Rapid health technology assessment of brivaracetam as adjunctive therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy
- VernacularTitle:布立西坦添加治疗难治性局灶性癫痫的快速卫生技术评估
- Author:
Xiaohua CHOU
1
;
Qian ZHANG
1
;
Xinran QIU
1
;
Bo ZHANG
1
;
Daoli JIANG
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Pharmacy，The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University，Jiangsu Xuzhou 221004，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
drug-resistant focal epilepsy;
rapid health technology assessment;
efficacy;
safety;
cost-effectiveness
- From:
China Pharmacy
2026;37(17):2320-2326
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy， safety， and cost-effectiveness of brivaracetam （BRV） as adjunctive therapy in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.METHODS PubMed， Embase， Cochrane Library， Web of Science， CNKI， Wanfang， and official health technology assessment （HTA） agency websites were searched from inception to January 31， 2026 for HTA reports， systematic reviews/meta-analyses， and pharmacoeconomic studies on BRV. After literature screening and quality assessment， a descriptive analysis was performed.RESULTS A total of 21 publications were included： 13 systematic reviews/meta-analyses， 7 pharmacoeconomic studies （including one study that simultaneously conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis）， and 2 HTA reports. Regarding efficacy， BRV significantly improved the 50% responder rate [risk ratio （RR）＝1.81] and seizure-freedom rate （RR＝5.89） versus placebo. Among third-generation anti-seizure medications （ASMs）， BRV ranked 1st-2nd for seizure freedom， while its 50% responder rate was at a moderate level. The optimal adult dose for seizure freedom was 100 mg/d. Regarding safety， BRV was well tolerated， overall adverse event rates did not differ from placebo， though withdrawal due to adverse event rates were higher than with placebo. Tolerability ranked 1st-2nd among the third-generation ASMs. Psychiatric/behavioral adverse event rates were lower with BRV （6.4%） than with levetiracetam （14.1%）. Regarding cost-effectiveness， BRV showed pharmacoeconomic advantages in countries with lower drug pricing （Australia， Finland） and only in high-risk subgroups in Japan， but did not show such advantages at current prices in the US or Italy. BRV has been included in China’s national reimbursement drug list in 2025， and the economic conclusions drawn during its initial market launch are outdated and require re-evaluation.CONCLUSIONS BRV has proven efficacy and good safety， especially suitable for patients intolerant to levetiracetam. However， due to pricing and medical insurance policies， the cost-effectiveness of BRV after its inclusion in China’s national reimbursement drug list still needs to be re-evaluated.
