EpilepsyPhase 2NCT01161524
A Study With an Open-label Extension Phase to Evaluate the Effect of Perampanel (E2007) on Cognition, Growth, Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics in Adolescents
A Phase 2 study testing Perampanel in people with Epilepsy, run by Eisai Inc. at 37 sites in 11 countries.
Trial summary
This study is designed to investigate the short- and long-term effects of perampanel on cognition, growth, and development in adolescents. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 12 to 18 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Epilepsy
- What is being tested?
- Perampanel
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 133 participants
- Where
- 37 sitesin 11 countries
- Study dates
- Sep 2010to Nov 2014
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 12 to 18 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Considered reliable and willing to be available for the study duration and was able to record seizures and report adverse events (AEs) themselves or had a legal guardian or a caregiver who could record seizures and report AEs for them.
- Understand the requirements of the Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) System tests and able to perform the tests appropriately at Visit 1.
- Male or female, 12 to less than 18 years of age at the time of consent/assent
- Had a diagnosis of epilepsy with partial-onset seizures with or without secondarily generalized seizures according to the International League Against Epilepsy's (ILAE) Classification of Epileptic Seizures (1981).
- Diagnosis was established at least 6 months prior to Visit 1, by clinical history and an electroencephalogram (EEG) that was consistent with localization-related epilepsy; normal interictal EEGs were allowed provided that the subject met the other diagnosis criterion (ie, clinical history).
- Had a brain imaging (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] scan or computed tomography [CT]) within the 5 years prior to Visit 1 that ruled out a progressive cause of epilepsy.
Show all 14Show fewer
- Had at least 1 partial-onset seizure during the 4 weeks prior to Visit 1 despite a stable regimen of 1 to 3 concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).
- Were currently being treated with stable doses of 1-3 AEDs. Only 1 inducer AED (either carbamazepine or phenytoin) out of the maximum of 3 AEDs was allowed.
- Were on a stable dose of the same concomitant AED(s) for at least 4 weeks prior to Visit 1; in the case where a new AED regimen was initiated for a subject, the dose must have been stable for at least 8 weeks prior to Visit 1.
- Female subjects of childbearing potential must had a negative serum human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-hCG) at Visit 1 and a negative urine pregnancy test prior to randomization at Visit 2. Female subjects of period of at least 60 days following administration of the last dose of study medication to commit to the consistent and correct use of a medically acceptable method of birth control (e.g., a double-barrier method [condom + spermicide, condom + diaphragm with spermicide]). Abstinence was considered an acceptable method of contraception on a case by case basis upon prior approval by the Medical Monitor.
- Had an intelligence quotient (IQ) of greater than or equal to 70, using the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, second edition (KBIT-2).
- Provided written informed consent signed by the legal guardian and a written assent from the subject prior to entering the study or undergoing any study procedures.
- Extension Phase:
- Had completed all scheduled visits up to and including Visit 8 in the Core Study Randomization Phase.
Who cannot join
- Had a diagnosis of primary generalized epilepsies or seizures such as absences and/or myoclonic epilepsies.
- Had current or a history of pseudo-seizures (psychogenic non-epileptic seizures [PNES]) within approximately 5 years prior to Visit 1.
- Had a diagnosis of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.
- Had seizure clusters where individual seizures could not be counted.
- Had a history of status epilepticus that required hospitalization during the 12 months prior to the Visit 1.
- Had an unstable psychiatric diagnosis that could confound the investigator's ability to conduct the study or that could prevent completion of the protocol specified tests (e.g., significant suicide risk, including suicidal behavior and ideation 6 months prior to Visit 1, current psychotic disorder, or acute mania).
Show all 9Show fewer
- Had any concomitant illnesses/co-morbidities (e.g., autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]) at Visit 1 that could severely affect cognitive function during the course of the study.
- Had previously participated in a clinical trial involving perampanel.
- Had chronically or routinely use benzodiazepines and who have not discontinued the use at least 4 weeks prior to Visit 1.
