ReviewBiomedicines2023
Efficacy and Tolerability of Perampanel in Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy: A Systematic Review.
Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Perampanel as add-on in high-grade glioma-related epilepsy: Seizure control and QoL in a prospective, multicenter, real-world 6-month follow-up study.Epilepsia open · 2026Observational
- The malignant synapse: architecture, signal integration, and therapeutic vulnerabilities in glioma.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- Neuro-glioma activity-dependent growth mechanisms: an actionable circuit from NLGN3-ADAM10 to AMPA synapses.Translational cancer research · 2026Review
- The influence of neuro-tumor interactions on tumorigenesis and therapeutic response.Experimental hematology & oncology · 2026Review
- Neuron-Glioma Synapses in Tumor Progression.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Research progress in glioma-related epilepsy (Review).Biomedical reports · 2025Article
- Significance of miR-1290 in glioblastoma patients with epilepsy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Efficacy of perampanel by etiology in Japanese patients with epilepsy-subpopulation analysis of a prospective post-marketing observational study.Epilepsia open · 2024Observational
- Perampanel for Treatment of People with a Range of Epilepsy Aetiologies in Clinical Practice: Evidence from the PERMIT Extension Study.Neurology and therapy · 2024Article
- Intrinsic brain activity differences in perampanel-responsive and non-responsive drug-resistant epilepsy patients: an EEG microstate analysis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2024Article
- Neuromodulation for Brain Tumors: Myth or Reality? A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- A nomogram to predict the treatment benefit of perampanel in drug-resistant epilepsy patients.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Epilepsy is a frequent comorbidity in patients with brain tumors, in whom seizures are often drug-resistant. Current evidence suggests that excess of glutamatergic activity in the tumor microenvironment may favor epileptogenesis, but also tumor growth and invasiveness. The selective non-competitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist perampanel (PER) was demonstrated to be efficacious and well-tolerated in patients with focal seizures. Moreover, preclinical in vitro studies suggested a potential anti-tumor activity of this drug. In this systematic review, the clinical evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of PER in brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is summarized. (2) Methods: Five databases and two clinical trial registries were searched from inception to December 2022. (3) Results: Seven studies and six clinical trials were included. Sample size ranged from 8 to 36 patients, who received add-on PER (mean dosage from 4 to 7 mg/day) for BTRE. After a 6-12 month follow-up, the responder rate (% of patients achieving seizure freedom or reduction ≥ 50% of seizure frequency) ranged from 75% to 95%, with a seizure freedom rate of up to 94%. Regarding tolerability, 11-52% of patients experienced non-severe adverse effects (most frequent: dizziness, vertigo, anxiety, irritability). The retention rate ranged from 56% to 83%. However, only up to 12.5% of patients discontinued the drug because of the adverse events. (4) Conclusions: PER seems to be efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated in patients with BTRE. Further randomized studies should be conducted in more homogeneous and larger populations, also evaluating the effect of PER on tumor progression, overall survival, and progression-free survival.
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.