• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

拉科酰胺与吡仑帕奈在癫痫治疗中的安全性比较分析:来自FAERS数据库的见解

Comparative safety analysis of lacosamide and perampanel in epilepsy management: insights from FAERS database.

作者信息

Ge Chang, Jin Liuyin, Tian Jing-Jing, Yang Na, Xu Jian

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fourth Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Yiwu, China.

Lishui Second People's Hospital, Zhejiang, China.

出版信息

Front Pharmacol. 2024 Sep 19;15:1418609. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1418609. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.3389/fphar.2024.1418609
PMID:39364050
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11446851/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a chronic neurological condition requiring effective management with minimal adverse effects. Lacosamide (LCM) and Perampanel (PER), two promising treatments, have distinct profiles that merit comparative analysis to guide clinical decision-making.

METHODS

This study utilizes a pharmacovigilance analysis of adverse events reported in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database from Q1 2009 to Q3 2023. Employing disproportionality and Bayesian analyses, we assessed and compared the AE signals associated with LCM and PER to elucidate their safety profiles in epilepsy treatment.

RESULTS

The analysis included 12,576 AE reports for LCM and 2,703 for PER, highlighting a higher incidence of psychiatric disorders, including aggression with LCM, and a notable association of PER with psychiatric disorders such as psychotic disorders and dizziness. LCM showed a relatively safe profile during pregnancy, whereas PER's data suggested caution due to reported cases of suicidal ideation and attempts.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive evaluation underscores the importance of understanding the distinct AE profiles of LCM and PER in clinical practice, providing valuable insights for personalized epilepsy management. Future research with rigorous prospective designs is recommended to validate these findings and explore the mechanisms underlying the reported adverse events.

摘要

背景

癫痫是一种慢性神经系统疾病,需要进行有效管理且副作用最小。拉科酰胺(LCM)和吡仑帕奈(PER)是两种有前景的治疗方法,它们具有不同的特征,值得进行比较分析以指导临床决策。

方法

本研究利用对2009年第一季度至2023年第三季度美国食品药品监督管理局不良事件报告系统数据库中报告的不良事件进行药物警戒分析。采用不成比例分析和贝叶斯分析,我们评估并比较了与LCM和PER相关的不良事件信号,以阐明它们在癫痫治疗中的安全性概况。

结果

分析包括12576份LCM的不良事件报告和2703份PER的不良事件报告,突出显示了精神障碍的较高发生率,包括LCM导致的攻击行为,以及PER与精神障碍如精神疾病和头晕的显著关联。LCM在孕期显示出相对安全的概况,而PER的数据因有自杀意念和自杀未遂的报告病例而提示需谨慎使用。

结论

这项全面评估强调了在临床实践中了解LCM和PER不同不良事件概况的重要性,为个性化癫痫管理提供了有价值的见解。建议未来进行严格前瞻性设计的研究以验证这些发现,并探索所报告不良事件的潜在机制。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/35701bd4c6b1/fphar-15-1418609-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/3438d1fbca92/fphar-15-1418609-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/d7fe7f2fbc76/fphar-15-1418609-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/e6a7737bc4d6/fphar-15-1418609-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/b6350ea706c7/fphar-15-1418609-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/35701bd4c6b1/fphar-15-1418609-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/3438d1fbca92/fphar-15-1418609-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/d7fe7f2fbc76/fphar-15-1418609-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/e6a7737bc4d6/fphar-15-1418609-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/b6350ea706c7/fphar-15-1418609-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cd83/11446851/35701bd4c6b1/fphar-15-1418609-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative safety analysis of lacosamide and perampanel in epilepsy management: insights from FAERS database.拉科酰胺与吡仑帕奈在癫痫治疗中的安全性比较分析:来自FAERS数据库的见解
Front Pharmacol. 2024 Sep 19;15:1418609. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1418609. eCollection 2024.
2
Real-world safety of Lacosamide: A pharmacovigilance study based on spontaneous reports in the FDA adverse event reporting system.拉考沙胺的真实世界安全性:基于 FDA 不良事件报告系统自发报告的药物警戒研究。
Seizure. 2023 Aug;110:203-211. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2023.07.003. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
3
Perampanel and lacosamide monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: A prospective study evaluating efficacy, tolerability, and behavior.新诊断局灶性癫痫儿童患者中氨己烯酸和吡仑帕奈单药治疗的前瞻性研究:评估疗效、耐受性和行为。
Epilepsy Behav. 2023 Sep;146:109353. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2023.109353. Epub 2023 Jul 22.
4
Newer Antiseizure Medications and Suicidality: Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Database.新型抗癫痫药物与自杀风险:食品和药物管理局不良事件报告系统(FAERS)数据库分析。
Clin Drug Investig. 2023 Jun;43(6):393-399. doi: 10.1007/s40261-023-01272-9. Epub 2023 May 15.
5
Clinical outcomes of perampanel vs. lacosamide in cohorts of consecutive patients with severely refractory epilepsies - A monocentric retrospective analysis of systematically collected data from the German Kork Epilepsy Center.吡仑帕奈与拉科酰胺治疗连续性严重难治性癫痫患者队列的临床结局——来自德国科尔克癫痫中心系统收集数据的单中心回顾性分析
Seizure. 2017 Feb;45:47-51. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2016.11.012. Epub 2016 Nov 23.
6
Safety profiles of methylphenidate, amphetamine, and atomoxetine: analysis of spontaneous reports submitted to the food and drug administration adverse event reporting system.哌甲酯、苯丙胺和托莫西汀的安全性概况:对提交至美国食品药品监督管理局不良事件报告系统的自发报告的分析
Front Pharmacol. 2023 Aug 14;14:1208456. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1208456. eCollection 2023.
7
Adverse event profile of memantine and donepezil combination therapy: a real-world pharmacovigilance analysis based on FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) data from 2004 to 2023.美金刚与多奈哌齐联合治疗的不良事件概况:基于2004年至2023年美国食品药品监督管理局不良事件报告系统(FAERS)数据的真实世界药物警戒分析
Front Pharmacol. 2024 Jul 17;15:1439115. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1439115. eCollection 2024.
8
Value of drug level concentrations of brivaracetam, lacosamide, and perampanel in care of people with epilepsy.评估药物浓度在癫痫患者护理中的应用:布瓦西坦、拉考沙胺和吡仑帕奈。
Epilepsia. 2024 Mar;65(3):620-629. doi: 10.1111/epi.17873. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
9
Cardiac adverse events associated with lacosamide: a disproportionality analysis of the FAERS database.与拉考沙胺相关的心脏不良事件:FAERS 数据库的一项比例失调分析。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 13;14(1):16202. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67209-0.
10
Evaluating the longer-term cognitive effects of adjunctive perampanel compared to lacosamide in a naturalistic outpatient setting.评估附加型培高利特与拉科酰胺在自然环境下门诊治疗中的长期认知效应。
Seizure. 2018 May;58:141-146. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2018.04.015. Epub 2018 Apr 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparative study on efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and lacoxamide in the treatment of epilepsy.左乙拉西坦与拉科酰胺治疗癫痫的疗效和安全性对比研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025 Aug 22;104(34):e43506. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000043506.