Trial locations and contacts
37 sites in 11 countries.
37 sites in 11 countries
United States11 sites
Study site
Akron, Ohio
Study site
Aurora, Colorado
Study site
Chesterfield, Missouri
Study site
Dallas, Texas
Study site
Gibbsboro, New Jersey
Study site
Gulf Breeze, Florida
Study site
Indianapolis, Indiana
Study site
Memphis, Tennessee
Study site
Nashville, Tennessee
Study site
Orlando, Florida
Study site
Tampa, Florida
India7 sites
Study site
Bangalore
Study site
Hyderabad
Study site
Mangalore
Study site
Nagpur
Study site
New Delhi
Study site
Pune
Study site
Secunderabad
Spain2 sites
Study site
Madrid, Madrid, Communidad de
Study site
Valencia, Valencia
About this study
Official title: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group Study With an Open-label Extension Phase to Evaluate the Effect of Perampanel (E2007) on Cognition, Growth, Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics When Administered as an Adjunctive Therapy in Adolescents (12 to Less Than 18 Years of Age) With Inadequately Controlled Partial-onset Seizures
This study is designed to investigate the short- and long-term effects of perampanel on cognition, growth, and development in adolescents.
Read the detailed description
This study consisted of the Core Study and the Extension Part A and B. The Core Study consisted of 2 phases: Prerandomization and Randomization. The Prerandomization Phase lasted up to 1 week, during which participants were assessed for their eligibility to participate in the study. The Randomization Phase consisted of 3 periods: Titration (6 weeks), Maintenance (13 weeks), and Follow-up (4 weeks; only for those participants not rolling over into the Extension Phase). During the Core Study Titration and Maintenance Periods, participants were randomized into perampanel (2 to 12 mg per day) or placebo treatment groups in a 2:1 ratio within each of the age-matched categories (ie, greater than or equal to 12 to less than 15 and greater than or equal to 15 to less than 18).
The extension phase consisted of part A (Conversion Period - 6 weeks and Maintenance period - 25 weeks) and Part B (Optional Extension Phase -52 weeks). The maximum duration for participation in Part B was 52 weeks.
- Conditions
- Epilepsy
- Being tested
- Perampanel, Placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Epilepsy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PerampanelDrug
2 mg titrated up to 8-12 mg maximum; taken once daily.
PlaceboDrug
Matching Placebo taken once daily.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Perampenal (Core Study) | Experimental | Participants received perampanel 2 mg per day and up-titrated weekly in 2-mg increments to a target dose range of 8 to 12 mg per day. Receives: Drug: Perampanel |
| Placebo (Core Study) | Placebo comparator | Participants received matching placebo tablets once a day (6 tablets of placebo). Receives: Drug: Placebo |
| Perampanel (Extension Phase) | Experimental | During the Extension Phase, participants previously assigned to perampanel arm (Core Study) continued taking study medication at the dose achieved at the end of the Core Study once daily. Participants previously assigned to a placebo arm (Core Study) started perampanel dose at 2 mg/day and up-titrated weekly in 2-mg increments up to a maximum dose of 12 mg/day. Receives: Drug: Perampanel |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline to Week 19 in Cognition Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (Core Study)
The CDR System Global Cognitive score was derived from the average of 5 CDR System cognitive domain scores (Power of Attention, Continuity of Attention, Quality of Episodic Memory, Quality of Working Memory, and Speed of Memory). The domain scores were normalized to mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 before taking the average. The scale ranged from 0 - 100. An increase in the Global Cognitive Score indicates improvement, while a decrease indicates worsening in cognitive function.
