Faculty Bibliography

Clinical trials as part of antiepileptic drug development are increasingly expensive and complex, with many pitfalls that can derail even promising drugs and devices. Although a third of patients remain resistant to treatment, the availability of more than 20 approved antiepileptic drugs can reduce the incentive to enrol in trials of unproven agents, for which safety is not assured. The challenge of recruiting patients drives investigators to regions of the world where treatment options are more limited. This increases complexity and has potential implications for quality of the trial data. Furthermore, the availability of so many approved treatments raises questions about the ethics and safety of placebo-controlled trials in patients with epilepsy. Novel trial designs, such as time-to-event adjunctive therapy and historical-control monotherapy, might be more acceptable to patients and their doctors because they restrict exposure to placebo or ineffective treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of once-daily 8 or 12 mg perampanel, a noncompetitive alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole-propionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist, when added to concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in the treatment of drug-resistant partial-onset seizures. METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00699972). Patients (>/=12 years, with ongoing seizures despite 1-3 AEDs) were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily perampanel 8 mg, 12 mg, or placebo. Following baseline (6 weeks), patients entered a 19-week double-blind phase: 6-week titration (2 mg/week increments to target dose) followed by a 13-week maintenance period. Percent change in seizure frequency was the primary endpoint; 50% responder rate was the primary endpoint for EU registration. RESULTS: Of 388 patients randomized and treated, 387 provided seizure frequency data. Using this intent-to-treat population over the double-blind phase, the median percent change in seizure frequency was -21.0%, -26.3%, and -34.5% for placebo and perampanel 8 and 12 mg, respectively (p = 0.0261 and p = 0.0158 for 8 and 12 mg vs placebo, respectively). Fifty percent responder rates during the maintenance period were 26.4%, 37.6%, and 36.1%, respectively, for placebo, perampanel 8 mg, and perampanel 12 mg; these differences were not statistically significant for 8 mg (p = 0.0760) or 12 mg (p = 0.0914). Sixty-eight (17.5%) patients discontinued, including 40 (10.3%) for adverse events. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events were dizziness, somnolence, irritability, headache, fall, and ataxia. CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrated that once-daily, adjunctive perampanel at doses of 8 or 12 mg improved seizure control in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures. Doses of perampanel 8 and 12 mg were safe, and tolerability was acceptable. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that once-daily 8 and 12 mg doses of adjunctive perampanel are effective in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures.

Early withdrawal of patients from a clinical trial can compromise the robustness of the data by introducing bias into the analysis. This is most commonly addressed by using the "intent to treat" (ITT) population and "last observation carried forward" (LOCF) methodology, where a patient's last assessment is carried forward. This can lead to overstatement of treatment efficacy especially if events indicative of treatment failure are infrequent. An alternative methodology, labeled "pragmatic ITT" (P-ITT), requires patients to have a positive outcome and to complete the trial in order to be considered a treatment success by that outcome measure. Data from 3 randomized multicenter lamotrigine extended-release (LTG XR) trials were analyzed and response (proportions seizure-free and with 50% response) were compared using LOCF and P-ITT methodologies. In 2 of the 3 trials, a lower response for both seizure freedom and 50% response was seen during the Maintenance phase using the P-ITT methodology. In the trial that did not show a difference, only a small number of patients withdrew early, thus negating the benefit brought by the P-ITT method. Differences between methodologies were not noted when evaluation was applied to the entire treatment period, most likely a reflection of the fact that a therapeutic dose of lamotrigine is not rapidly achieved. We propose that the P-ITT may be a simpler, more informative method for evaluating the effectiveness of a drug, especially in comparison to another active drug(s).

