Effect of lifetime antiepileptic drug treatment history on efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in adults with focal seizures: Post-hoc analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in adults with focal seizures by the number of lifetime (previous and concomitant) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of data from N01358 (NCT01261325), a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled Phase III trial evaluating BRV 100 and 200 mg/day in patients ≥16 years of age with uncontrolled focal seizures. Efficacy and tolerability outcomes were assessed for the 12-week Treatment Period in subgroups of patients with 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, or ≥7 lifetime AEDs. RESULTS: 764 patients received at least one dose of trial medication (BRV: 503; PBO: 261; Safety Set), of whom 14.3% had 1-2, 20.8% had 3-4, 21.3% had 5-6, and 43.6% had ≥7 lifetime AEDs. In all lifetime AED subgroups, >85% of patients completed the trial. Patients with a higher number of lifetime AEDs had a younger age at epilepsy onset, longer epilepsy duration, and higher baseline seizure frequency. In patients on BRV, 50% responder rates were 49.3%, 44.4%, 47.2% and 27.4% in patients with 1-2 (n = 75), 3-4 (n = 99), 5-6 (n = 108) and ≥7 (n = 219) lifetime AEDs; 75% responder rates were 36.0%, 21.2%, 22.2% and 12.3%. In patients on PBO, 50% responder rates were 35.3%, 25.9%, 20.4% and 15.9% in patients with 1-2 (n = 34), 3-4 (n = 58), 5-6 (n = 54) and ≥7 (n = 113) lifetime AEDs; 75% responder rates were 26.5%, 6.9%, 3.7% and 4.4%. The Kaplan-Meier estimated probability of patients achieving a sustained 50% or 75% response from the first day of treatment was generally higher in patients with a lower number of lifetime AEDs (both in patients on BRV and PBO). In patients on adjunctive BRV, the incidence of drug related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 34.7%, 26.0%, 44.4% and 47.7% in patients with 1-2 (n = 75), 3-4 (n = 100), 5-6 (n = 108) and ≥7 (n = 220) lifetime AEDs; the incidence of discontinuations due to TEAEs was 1.3%, 3.0%, 8.3% and 10.5%. CONCLUSIONS: This post-hoc analysis suggests a numerically higher response to adjunctive BRV in patients with fewer lifetime AEDs. The lowest response was observed in patients with ≥7 lifetime AEDs, although these patients could also benefit from adjunctive BRV treatment. Patients with fewer lifetime AEDs had lower discontinuation of BRV due to TEAEs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".