Measured: Baseline (Visit 2/Week 0 Evaluation) and Week 19 LOCF (last observation carried forward)
Secondary outcomes (22)
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Power of Attention T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
The Power of Attention domain (one of the 5 CDR System cognitive domains) was a measure of focused attention and information processing, comprised of the 3 CDR System attention tasks: the simple reaction time, choice reaction time and digit vigilance tasks. Z-scores were calculated for each domain by subtracting each participant's domain score from the normative population mean of that domain and dividing the result by the standard deviation (SD) of the normative population mean. Z-scores were converted into T-scores by multiplying by 50 and adding 50. Power of Attention were also multiplied by -1, so that for all domains, greater T-scores reflected superior cognitive function. T-scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50 and an SD of 10. The CDR System Global Cognition score was created by adding the T-scores for the five domains. A decrease in the score of Power of Attention indicated improvement in cognitive function and a negative change reflects impairment from baseline.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Continuity of Attention T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
The Continuity of Attention domain (one of the 5 CDR System cognitive domains) was a measure of sustained attention, comprised of the accuracy scores from 2 of the CDR System attention tasks: choice reaction time and digit vigilance. Z-scores were calculated for this domain using normative data from the CDR System database for the age range of the study population. Specifically, Z-scores were calculated by subtracting each participant's domain score from the normative population mean of that domain and dividing the result by the SD of the normative population mean. Z-scores were converted into T-scores by multiplying by 50 and adding 50. Greater T-scores reflected superior cognitive function and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to baseline. T-scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50 and an SD of 10.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
The Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory domain was a measure of the capability of individuals to encode, store, and subsequently retrieve verbal and nonverbal information in episodic (or declarative) memory; what was meant by memory in everyday terminology. This measure was derived by summing the scores from the 4 tasks: immediate and delayed word recall, word recognition, and picture recognition. Z-scores were calculated by subtracting each participant's domain score from the normative population mean of that domain and dividing the result by the SD of the normative population mean. Z-scores were converted into T-scores by multiplying by 50 and adding 50. Greater T-scores reflected superior cognitive function. T-scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50 and an SD of 10. A high score reflects a good ability to store, hold and retrieve information of an episodic nature (i.e. an event or a name) and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to baseline.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Quality of Working Memory (Short Term) T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
The Quality of Working Memory domain (one of the 5 CDR System cognitive domains) was a measure of reflecting how well individuals can hold numeric and spatial information 'on line' in working memory. Z-scores were calculated by subtracting each participant's domain score from the normative population mean of that domain and dividing the result by the SD of the normative population mean. Z-scores were converted into T-scores by multiplying by 50 and adding 50. Greater T-scores reflected superior cognitive function. T-scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50 and an SD of 10. A higher score reflects a good working memory and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to the baseline assessment.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Speed of Memory T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
The Speed of Memory domain (one of the 5 CDR System cognitive domains) was a measure, which reflects the time taken to accurately retrieve information from working and episodic memory. Z-scores were calculated for this domain using normative data from the CDR System database for the age range of the study population. Specifically, Z-scores were calculated by subtracting each participant's domain score from the normative population mean of that domain and dividing the result by the SD of the normative population mean. Z-scores were converted into T-scores by multiplying by 50 and adding 50. Speed of Memory were also multiplied by -1, so that for all domains, greater T-scores reflected superior cognitive function and a negative change from baseline reflects impairment compared to the baseline assessment. T-scores ranged from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50 and an SD of 10.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19
Percentage of Participants Who Experienced 50% or More Decrease in Seizure Frequency (Core Study)
A responder was a participant who experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared to the baseline of the Randomization Phase.
Measured: From Baseline up to Week 19 LOCF
Percent Change From Baseline in Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Treatment Duration of the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Seizure frequency was based on overall number of seizures obtained by summing the 4 seizure types (all partial seizure types, that is, simple partial without motor signs, simple partial with motor signs, complex partial, and complex partial with secondary generalization) collected via the patient diary over a particular time interval and re-scaled to 28 days window.
Measured: Baseline and Week 19 LOCF
Number of Participants Who Achieved Seizure-Free Status During the Maintenance Period and the Last 28 Days of the Maintenance Period During the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Number of Participants who were seizure free, were assessed.