本文引用的文献

1
A real-world comparison among third-generation antiseizure medications: Results from the COMPARE study.第三代抗癫痫药物的真实世界比较:COMPARE研究结果
Epilepsia. 2024 Feb;65(2):456-472. doi: 10.1111/epi.17843. Epub 2023 Dec 16.
2
Perampanel as only add-on epilepsy treatment in elderly: A subgroup analysis of real-world data from retrospective, multicenter, observational study.拉科酰胺作为老年人唯一的附加癫痫治疗药物:来自回顾性、多中心、观察性研究的真实世界数据的亚组分析。
J Neurol Sci. 2023 Dec 15;455:122797. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2023.122797. Epub 2023 Nov 13.
3
Effectiveness, safety and tolerability of perampanel by age group when used to treat people with focal and generalized epilepsy in clinical practice: The PERMIT Extension study.
在临床实践中,吡仑帕奈按年龄组用于治疗局灶性和全身性癫痫患者时的有效性、安全性和耐受性:PERMIT扩展研究。
Epilepsy Behav. 2023 Oct;147:109369. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2023.109369. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
4
Mining and analysis of adverse drug reactions associated with perampanel based on FAERS database.基于 FAERS 数据库挖掘与培哚普利氨有关的药物不良反应并进行分析。
Epilepsy Behav. 2023 Aug;145:109283. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2023.109283. Epub 2023 Jun 12.
5
Perampanel add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.添加氨己烯酸治疗耐药性局灶性癫痫。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Apr 14;4(4):CD010961. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010961.pub2.
6
Perampanel monotherapy for the treatment of epilepsy: Clinical trial and real-world evidence.氨己烯酸单药治疗癫痫:临床试验和真实世界证据。
Epilepsy Behav. 2022 Nov;136:108885. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2022.108885. Epub 2022 Sep 21.
7
Effectiveness of perampanel as the only add-on: Retrospective, multicenter, observational real-life study on epilepsy patients.吡仑帕奈作为唯一添加药物的有效性:关于癫痫患者的回顾性、多中心、观察性真实世界研究。
Epilepsia Open. 2022 Dec;7(4):687-696. doi: 10.1002/epi4.12649. Epub 2022 Sep 22.
8
Sex and gender differences in epilepsy.癫痫的性别差异。
Int Rev Neurobiol. 2022;164:235-276. doi: 10.1016/bs.irn.2022.06.012. Epub 2022 Aug 10.
9
Antiseizure Medications for Adults With Epilepsy: A Review.成人癫痫患者的抗癫痫药物:综述
JAMA. 2022 Apr 5;327(13):1269-1281. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.3880.
10
Eye disorders associated with newer antiepileptic drugs: A real-world disproportionality analysis of FDA adverse event reporting system.与新型抗癫痫药物相关的眼部疾病:FDA 不良事件报告系统的真实世界药物不良反应比例分析。
Seizure. 2022 Mar;96:66-73. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2022.01.011. Epub 2022 Jan 22.