![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
Abstract
Background
In the present meta-analysis, the efficacy and safety of perampanel (PER) for the treatment of adolescents with epilepsy were assessed.
Methods
Keyword searches were performed in Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO and CNKI from 1 January 2020 to 10 October 2020. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies in which PER was compared with other Anti-seizure drugs (ASDs) and/or placebo in children with epilepsy, were considered eligible studies. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the dichotomous outcome statistic was calculated using a fixed-effects or random-effects model.
Results
Three RCTs with a total of 372 adolescents’ patients were included in this meta-analysis. Placebo was used as a control in these studies. Compared with placebo, PER showed better efficacy in median seizure frequency reduction from baseline per 28 days (OR = 2.49, 95% CI: 1.25–4.96, p = 0.009) and in responder rate (OR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.15–3.05, p = 0.01); both were considered statistically increased in PER group. Regarding adverse effects (AEs), significant differences between PER and placebo (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 0.92–2.41, p = 0.11) were not found, and the most common AEs of PER were dizziness (24.0%), somnolence (15.9%), headache (11.2%), nasopharyngitis (9.7%), upper respiratory tract infection (7.0%) and aggression (7.0%).
Conclusion
Based on the results in this study, PER showed better efficacy than placebo therapy in children with epilepsy and the AEs were similar in PER group and placebo group. PER showed good efficacy and a low risk of AEs, and might be a promising medication for the treatment of pediatric epilepsy. In the future, well-designed and large-scale RCTs are necessary to validate the present findings.
Disclosure statement
The authors declare no potential competing interests.
Author contributions
Ting Wang: conception and design of study, literature search, data extraction, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting/editing manuscript. Limin Li: literature search and editing manuscript. Fei Sun: data extraction and drafting manuscript. Yonghua Yang: Providing funds and editing manuscript. Xiaohong Liu: Providing funds, design of study, analysis and interpretation of data, editing manuscript, and final approval of work. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
We promise that this paper has never been submitted to this or other journals before, and the original results are reliable and credible. We also confirm that no conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and the manuscript has been approved by all named authors.