Updated July 11, 2022
Since our review, we found a published meta-analysis (Neurol Sci 2022;43:889-897), an open-label trial (Muscle Nerve 2021;64:504-508) and a small randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. The trials showed no benefits from Perampanel; in fact, patients in the controlled trial progressed faster on the drug than those on placebo. Adverse events were very common in the trials, with the open-label trial being stopped prematurely due to the high frequency of these. In the controlled trial, 27% of patients on 4mg had serious adverse events, 48% of patients on 8mg had serious adverse vents and 14% of patients on placebo had adverse events. Taken together, this new data warrants a change in our TOE Trials grade to F, and a change in our Risks grade to F. Our overall conclusion is unchanged: we cannot recommend Perampanel for the treatment of ALS.
Key Information
Click on any letter grade below for more info:
Preclinical Trials Grade:
C
Published: Feb 2019
Perampanel is a drug currently used to treat seizures which has a mechanism of action that theoretically could be useful in treating patients with ALS. A single flawed study in a mouse model of ALS showed some benefits of perampanel, but data from humans with ALS is quite limited. Due to the lack of data in PALS, the failure of the closely related drug talampanel in ALS clinical trials, and several serious safety concerns, including an increased fall risk and serious psychiatric adverse effects, we cannot recommend off-label use of perampanel for ALS at this time. We look forward to the results of the on-going clinical trials of perampanel in ALS and we will update our TOE grades accordingly when these results become available.
Click here to download the complete review.
Grade A: Shown in a peer-reviewed publication to act on a relevant mechanism in humans
Grade B: Shown in a peer-reviewed publication to act on a relevant mechanism in pre-clinical model(s)
Grade C: Theoretically and plausibly acts on an ALS-relevant mechanism in humans
Grade D: Acts on a biological mechanism but it is not clear that this mechanism is relevant in ALS
Grade F: Implausible; would violate known principles or laws of biology
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: Two or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in well-designed studies.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade B: One peer-reviewed publication reporting benefits in a well-designed study.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade C: One or more peer-reviewed publication(s) reporting benefits in flawed studies.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade D: One or more non-peer reviewed studies reporting benefits (published on a website or in an abstract)
Grade F: The only studies available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade B: More than one unpublished report of benefit with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade C: One unpublished report of benefit with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade D: Subjective report(s) of benefit without validated diagnoses and/or benefits
Grade F: The only reports available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Two or more peer-reviewed publications describing benefits in well-designed randomized, blinded placebo-controlled phase III trials
Grade C: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in a well-designed randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled phase I or II trial
Grade D: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in a flawed trial.
Flawed trials means those in which there are identifiable problems with patient selection, randomization, blinding, controls or follow-up. These have ‘high or unclear risk of bias’ according to published criteria. Well-designed trials are those that have ‘low risk of bias’.
Grade F: The only trials available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: No exposed patients appear to have experienced harms
Grade B: More than 0% but less than 10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade B (oral): More than 0% but less than10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade D (intravenous): More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade C: At least 10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade D: More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade D: More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade F: At least 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalization
Grade F: At least 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalization
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Listen to the Podcast
Listen on Spreaker