Measured: 13 Week Maintenance Period
Percent Change From Baseline in Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days Over the Perampanel Duration Exposure (Extension Phase)
The median percent change in total partial onset seizure frequency per 28 days during the Extension Phase relative to the Pre-perampanel Baseline from Week 1 of perampanel treatment through successive 13-week intervals (Weeks 1 to 13 for subjects with any data, Weeks 1 to 26 for subjects with exposure of more than 13 weeks, Weeks 1 to 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, and Week 1 to 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks) are presented. The perampanel exposure duration starts from the first perampanel dose (in the Core Study for subjects previously randomized to perampanel or Extension Phase for subjects previously randomized to placebo) to the last perampanel dose in the Extension Phase.
Measured: Week 1-13, Week 14-26, Week 27-39, and Week 40-52
Percentage of Participants Who Experienced 50% or More Decrease in Seizure Frequency Over the Perampanel Duration Exposure (Extension Phase)
A responder was a participant who experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from pre-perampanel. The percentage of responders from Week 1 of perampanel treatment through successive 13-week intervals (Weeks 1 to 13 for subjects with any data, Weeks 1 to 26 for subjects with exposure of more than 13 weeks, Weeks 1 to 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, and Week 1 to 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks) are presented. The perampanel exposure duration starts from the first perampanel dose (in the Core Study for subjects previously randomized to perampanel or Extension Phase for subjects previously randomized to placebo) to the last perampanel dose in the Extension Phase.
Measured: Week 1-13, Week 14-26, Week 27-39, and Week 40-52
Mean Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Cognition Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (Extension Phase)
The CDR System Global Cognitive was derived from the average of 5 CDR System cognitive domain scores (Power of Attention, Continuity of Attention, Quality of Episodic Memory, Quality of Working Memory, and Speed of Memory). Domain scores were normalized to mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 before taking the average. The scale ranged from 0 to 100. An increase in the Global Cognitive Score indicates improvement, while a decrease indicates worsening in cognitive function. The perampanel exposure duration starts from the first perampanel dose (in the Core Study for subjects previously randomized to perampanel or Extension Phase for subjects previously randomized to placebo) to the last perampanel dose in the Extension Phase.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, Week 52, and End of Treatment (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first perampanel dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Global Cognition Score Over Time (Extension Phase)
The CDR System Global Cognitive was derived from the average of 5 CDR System cognitive domain scores (Power of Attention, Continuity of Attention, Quality of Episodic Memory, Quality of Working Memory, and Speed of Memory). Domain scores were normalized to mean of 50 and SD of 10 before taking the average. The scale ranged from 0 to 100. An increase in the Global Cognitive Score indicates improvement, while a decrease indicates worsening in cognitive function. The data is presented as CDR System Global Cognitive scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for subjects with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for subjects with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks).
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline by Visits in CDR System Domain T-Scores (Extension Phase)
The Cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores. T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening. Wk = Week and EOT=End of Treatment. The perampanel exposure duration starts from the first perampanel dose (in the Core Study for subjects previously randomized to perampanel or Extension Phase for subjects previously randomized to placebo) to the last perampanel dose in the Extension Phase.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, Week 52, and EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Power of Attention (Extension Phase)
The Cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for subjects with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for subjects with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks). T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Continuity of Attention (Extension Phase)
The Cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for subjects with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for subjects with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks). T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory (Extension Phase)
The Cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for subjects with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for subjects with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks). T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Quality of Working Memory (Short Term) (Extension Phase)
The cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for participants with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for participants with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for participants with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for participants with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for participants with exposure of more than 52 weeks). T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Speed of Memory (Extension Phase)
The Cognitive measure scores are presented as T-Scores at specific intervals (Week 9 for subjects with exposure of more than 9 weeks, Week 19 for subjects with exposure of more than 19 weeks, Week 30 for subjects with exposure of more than 26 weeks, Week 39 for subjects with exposure of more than 39 weeks, and Week 52 for subjects with exposure of more than 52 weeks). T-Scores were normalized standard scores with mean of 50 and SD of 10 with an absolute range of 0-100. The T-Scores are based on the norms from healthy age-matched controls from the CDR System database. Cohen's d-effect sizes were used to estimate the clinical relevance of a change in a parameter. A change in a score of 0.2 SD was defined by Cohen as a small effect size, 0.5 SD a medium effect size and 0.8 SD was considered a large effect size. An increase in the T-scores indicates improvement while a decrease in T-scores indicates worsening.
