| Literature DB >> 35529828 |
Yuya Kinoshita1,2, Hiroe Ueno1,3, Hirofumi Kurata1, Chizuru Ikeda1, Erika Hori4, Takumi Okada5, Tomoyuki Shimazu1, Isao Fujii6, Makoto Matsukura7, Hoseki Imamura1.
Abstract
Perampanel is a noncompetitive, α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid glutamate receptor antagonist. Herein, we report a case of increased perampanel plasma concentration and impaired consciousness triggered by an infection. The patient had refractory epilepsy associated with hemimegalencephaly. During adolescence, perampanel (maximum dose, 10 mg, oral), valproic acid, clobazam, and lacosamide were administered for seizure control. He was admitted to our hospital with high fever, impaired consciousness, and elevated perampanel plasma level (from 1,300 to 1,790 ng/mL), but with no increase in the concentration of other antiseizure medications. Further examinations (blood, cerebrospinal fluid, brain magnetic resonance images, and electroencephalogram) revealed no physical cause for impaired consciousness. After discontinuation of perampanel, his level of consciousness gradually improved. The pharmacokinetics of perampanel may be modified by both hemimegalencephaly and infection, resulting in an elevated plasma concentration of perampanel. This case underlines the importance of monitoring perampanel plasma concentration in patients with underlying brain disease who develop an infection.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35529828 PMCID: PMC9076349 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9844820
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Case Rep Pediatr
Figure 1(a) MR image using fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) at 9 years 4 months. (b) Repeat FLAIR image obtained at 15 years 11 months (on day 7 after infection onset). (c) Electroencephalogram obtained during sleep at 15 years 1 month. (d) Electroencephalogram obtained during the period of impaired consciousness at 15 years 11 months. MR, magnetic resonance.
Figure 2Clinical course. The patient's fever resolved immediately after hospitalization but with persistence of the state of impaired consciousness. Perampanel concentration was elevated at the time of admission (1,300 ng/ml) and ultimately increasing to a maximum of 1,790 ng/ml. Cessation of perampanel treatment improved the level of consciousness. Seizures increased with decreasing plasma concentration of perampanel. Fosphenytoin was initially introduced for seizure control, which was then switched to oral carbamazepine. The patient was discharged without apparent sequelae. VPA, valproic acid; CLB, clobazam; LCM, lacosamide; PER, perampanel; CBZ, carbamazepine.
Case reports of impaired consciousness due to perampanel.
| Case | Age (years) | Sex | Dose | Underlying disease | Trigger | Period of impaired consciousness (days) | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Li et al., 2018 [ | 54 | Male | 300 mg (once) | Refractory epilepsy | Overdose | 4 | He had cerebellar symptoms after awakening, but recovered spontaneously. |
| Wu et al., 2019 [ | 40 | Male | 60 mg (once) | Depression | Overdose | 1 | He self-extubated after mechanical ventilation was administered. |
| He was aggressive after waking and was sedated for 5 days. | |||||||
| He had irritability and anxiety until the 9th day. | |||||||
| Hoppner et al., 2013 [ | 34 | Female | 204 mg (once) | Partial epilepsy | Overdose | 2 | She was disorientated after awakening, but recovered spontaneously. |
| Mutata and Nobukuni, 2020 [ | 74 | Female | 6 mg (every day) | Temporal epilepsy | Infection | Not provided | She was treated with an antimicrobial infusion and her consciousness gradually improved. |
| Our patient | 15 | Male | 10 mg (every day) | Hemimegalencephaly | Infection | 8 | He recovered after IVIG and tapering off perampanel treatment. |
IVIG, intravenous immunoglobulin.
Evaluation of the causal relationship between perampanel and impaired consciousness using the Naranjo scale.
| Yes | No | Do not know | Score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Are there previous conclusive reports on this reaction? | +1 | 0 | 0 | +1 |
| 2. Did the adverse event appear after the suspected drug was administered? | +2 | −1 | 0 | +2 |
| 3. Did the adverse reaction improve when the drug was discontinued or a specific antagonist was administered? | +1 | 0 | 0 | +1 |
| 4. Did the adverse reaction reappear when the drug was readministered? | +2 | −1 | 0 | 0 |
| 5. Are there alternative causes (other than the drug) that could on their own have caused the reaction? | −1 | +2 | 0 | +2 |
| 6. Did the reaction reappear when a placebo was given? | −1 | +1 | 0 | 0 |
| 7. Was the drug detected in blood (or other fluids) in concentration known to be toxic? | +1 | 0 | 0 | +1 |
| 8. Was the reaction more severe when the dose was increased or less severe when the dose was decreased? | +1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 9. Did the patient have a similar reaction to the same or similar drugs in any previous exposure? | +1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 10. Was the adverse event confirmed by any objective evidence? | +1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total score | +7 |
Total score ≥9, definite ADR; 5–8, probable ADR; 1–4, possible ADR; 0, doubtful ADR. ADR, adverse drug reaction.