Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41264217›Full record

ArticleNeurology and therapy2026

Lacosamide is Associated with a Higher Treatment Persistence at 12 Months than Brivaracetam and Perampanel Despite Similar Efficacy.

Roberta Roberti, Cristina Politi, Francesca Anzellotti, Vincenzo Belcastro, Simone Beretta, Giovanni Boero, Paolo Bonanni, Laura Canafoglia, Alfredo D'Aniello, Filippo Dainese and 27 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

37 authors.

Roberta RobertiCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.
Cristina PolitiCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.
Francesca AnzellottiDepartment of Neurology, Epilepsy Center, "SS Annunziata" Hospital, Chieti, Italy.
Vincenzo BelcastroNeurology Unit, Maggiore Hospital, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST) Lodi, Lodi, Italy.
Simone BerettaDepartment of Neurology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
Giovanni BoeroComplex Structure of Neurology, SS Annunziata Hospital, Taranto, Italy.
Paolo BonanniEpilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology Unit, IRCCS Eugenio Medea Scientific Institute, Conegliano, Treviso, Italy.
Laura CanafogliaIntegrated Diagnostics for Epilepsy, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Besta-European Reference Network (ERN) EpiCARE, Milan, Italy.
Alfredo D'AnielloIRCCS NEUROMED, Pozzilli, IS, Italy.
Filippo DaineseClinical Neurophysiology Unit, Clinical Neurology, DIDAS Department, Padua, Italy.
Carmen De CaroCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.
Giancarlo Di GennaroIRCCS NEUROMED, Pozzilli, IS, Italy.
Roberta Di GiacomoEpilepsy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Besta-European Reference Network (ERN) EpiCARE, Milan, Italy.
Jacopo C DiFrancescoDepartment of Neurology, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
Fedele DonoDepartment of Neurology, Epilepsy Center, "SS Annunziata" Hospital, Chieti, Italy.
Giovanni FalcicchioDiBraiN Department, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Edoardo FerlazzoDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, "Magna Græcia" University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Nicoletta FoschiNeurological Clinic, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, Italy.
Antonio GambardellaInstitute of Neurology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Alfonso GiordanoDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Angelo LabateNeurophysiopatology and Movement Disorders Clinic, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Angela La NeveDiBraiN Department, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Simona LattanziNeurological Clinic, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, Italy.
Ugo LeggioUnit of Neurophysiopathology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale (ASST) Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
Claudio LiguoriDepartment of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Marta MaschioCenter for Tumor-Related Epilepsy, UOSD Neurooncology, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Pietro MattioliDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DINOGMI), Clinical Neurology, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Annacarmen NiloClinical Neurology Unit, Department of Medicine (DMED), University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Francesca Felicia OpertoCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.
Angelo PascarellaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, "Magna Græcia" University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Giada PaulettoNeurology Unit, Department of Head, Neck and Neurosciences, Santa Maria Della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy.
Luciano PellegrinoClinical Neurophysiology Unit, Clinical Neurology, DIDAS Department, Padua, Italy.
Rosaria RennaNeurology and Stroke Unit, Department of Neurosciences, AORN San Pio, Benevento, Italy.
Gionata StrigaroEpilepsy Center, Neurology Unit, Department of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, and Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "Maggiore della Carità", Novara, Italy.
COMPARE Study Group
Emilio RussoCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy. erusso@unicz.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1279-8123
Gianfranco Di GennaroCRUISE Research Center, Science of Health Department, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.

Funding

Ministero della Salute PNRR MCNT2- 2023-12377846 (GUMBLE Study)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEvidence directly comparing newer antiseizure medications (ASMs) is limited but crucial for guiding treatment decisions. This study compared the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) as add-on therapy in adults with epilepsy, applying a causal-inference extension of the COMPARE study. The aim of this approach was to overcome the limitations of standard multivariable analyses, better approximate causal effects, and reinforce the credibility of the results.

methodsData were retrospectively collected in the Italian multicentre COMPARE study. To emulate a randomized setting, we estimated multinomial propensity scores and applied stabilized inverse probability weights. The primary analysis used a log-logistic accelerated failure time model to estimate time-to-treatment discontinuation, adjusting for adverse events (AEs), clinical response and follow-up duration. Secondary analyses evaluated changes in total and concomitant drug load and tolerability over time.

resultsAmong the 850 subjects included in this analysis (259, 240 and 351 receiving LCM, BRV and PER, respectively; 53.4% female; median age 43 years), the estimated probability of 12-month retention was highest for LCM (86.1%), followed by BRV (79.1%) and PER (75.4%). Long-term trends suggested convergence of PER and LCM retention, whereas BRV discontinuation remained higher. In the adjusted analyses, BRV and PER were associated with shorter time-to-treatment discontinuation than LCM, but this negative effect decreased over time, while the beneficial effect of clinical response strengthened. Total drug load increased across all groups but remained lowest for LCM; concomitant ASM load decreased, particularly among responders. AEs were mostly mild, with dizziness, irritability and somnolence the most common AEs. AE rates were initially higher for PER and BRV, but differences diminished over time.

conclusionTreatment discontinuation in epilepsy emerges as a dynamic process shaped by both tolerability and clinical response. Early persistence was higher for LCM, whereas long-term retention was improved for BRV and PER. These results support a personalized approach to ASM selection that integrates early tolerability with sustained effectiveness.

Indexed as

Antiseizure medicationsComparative analysisDrug loadEpilepsyReal world studyRetention rateSafety

Identifiers

PMID41264217
PMCPMC12804576

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.