ucb-34714 and Dizziness

The objective of this analysis was to provide a comprehensive analysis of safety data for adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV), an antiepileptic drug (AED) of the racetam class, for treatment of focal seizures in patients with epilepsy.. Data were pooled from two phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-ranging trials (N01114 [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00175929], N01193 [NCT00175825]) and three phase III, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 12-week trials (N01252 [NCT00490035], N01253 [NCT00464269], and N01358 [NCT01261325]) in patients aged ≥16 years with focal seizures, as well as a phase III, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 16-week trial in patients aged ≥16 years with focal or generalized epilepsy (N01254 [NCT00504881]). Data are presented for the approved therapeutic dose range of 50-200 mg/day. Data for BRV administered intravenously (25-150 mg doses) were pooled separately from one phase III trial (N01258 NCT01405508]) and two clinical pharmacology trials (N01256 [Part B] [UCB Pharma, data on file]; EP0007 [NCT01796899]). Adverse events (AEs) of interest were summarized in relevant categories.. The safety pool comprised 1957 patients: 1271 receiving adjunctive BRV and 686 receiving placebo. Overall, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 66.9% with BRV versus 62.8% with placebo. The most frequently reported TEAEs with BRV (≥5% of patients) versus placebo were somnolence (13.3% vs. 7.9%), headache (10.5% vs. 11.5%), dizziness (10.0% vs. 7.0%), and fatigue (8.2% vs. 4.2%). Incidence of psychiatric disorder-related TEAEs was 11.3% with BRV versus 8.2% with placebo. Behavioral disorder-related TEAE incidence was low (4.0% with BRV vs. 2.5% with placebo). Irritability was reported in 2.7% of BRV-treated patients vs. 1.5% of patients receiving placebo; anger, aggression, and agitation were each reported by ≤1% of patients receiving BRV. Treatment-emergent adverse events potentially associated with psychosis were psychotic disorder (three patients on BRV vs. two patients on placebo), auditory hallucination, illusion, visual hallucination (one patient each on BRV), epileptic psychosis, and hallucination (one patient each on placebo). No additional safety concerns were identified in patients with intravenous (IV) BRV administration (n = 104).. These safety data for adjunctive BRV support its acceptable safety and tolerability profile.

Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Anticonvulsants; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dizziness; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Epilepsy; Fatigue; Humans; Pyrrolidinones; Treatment Outcome

Brivaracetam is the latest antiepileptic drug to be approved for adjunctive therapy in focal epilepsy and has a high affinity as a SV2A ligand. The aim of this review article is to summarize the data from the pivotal studies in which more than 2000 patients received brivaracetam. A significant median reduction in seizures from 30.5 % to 53.1 % for 50 mg/day, from 32.5 % to 37.2 % for 100 mg/day and 35.6 % for 200 mg/day could be demonstrated. Overall brivaracetam appears to be well-tolerated, with fatigue, dizziness and somnolence being the main adverse side effects. An immediate change from levetiracetam to brivaracetam at a conversion ratio of 10:1 to 15:1 seems feasible and could alleviate behavioral side effects related to treatment with levetiracetam. A swift permeability into brain tissue and a faster onset of action compared to levetiracetam suggest that brivaracetam could be useful in emergency situations.

Topics: Anticonvulsants; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disorders of Excessive Somnolence; Dizziness; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Epilepsies, Partial; Evidence-Based Medicine; Fatigue; Humans; Pyrrolidinones; Treatment Outcome

The objective of the present trial was to assess efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) brivaracetam (BRV) vs. lorazepam (LZP) in patients with epilepsy undergoing evaluation in an epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) who experienced seizures requiring acute treatment.. This was a phase 2, open-label, randomized, active-control, proof-of-concept trial (EP0087; NCT03021018). Patients (18-70 years) admitted to EMU were randomized 1:1:1 to single-dose bolus IV LZP (dose per investigator's practice), IV BRV 100 mg, or IV BRV 200 mg. Trial medication had to be administered within 30 min of qualifying seizure. Primary efficacy outcome was time to next seizure (clinical observation with electroencephalogram [EEG] confirmation) or to rescue medication use within 12 h of trial medication administration. Secondary outcomes included seizure freedom and rescue medication use within 12 h of trial medication administration. Safety and tolerability outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).. Overall, 46 patients were randomized, and 45 received trial medication for a qualifying seizure. Patients in the LZP arm had doses from 1 to 4 mg (median: 1 mg). Eleven of 45 patients had a seizure within 12 h of trial medication administration (LZP 5/15 [median time to next seizure: 5.55 h], BRV 100 mg 3/15 [5.97 h], BRV 200 mg 3/15 [3.60 h]). No patients received additional rescue medication to control their qualifying seizure. Most patients were seizure-free over 12 h (LZP 9/15 [60.0%], BRV 100 mg 12/15 [80.0%], BRV 200 mg 12/15 [80.0%]). Rescue medication use within 12 h was numerically higher for LZP (6/15 [40.0%]) vs. BRV 100 mg (1/15 [6.7%]) and vs. BRV 200 mg (2/15 [13.3%]). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 5/16 (31.3%), 6/15 (40.0%), and 3/15 (20.0%) of LZP, BRV 100 mg, and BRV 200 mg patients; one LZP patient had a serious TEAE (seizure cluster). Most common TEAEs (≥10% of patients) were sedation and somnolence with LZP, and dizziness, headache, and nausea with BRV.. Intravenous LZP, IV BRV 100 mg, and IV BRV 200 mg showed similar efficacy in controlling acute seizure activity in the EMU. Treatment-emergent adverse events were as expected for each medication. Although this trial should be interpreted with caution because of small patient numbers, it suggests a possible role of BRV in the acute treatment of increased seizure activity.

Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anticonvulsants; Dizziness; Double-Blind Method; Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Female; Humans; Lorazepam; Male; Middle Aged; Proof of Concept Study; Pyrrolidinones; Seizures; Sleepiness; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

This long-term follow-up (LTFU) trial was conducted to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) at individualized doses (maximum of 200 mg/day) in patients with focal seizures. The secondary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of BRV over time.. Two Phase III, randomized, double-blind, historical-controlled conversion-to-monotherapy trials (N01276: NCT00698581; N01306: NCT00699283) were conducted in patients aged ≥16 years with uncontrolled focal seizures. Patients who completed either of these core trials or who met a protocol-defined exit criterion could enter this LTFU trial (N01315; NCT00761774). Patients entered LTFU at a recommended BRV dose of 100 mg/day, with flexible dosing of 50-200 mg/day, as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy; additional AEDs could be prescribed and adapted in dose if clinically indicated. Safety variables included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy variables included duration of continuous monotherapy, reduction in focal seizure frequency and seizure freedom. Safety and efficacy variables were assessed for all patients in the safety set or efficacy set, respectively, regardless of BRV treatment regimen. In addition, a post hoc subgroup analysis was conducted for patients who completed the BRV monotherapy period in either core trial, and entered the LTFU on BRV monotherapy. For this subgroup, TEAEs were summarized by 3-month time intervals over the first 12 months of LTFU.. 108 patients were enrolled in the LTFU trial between November 2008 and February 2010. 79 (73.1 %) patients discontinued the LTFU trial, most commonly due to lack of efficacy [37 (34.3 %)] and adverse events [16 (14.8 %)]. At core trial baseline, patients had a median of 6.3 focal seizures/28 days and 53 (49.1 %) had failed ≥5 previous lifetime AEDs. During LTFU, 70 (64.8 %) patients had ≥12 months and 56 (51.9 %) patients had ≥24 months of BRV treatment. TEAEs were reported by 98 (90.7 %) patients; most commonly (≥15 % of patients) convulsion (17.6 %), nasopharyngitis (17.6 %), depression (16.7 %) and fatigue (15.7 %). Median percent reduction from baseline in focal seizure frequency/28 days was 56.8 %. Among 86 patients who completed at least 6 months of treatment, 29 (33.7 %) patients were seizure-free for ≥6 months and 22 (25.6 %) were seizure-free for ≥12 months. 50/108 patients were included in the BRV monotherapy subgroup; 33/50 (66.0 %) patients reported a TEAE in the core trials, while 26/50 (52.0 %), 15/37 (40.5 %), 14/33 (42.4 %) and 9/27 (33.3 %) patients reported any TEAE during LTFU months 1-3, 4-6, 7-9 and 10-12, respectively. In the BRV monotherapy subgroup, the most common TEAEs (≥5% of patients) during LTFU months 1-3 were fatigue [3/50 (6.0 %)] and dizziness [3/50 (6.0 %)].. Results from the LTFU trial support the long-term safety of BRV at individualized doses of up to 200 mg/day as a well-tolerated, and effective treatment for patients with focal seizures. Efficacy analyses indicate that seizure reductions with brivaracetam were generally maintained over time.

Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Dizziness; Double-Blind Method; Fatigue; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Internationality; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrrolidinones; Seizures; Treatment Outcome

The objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) with concomitant use of lamotrigine (LTG) or topiramate (TPM) in patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.. Data were pooled from three randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III studies (NCT00490035/N01252, NCT00464269/N01253, NCT01261325/N01358) of adults with focal (partial-onset) seizures. Patients taking concomitant levetiracetam were excluded from the efficacy populations, but included in the safety populations. This post-hoc analysis reports data from patients taking BRV in the approved therapeutic range (50-200mg/day) concomitantly with LTG or TPM.. The number of patients in each of the three BRV dosage groups was small, particularly for the TPM subgroup. Mean percent reduction over placebo in baseline-adjusted focal seizure frequency/28days for BRV 50, 100, and 200mg/day was 8.7, 5.3, and 8.9 in the LTG subgroup (n=220), and 8.4, 21.3, and -4.2 in the TPM subgroup (n=122). The ≥50% responder rate with concomitant LTG or TPM with BRV 50, 100, and 200mg/day or placebo was LTG: 28.1%, 36.1%, 34.1%, and 29.1%; and TPM: 14.3%, 44.4%, 25.0%, and 17.5%. There were numerically ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, and 100% responder rates for patients taking BRV ≥50mg/day compared with placebo in both subgroups. In the LTG and TPM safety populations (n=245 versus n=125), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported with LTG 68.7% versus 68.4%, and TPM 65.6% versus 57.8% (BRV ≥50mg/day versus placebo). Discontinuations due to TEAEs versus placebo were LTG 7.3% versus 6.3% and TPM 8.2% versus 4.7%. The three most frequently reported TEAEs for both subgroups were somnolence, dizziness, and fatigue. Of these, the incidence of fatigue in the LTG population appeared to increase with dose.. In this post-hoc pooled analysis, BRV administered with concomitant LTG or TPM reduced seizure frequency and was generally well tolerated for BRV doses of 50-200mg/day.

Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Dizziness; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Lamotrigine; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrrolidinones; Seizures; Sleepiness; Topiramate; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Patients with intellectual disability (ID) are often excluded from clinical trials, and little is known about the best approach to treat their epilepsy. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) for adjunctive treatment in patients with focal-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization. We analyzed the efficacy and tolerability of BRV in patients with ID and epilepsy who either had or had not previously received treatment with levetiracetam (LEV). Data on efficacy and tolerability were retrospectively collected. After the initial start of BRV in our tertiary epilepsy center, we analyzed medical records at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months of follow-up. 116 patients were included (mean age = 34.9 years, 44% female). All had complete data of 3-month follow-up, 76 of 6-month follow-up, and 39 patients of 1-year follow-up. Median starting dose of BRV was 50.0 mg/day and the mean number of concomitant AEDs was 2.6. Seizure reduction and no side effects were reported in more than half of all patients. The most reported side effects were somnolence, dizziness and aggression. Retention rates for BRV were 84.4%, 75.5% and 58.1% after 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. Seizure reduction and side effects did not differ significantly between the groups with or without previous LEV treatment. We demonstrate that BRV is effective and well tolerated in patients with epilepsy and ID, even in those where previous LEV treatment failed.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anticonvulsants; Child; Dizziness; Epilepsy; Fatigue; Female; Headache; Humans; Intellectual Disability; Male; Middle Aged; Pyrrolidinones; Retrospective Studies; Sleepiness; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in a refractory epilepsy population in an outpatient clinical setting.. Retrospective medical information system review and self-report questionnaire for all patients treated with BRV until the end of 2017.. Thirty-eight patients were included, 73.7% female and mean age 36.2. The mean number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for previous use was 8.9, and for current use was 2.5. Mean seizure frequency in the last 3 months was 12 per month. At 3, 6, 12, and 15 months, the 50% responder rates were 36.1%, 32%, 41.2%, and 45.5%, respectively. Patients took BRV for a median duration of 8.25 months, ranging from 7 days to 60 months. Retention rate was 75.0%, 72.0%, 59.2%, and 47.9% at 3, 6, 12, and 15 months, respectively. Overall, the main reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs) (52.3%), lack of efficacy (35.3%), or both (11.8%). The rate of total AEs was 60.5% according to medical records and 85.7% according to questionnaire, including mostly tiredness, psychiatric, and memory complaints. Psychiatric side effects occurred in 31.6% according to medical records and 47.4% according to questionnaire results, which is higher than previously reported and persisted throughout the study period.. BRV appears to be a useful and safe add-on treatment, even in a very refractory group of patients. In this real-life clinical setting, psychiatric AEs were found at a higher rate than previously published.

Topics: Adult; Anger; Anticonvulsants; Anxiety; Canada; Depersonalization; Depression; Dizziness; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Emotional Regulation; Epilepsies, Partial; Epilepsy, Generalized; Female; Humans; Irritable Mood; Male; Memory Disorders; Middle Aged; Paranoid Disorders; Paresthesia; Pruritus; Pyrrolidinones; Retrospective Studies; Sleepiness; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult