Observational studyNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2021
Perampanel as first add-on choice on the treatment of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy: an observational real-life study.
Observational study in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel in patients with seizures in real-world clinical practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Sleep effects in drug-resistant epileptic patients taking perampanel: an observational study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Observational
- Effectiveness of perampanel as only concomitant antiseizure medication for highly active epilepsy: insight from a real-world, multicenter retrospective study.Journal of neurology · 2025Observational
- Observational
- Perampanel outcomes at different stages of treatment in people with focal and generalized epilepsy treated in clinical practice: Evidence from the PERMIT study.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- The broad-spectrum activity of perampanel: state of the art and future perspective of AMPA antagonism beyond epilepsy.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel: a Chinese real-world observational study in epilepsy.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Psychiatric and Behavioural Side Effects Associated With Perampanel in Patients With Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. A Real-World Experience.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the efficacy of perampanel (PER) in patients with a diagnosis of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) taking PER as first add-on option due to inefficacy of first antiepileptic drug (AED), rather than late add-on choice.
methodsThirty-seven MTLE patients aged ≥ 12 years were recruited consecutively with a minimum duration of follow-up of 1 year and intermediate follow-up of 3 months. Patients were divided into two groups: 20/37 taking PER as first add-on due to inefficacy of first AED (first group) and 17/37 taking PER as late add-on due to inefficacy of ≥ 2 AEDs (second group). Efficacy, retention rate, and safety were evaluated.
resultsAt 3 months, the 70% of the first group had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency, with six patients becoming also seizure free, while in the second group, only the 23.5% had a reduction > 50% of seizure frequency and none became seizure free (p = 0.005). Six patients of first group were also switched to a monotherapy of PER and five out of six remained seizure free at 12 months. At 1 year of follow-up, efficacy of PER was 70% for the first group, while only of 29.4% for the second group (p = 0.014). Retention rate of the first group at 3 months and 1 year was 85%, while for the second group was, respectively, 82.3% and 64.7%.
conclusionPER was significantly successful and tolerated in MTLE patients when used as first add-on option rather than as late add-on.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.