Measured: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Controlled Oral Word Association Test Scores (COWAT) (Extension Phase)
The COWAT test measured the executive function of the frontal lobe and consisted of examinations of category/meaning fluency and letter/phoneme fluency. It consisted of 2 parts which included the Letter Fluency task and the Category Fluency task. For the Letter Fluency task, the participant was given one minute to list as many words as they could which began with a given letter from the following set of 3 letters: F, A, and L. The number of correct words from the 3 sets comprised the Letter Fluency score. For the Category Fluency task, the participant was given one minute to list as many words as they could which belonged to a given category. The number of correct words comprised the Category Fluency score. Total score was calculated as sum of acceptable words generated. The scale ranged from 0-90, with higher scores indicating improvement in language.
Measured: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Time to Complete Lafayette Grooved Pegboard Test (LGPT) (Extension Phase)
The LGPT test measured visuomotor skills. This test was a manipulative dexterity test that consisted of a metal matrix of 25 holes with randomly positioned slots. The participant was required to insert 25 grooved pegs into the holes. The task was completed once for each hand; firstly, using the dominant hand followed by the non-dominant hand. The task was timed and the scores were the time taken for the participant to complete all 25 pegs for each hand. If the test cannot be completed within 300 seconds, 300 seconds were recorded for the time. An increase in score (longer time) indicated worsening of visuomotor skills. The time to complete test is presented as mean seconds +/- SD.
Measured: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in Bone Age Minus Age (Months) From Hand X-ray (Extension Phase)
Bone age was measured using hand X-ray. The mean change from Baseline in bone age (months) minus age (months) from the hand x-ray was assessed. "+" means bone age is older than age and "-" means bone age is younger than age.
Measured: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (EOT) for the Tanner Stage
The effect of perampanel on growth and development in adolescents (male and female), including sexual development was measured using Tanner scale. The scale defined physical measurements of development based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics, such as the size of the breasts, genitals, testicular volume and development of pubic hair. Tanner scale consisted of 5 scales from I to V (1: pre-pubertal to 5: adult). Data is reported as the change from Baseline to End of Treatment for the Tanner Stage.
Measured: From Baseline up to Week 52 or EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jul 2010 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2010
- Primary completionJun 2013
- Study completionNov 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for EpilepsyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Eisai Inc.The sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 133 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Eisai Inc.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Haichen Yang, M.D., M.A., Study director, Study Director
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01161524
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- E2007-G000-235
- Status last verified
- Nov 2015
- First submitted
- 12 Jul 2010
- Last updated
- 15 May 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Bresnahan R, Hill RA, Wang J. Perampanel add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Apr 14;4(4):CD010961. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010961.pub2.
PubMed 37059702Pina-Garza JE, Lagae L, Villanueva V, Renfroe JB, Laurenza A, Williams B, Kumar D, Meador KJ. Long-term effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition in adolescents with partial seizures. Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Jun;83:50-58. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2018.03.029. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
PubMed 29653338Meador KJ, Yang H, Pina-Garza JE, Laurenza A, Kumar D, Wesnes KA. Cognitive effects of adjunctive perampanel for partial-onset seizures: A randomized trial. Epilepsia. 2016 Feb;57(2):243-51. doi: 10.1111/epi.13279. Epub 2016 Jan 1.
PubMed 26724782
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 May 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group Study With an Open-label Extension Phase to Evaluate the Effect of Perampanel (E2007) on Cognition, Growth, Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics When Administered as an Adjunctive Therapy in Adolescents (12 to Less Than 18 Years of Age) With Inadequately Controlled Partial-onset Seizures
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01161524
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- E2007-G000-235
- Conditions
- Epilepsy
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 133 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Eisai Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- Sep 2010 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jul 2010 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 15 May 2019
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is designed to investigate the short- and long-term effects of perampanel on cognition, growth, and development in adolescents.