Object The authors evaluated the extent to which the Subdural Pharmacotherapy Device (SPD), chronically implanted over the frontal cortex to perform periodic, localized muscimol-delivery/CSF removal cycles, affects overall behavior, motor performance, electroencephalography (EEG) activity, and blood and CSF neurochemistry in macaque monkeys. Methods Two monkeys were used to adjust methodology and 4 monkeys were subjected to comprehensive testing. Prior to surgery, the animals' behavior in a large test chamber was monitored, and the motor skills required to remove food pellets from food ports located on the walls of the chamber were determined. The monkeys underwent implantation of the subdural and extracranial SPD units. The subdural unit, a silicone strip integrating EEG electrodes and fluid-exchange ports, was positioned over the right frontal cortex. The control unit included a battery-powered, microprocessor-regulated dual minipump and radiofrequency module secured to the cranium. After implantation, the SPD automatically performed periodic saline or muscimol (1.0 mM) deliveries at 12-hour intervals, alternating with local CSF removals at 6-hour intervals. The antiepileptic efficacy of this muscimol concentration was verified by demonstrating its ability to prevent focal acetylcholine-induced seizures. During SPD treatment, the monkeys' behavior and motor performance were again monitored, and the power spectrum of their radiofrequency-transmitted EEG recordings was analyzed. Serum and CSF muscimol levels were measured with high-performance liquid chromatography electrochemical detection, and CSF protein levels were measured with turbidimetry. Results The SPD was well tolerated in all monkeys for up to 11 months. The behavioral study revealed that during both saline and muscimol SPD treatment, the monkeys could achieve the maximum motor performance of 40 food-pellet removals per session, as before surgery. The EEG study showed that local EEG power spectra were not affected by muscimol treatment with SPD. The neurochemical study demonstrated that the administration of 1.0 mM muscimol into the neocortical subarachnoid space led to no detectable levels of this compound in the blood and cisternal CSF, as measured 1-125 minutes after delivery. Total protein levels were within the normal range in the cisternal CSF, but protein levels in the cortical-site CSF were significantly higher than normal: 361 +/- 81.6 mg/dl. Abrupt discontinuation of 3-month, periodic, subdural muscimol treatments induced withdrawal seizures, which could be completely prevented by gradually tapering off the subdural muscimol concentration from 1.0 mM to 0.12-0.03 mM over a period of 2 weeks. The monkeys' general health and weight were maintained. Infection occurred only in one monkey 9 months after surgery. Conclusions Long-term, periodic, transmeningeal muscimol delivery with the SPD is essentially a safe procedure. If further improved and successfully adapted for use in humans, the SPD can be used for the treatment of intractable focal neocortical epilepsy affecting approximately 150,000 patients in the US.

Patient age can impact selection of the optimal antiepileptic drug for a number of reasons. Changes in brain physiology from neonate to elderly, as well as changes in underlying etiologies of epilepsy, could potentially affect the ability of different drugs to control seizures. Unfortunately, much of this is speculative, as good studies demonstrating differences in efficacy across age ranges do not exist. Beyond the issue of efficacy, certain drugs may be more or less appropriate at different ages because of differing pharmacokinetics, including changes in hepatic metabolism, absorption, and elimination. Lack of appropriate drug formulations (such as liquid forms) may be a barrier to using drugs in the very young. Finally, some serious adverse events are seen either exclusively or preferentially at different ages.

PURPOSE: An NINDS-sponsored conference in April of 2011 reviewed issues in epilepsy clinical trials. One goal was to clarify new electronic methods for recording seizure information and other data in clinical trials. METHODS: This selective literature review and compilation of expert opinion considers advantages and limitations of traditional paper-based seizure diaries in comparison to electronic diaries. KEY FINDINGS: Seizure diaries are a type of patient-reported outcome. All seizure diaries depend first on accurate recognition and recording of seizures, which is a problem since about half of seizures recorded during video-EEG monitoring are not known to the patient. Reliability of recording is another key issue. Diaries may not be at hand after a seizure, lost or not brought to clinic visits. On-line electronic diaries have several potential advantages over paper diaries. Smartphones are increasingly accessible as data entry gateways. Data are not easily lost and are accessible from clinic. Entries can be time-stamped and provide immediate feedback, validation or reminders. Data can also can be graphed and pasted into an EMR. Disadvantages include need for digital sophistication, higher cost, increased setup time, and requiring attention to potential privacy issues. The Epilepsy Diary by epilepsy.com and Irody, Inc. has over 13,000 registrants and SeizureTracker over 10,000, and both are used for clinical and research purposes. Some studies have documented patient preference and increased compliance for electronic versus paper diaries. Seizure diaries can be challenging in the pediatric population. Children often have multiple seizure types and limited reporting of subjective symptoms. Multiple caregivers during the day require more training to produce reliable and consistent data. Diary-based observational studies have the advantages of low cost, allowing locus-of-control by the patient and testing in a "real-world" environment. Diary-based studies can also be useful as descriptive "snapshots" of a population. However, the type of information available is very different from that obtained by prospective controlled studies. The act of self-recording observations may itself influence the observation, for example, by causing the subject to attend more vigilantly to seizures after changing medication. Pivotal anti-seizure drug or device trials still mostly rely on paper-based seizure diaries. Industry is aware of the potential advantages of electronic diaries, particularly, the promise of real-time transmission of data, time-stamping of entries, reminders to subjects, and potentially automatic interfaces to other devices. However, until diaries are validated as research tools and the regulatory environment becomes clearer, adoption of new types of diaries as markers for a primary study outcome will be cautious. SIGNIFICANCE: Recommendations from the conference included: further studies of validity of epilepsy diaries and how they can be used to improve adherence; use and further development of core data sets, such as the one recently developed by NINDS; encouraging links of diaries to electronic sensors; development of diary privacy and legal policies; examination of special pediatric diary issues; development of principles for observational research from diaries; and work with the FDA to make electronic diaries more useful in industry-sponsored clinical trials.