C. Martellino , G. Salafica , G. Tripepi , A. Vinaccia , G. Atanasio , Diana Tilenni , F. Lamanna , O. Pardeo , M. Panebianco , L. Urso , G. Maira , P. Laisa , S. Zappulla , M. Gammino , D.Lo Coco , L. Agrò , R. Avarello , L. Zummo , A. Laganà , A. Labate
{"title":"The efficacy of switching intravenous to oral brivaracetam following status epilepticus: A real-world, multicenter Sicilian study","authors":"C. Martellino , G. Salafica , G. Tripepi , A. Vinaccia , G. Atanasio , Diana Tilenni , F. Lamanna , O. Pardeo , M. Panebianco , L. Urso , G. Maira , P. Laisa , S. Zappulla , M. Gammino , D.Lo Coco , L. Agrò , R. Avarello , L. Zummo , A. Laganà , A. Labate","doi":"10.1016/j.yebeh.2025.110744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Brivaracetam (BRV) is a third-generation antiseizure medication (ASM) that acts as a high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A), sharing a similar mechanism of action with levetiracetam (LEV). Nevertheless, BRV exhibits higher binding affinity and selectivity for SV2A and a more favorable safety profile. We aim to study the efficacy of switching intravenous to oral BRV following status epilepticus (SE) and cluster seizures.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational study performed at seven Sicilian epilepsy centers in the context of real-world clinical practice. Recruited patients received intravenous BRV as a second-line treatment for SE and subsequently switched to oral administration. Outcome measures were responder rate (≥ 50 % seizure reduction), sustained seizure freedom and the occurrence of adverse events. were defined as the occurrence, number, and type of adverse events (AEs).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>75 patients were included in the study whereas seven were excluded because of death before six months of follow-up and five were because lost at follow-up. Sixty-two patients (mean age 69.63 ± 12.99) were included in the present analyses. The mean dosage of BRV was 165 mg (SD 50,04) mg/day at 8.7 months. The retention rate of BRV was 93.7 %. At follow-up, 30 (47.6 %) patients showed sustained seizure freedom, in 22 (34.9 %) seizure frequency decreased ≥ 50 % and 10 (16,1%) experienced a clinical worsening. Adverse events (AEs) were observed in two out of 62 participants (3.2 %). We didn’t find any correlation between sex, age, dosage of BRV and the sustained seizure freedom or the reduction in the number of seizures ≥ 50 % (p = 0.57; p = 0.26; p = 0.57, respectively). Patients with vascular aetiology had a likelihood of resolution or a reduction ≥ 50 % approximately three times higher (odds ratio 3.13<!--> <!-->(IC 95 %: 1.01–9.77), p = 0.05) than others.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The switch of BRV from intravenous to oral administration has demonstrated a good effectiveness and safety profile in long-term treatment of epilepsy following a prior SE particularly in patients with vascular diseases.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11847,"journal":{"name":"Epilepsy & Behavior","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 110744"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epilepsy & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1525505025004846","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Brivaracetam (BRV) is a third-generation antiseizure medication (ASM) that acts as a high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A), sharing a similar mechanism of action with levetiracetam (LEV). Nevertheless, BRV exhibits higher binding affinity and selectivity for SV2A and a more favorable safety profile. We aim to study the efficacy of switching intravenous to oral BRV following status epilepticus (SE) and cluster seizures.
Methods
We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational study performed at seven Sicilian epilepsy centers in the context of real-world clinical practice. Recruited patients received intravenous BRV as a second-line treatment for SE and subsequently switched to oral administration. Outcome measures were responder rate (≥ 50 % seizure reduction), sustained seizure freedom and the occurrence of adverse events. were defined as the occurrence, number, and type of adverse events (AEs).
Results
75 patients were included in the study whereas seven were excluded because of death before six months of follow-up and five were because lost at follow-up. Sixty-two patients (mean age 69.63 ± 12.99) were included in the present analyses. The mean dosage of BRV was 165 mg (SD 50,04) mg/day at 8.7 months. The retention rate of BRV was 93.7 %. At follow-up, 30 (47.6 %) patients showed sustained seizure freedom, in 22 (34.9 %) seizure frequency decreased ≥ 50 % and 10 (16,1%) experienced a clinical worsening. Adverse events (AEs) were observed in two out of 62 participants (3.2 %). We didn’t find any correlation between sex, age, dosage of BRV and the sustained seizure freedom or the reduction in the number of seizures ≥ 50 % (p = 0.57; p = 0.26; p = 0.57, respectively). Patients with vascular aetiology had a likelihood of resolution or a reduction ≥ 50 % approximately three times higher (odds ratio 3.13 (IC 95 %: 1.01–9.77), p = 0.05) than others.
Conclusions
The switch of BRV from intravenous to oral administration has demonstrated a good effectiveness and safety profile in long-term treatment of epilepsy following a prior SE particularly in patients with vascular diseases.
期刊介绍:
Epilepsy & Behavior is the fastest-growing international journal uniquely devoted to the rapid dissemination of the most current information available on the behavioral aspects of seizures and epilepsy.
Epilepsy & Behavior presents original peer-reviewed articles based on laboratory and clinical research. Topics are drawn from a variety of fields, including clinical neurology, neurosurgery, neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, neurophysiology, neuropharmacology, and neuroimaging.
From September 2012 Epilepsy & Behavior stopped accepting Case Reports for publication in the journal. From this date authors who submit to Epilepsy & Behavior will be offered a transfer or asked to resubmit their Case Reports to its new sister journal, Epilepsy & Behavior Case Reports.