Detailed description
This study consisted of the Core Study and the Extension Part A and B. The Core Study consisted of 2 phases: Prerandomization and Randomization. The Prerandomization Phase lasted up to 1 week, during which participants were assessed for their eligibility to participate in the study. The Randomization Phase consisted of 3 periods: Titration (6 weeks), Maintenance (13 weeks), and Follow-up (4 weeks; only for those participants not rolling over into the Extension Phase). During the Core Study Titration and Maintenance Periods, participants were randomized into perampanel (2 to 12 mg per day) or placebo treatment groups in a 2:1 ratio within each of the age-matched categories (ie, greater than or equal to 12 to less than 15 and greater than or equal to 15 to less than 18).
The extension phase consisted of part A (Conversion Period - 6 weeks and Maintenance period - 25 weeks) and Part B (Optional Extension Phase -52 weeks). The maximum duration for participation in Part B was 52 weeks.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Perampenal (Core Study) | Experimental | Drug: PerampanelParticipants received perampanel 2 mg per day and up-titrated weekly in 2-mg increments to a target dose range of 8 to 12 mg per day. |
| Placebo (Core Study) | Placebo comparator | Drug: PlaceboParticipants received matching placebo tablets once a day (6 tablets of placebo). |
| Perampanel (Extension Phase) | Experimental | Drug: PerampanelDuring the Extension Phase, participants previously assigned to perampanel arm (Core Study) continued taking study medication at the dose achieved at the end of the Core Study once daily. Participants previously assigned to a placebo arm (Core Study) started perampanel dose at 2 mg/day and up-titrated weekly in 2-mg increments up to a maximum dose of 12 mg/day. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 12 to 18 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (14 listed)
- Considered reliable and willing to be available for the study duration and was able to record seizures and report adverse events (AEs) themselves or had a legal guardian or a caregiver who could record seizures and report AEs for them.
- Understand the requirements of the Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) System tests and able to perform the tests appropriately at Visit 1.
- Male or female, 12 to less than 18 years of age at the time of consent/assent
- Had a diagnosis of epilepsy with partial-onset seizures with or without secondarily generalized seizures according to the International League Against Epilepsy's (ILAE) Classification of Epileptic Seizures (1981).
- Diagnosis was established at least 6 months prior to Visit 1, by clinical history and an electroencephalogram (EEG) that was consistent with localization-related epilepsy; normal interictal EEGs were allowed provided that the subject met the other diagnosis criterion (ie, clinical history).
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Had a diagnosis of primary generalized epilepsies or seizures such as absences and/or myoclonic epilepsies.
- Had current or a history of pseudo-seizures (psychogenic non-epileptic seizures [PNES]) within approximately 5 years prior to Visit 1.
- Had a diagnosis of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.
- Had seizure clusters where individual seizures could not be counted.
- Had a history of status epilepticus that required hospitalization during the 12 months prior to the Visit 1.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Perampanel2 mg titrated up to 8-12 mg maximum; taken once daily. | Drug | Perampanel (Extension Phase), Perampenal (Core Study) |
| PlaceboMatching Placebo taken once daily. | Drug | Placebo (Core Study) |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline to Week 19 in Cognition Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline (Visit 2/Week 0 Evaluation) and Week 19 LOCF (last observation carried forward)
The CDR System Global Cognitive score was derived from the average of 5 CDR System cognitive domain scores (Power of Attention, Continuity of Attention, Quality of Episodic Memory, Quality of Working Memory, and Speed of Memory). The domain scores were normalized to mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 before taking the average. The scale ranged from 0 - 100. An increase in the Global Cognitive Score indicates improvement, while a decrease indicates worsening in cognitive function.
