81 years, 54 females, ) were analyzed. The median number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) used prior to BRV was 10 (range 2–18). The initial dose of BRV was at least 50 mg per day, the mean maintenance dose at cut-off was 168.6 mg (median 200 mg, range 50–400 mg). Efficacy data were assessed for the last three months or at the time of the last observation carried forward if BRV had been discontinued prematurely. Responder rate was 27.8% (n = 28) with 7% seizure-free patients. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 37 patients (37%). Most frequent AEs were dizziness (16%) and somnolence (11%). Psychiatric adverse events comprised irritability, aggression, depression and psychosis in single cases. Retention rate after six months was 51.5%. Main reason for discontinuation was a lack of efficacy. In 43 cases LEV and BRV were switched. The switch was performed abruptly without complications. In 26 cases (60%) BRV was discontinued and re-switched to LEV within weeks, mainly due to a lack of better efficacy. After the switch from LEV to BRV we even saw an aggravation both of seizure frequency and severity in 5 cases. Retention rate in patients who had not been on LEV was 57%. Conclusion: In our hands BRV appeared to be well tolerated and easy to handle. The retention rate was influenced by patients who were switched from LEV and re-switched because BRV was not more efficient. Switching from and re-switching to LEV was easy.