Trial reportEpilepsia2025
Time to prerandomization seizure count design sufficiently assessed the safety and tolerability of perampanel for the treatment of focal seizures.
Trial report in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Escalation, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of E2007 (Perampanel) Given as Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects With Refractory Partial Seizures
A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Escalation, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of E2007 (Perampanel) Given as Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects With Refractory Partial Seizures
A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Escalation, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of E2007 (Perampanel) Given as Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects With Refractory Partial Seizures
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIn traditionally designed randomized clinical trials of antiseizure medications, participants take a blinded treatment for a prespecified number of weeks, irrespective of continued seizures. The alternative design time to prerandomization monthly seizure count (T-PSC) allows participants to end the blinded treatment after an individually prespecified number of seizures, which shortens exposure to placebo and ineffective treatment. Previous reanalyses have shown that T-PSC replicated the efficacy conclusions of trials; therefore, we evaluated whether T-PSC also could replicate tolerability and safety conclusions.
methodsWe retrospectively applied the T-PSC design to analyze treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) from three blinded, placebo-controlled trials of perampanel for focal onset seizures (NCT00699972, NCT00699582, NCT00700310). We evaluated the incidences of TEAEs, treatment-related TEAEs, serious TEAEs, and TEAEs that prompted medication adjustment compared to those observed during the full-length trial.
resultsOf the 1480 participants in the three trials, 1093 experienced any TEAE, of whom 1006 (92%) had onset prior to T-PSC. When evaluating the differences in each type of TEAE for each dose of perampanel from placebo within each trial, there was no consistent pattern of under- or overestimation. Across the three studies, 23 of 79 (29%) serious TEAEs, most requiring hospitalization, occurred after T-PSC. SIGNIFICANCE: Almost all TEAEs occurred before T-PSC. Similar conclusions regarding the tolerability and safety of perampanel would have been reached if the T-PSC design had been used. This suggests that the T-PSC design may potentially benefit participants by allowing earlier change from an ineffective treatment to an alternate treatment, which could reduce the risk of serious consequences of ineffective treatment, such as hospitalization.
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.