22 secondary outcomes
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Power of Attention T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Continuity of Attention T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Quality of Working Memory (Short Term) T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19
Change From Baseline at Week 19 in the Speed of Memory T-score in the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19
Percentage of Participants Who Experienced 50% or More Decrease in Seizure Frequency (Core Study)
Time frame: From Baseline up to Week 19 LOCF
Percent Change From Baseline in Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Treatment Duration of the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: Baseline and Week 19 LOCF
Number of Participants Who Achieved Seizure-Free Status During the Maintenance Period and the Last 28 Days of the Maintenance Period During the Randomization Phase (Core Study)
Time frame: 13 Week Maintenance Period
Percent Change From Baseline in Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days Over the Perampanel Duration Exposure (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Week 1-13, Week 14-26, Week 27-39, and Week 40-52
Percentage of Participants Who Experienced 50% or More Decrease in Seizure Frequency Over the Perampanel Duration Exposure (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Week 1-13, Week 14-26, Week 27-39, and Week 40-52
Mean Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Cognition Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, Week 52, and End of Treatment (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first perampanel dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Global Cognition Score Over Time (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline by Visits in CDR System Domain T-Scores (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, Week 52, and EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Power of Attention (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Continuity of Attention (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Quality of Episodic Secondary Memory (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Quality of Working Memory (Short Term) (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Mean Change From Baseline in CDR System Domain T-Score Over Time: Speed of Memory (Extension Phase)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 9, Week 19, Week, 30, Week 39, and Week 52
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Controlled Oral Word Association Test Scores (COWAT) (Extension Phase)
Time frame: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment in Time to Complete Lafayette Grooved Pegboard Test (LGPT) (Extension Phase)
Time frame: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Mean Change From Baseline in Bone Age Minus Age (Months) From Hand X-ray (Extension Phase)
Time frame: From Baseline up to Week 52 or up to EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Change From Baseline to End of Treatment (EOT) for the Tanner Stage
Time frame: From Baseline up to Week 52 or EOT (defined as the last nonmissing value after date of first dose up to 14 days after date of last dose)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 May 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37059702Bresnahan R, Hill RA, Wang J. Perampanel add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Apr 14;4(4):CD010961. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010961.pub2.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29653338Pina-Garza JE, Lagae L, Villanueva V, Renfroe JB, Laurenza A, Williams B, Kumar D, Meador KJ. Long-term effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition in adolescents with partial seizures. Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Jun;83:50-58. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2018.03.029. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 26724782Meador KJ, Yang H, Pina-Garza JE, Laurenza A, Kumar D, Wesnes KA. Cognitive effects of adjunctive perampanel for partial-onset seizures: A randomized trial. Epilepsia. 2016 Feb;57(2):243-51. doi: 10.1111/epi.13279. Epub 2016 Jan 1.
Related trials for Epilepsy
Not yet recruiting
High-Intensity Focused Ultrasonic Ablation of the Centromedian Thalamic Nucleus for Treatment of Medically Refractory Generalized Epilepsy in Patients Ages 18 Years to 89 Years
Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy
RecruitingObservational study
Rare Disease Patient Registry & Natural History Study - Coordination of Rare Diseases at Sanford
Rare Disorders, Undiagnosed Disorders
Not yet recruiting
Peri-procedural Weighted Blanket Use for ECT
Post-ect Agitation, Post-ictal Agitation
RecruitingObservational study
PET/MRI/EEG Imaging Study in Epilepsy
Epilepsy
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Open-label Study of Cenobamate Monotherapy in Adult Subjects With Newly Diagnosed or Recurrent Partial-Onset Epilepsy
Focal Onset Seizure
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Haichen Yang, M.D., M.A. study director
Study Director
37 sites in 11 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing Perampanel in people with Epilepsy, run by Eisai Inc. at 37 sites in 11 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 14 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 May 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 37 sites in United States, India, Belgium, Hungary, Latvia and 6 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 15 May 2019). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change From Baseline to Week 19 in Cognition Drug Research (CDR) System Global Cognition Score (Core Study) (time frame: Baseline (Visit 2/Week 0 Evaluation) and Week 19 LOCF (last observation carried forward)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01161524, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 May 2019.