Perioperative perampanel administration for early seizure prophylaxis in brain tumor patients

Kosuke Kusakabe; Akihiro Inoue; Hideaki Watanabe; Yawara Nakamura; Masahiro Nishikawa; Yoshihiro Ohtsuka; Masahiro Ogura; Seiji Shigekawa; Mashio Taniwaki; Riko Kitazawa; Takeharu Kunieda

doi:10.25259/SNI_495_2023

Perioperative perampanel administration for early seizure prophylaxis in brain tumor patients

Surg Neurol Int. 2023 Aug 11:14:287. doi: 10.25259/SNI_495_2023. eCollection 2023.

Affiliations

¹ Department of Neurosurgery, Ehime University School of Medicine, Toon, Japan.
² Department of Rehabilitation, Ehime University Hospital, Toon, Japan.
³ Division of Diagnostic Pathology, Ehime University Hospital, Toon, Japan.

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of perioperative prophylactic antiepileptic drug therapy in "seizure-naïve" patients with brain tumor, including glioblastoma (GBM), remains controversial. This study investigated whether perampanel (PER) is effective and safe for preventing perioperative onset of epileptic seizures, so-called early seizure, in patients with brain tumors.

Methods: Forty-five patients underwent tumor resection through craniotomy for a primary supratentorial brain tumor at Ehime University Hospital between April 2021 and July 2022. PER was administered from the 1^st to the ^6th day after surgery for seizure prophylaxis. Occurrence of early seizure, hematological toxicities, and various side effects were recorded on postoperative days 7 and 14. In addition, the clinical course of these patients was compared with 42 brain tumor patients under the same treatment protocol who received levetiracetam (LEV) for seizure prophylaxis between April 2017 and October 2018.

Results: In 45 patients with brain tumor, including GBM, who received PER administration, no early seizures were identified within 7 days postoperatively. No adverse drug reactions such as hematological toxicity, liver or kidney dysfunction, or exanthematous drug eruption were observed in any cases. As side effects, somnolence was reported in 14 patients (31.1%), vertigo in 3 patients (6.7%), and headache in 3 patients (6.7%). Although somnolence and vertigo were difficult to assess in the case of intraparenchymal tumors, particularly GBM, these side effects were not identified in patients with extraparenchymal tumors such as meningiomas, epidermoid cysts, and pituitary adenomas. In addition, no significant differences were identified compared to patients who received LEV.

Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of PER in preventing early seizures among patients with brain tumors were retrospectively evaluated. Perioperative administration of PER to patients with brain tumors may reduce the risk of early seizures without incurring serious side effects, showing no significant differences compared to patients who received LEV.

Keywords: Brain tumor-related epilepsy; Early seizure; Glioblastoma; Perampanel; Side effect.