ArticleCNS drugs2025
Post-marketing Experience with Cenobamate in the Treatment of Focal Epilepsies: A Multicentre Cohort Study.
Article in CNS drugs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the Role of Early Add-On Cenobamate in Uncontrolled Focal Epilepsy: A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Sustained seizure reduction, treatment simplification, and high retention with cenobamate: A 12-month real-world study in refractory and ultra-refractory focal epilepsy.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- Real-world effectiveness of cenobamate in drug-resistant and ultra-refractory epilepsy: A multicenter study.Epilepsia open · 2026Observational
- GABACellular and molecular neurobiology · 2026Review
- Cenobamate in pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy: real-world evidence from a two-center retrospective study.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Real-world retention of newer ASMs, including lacosamide and brivaracetam as first or second therapies in adult-onset epilepsy.Epilepsia · 2025Article
- Early Introduction of Cenobamate in Uncontrolled Focal Epilepsy: Insights from a Structured Controversy.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Use of cannabidiol for off-label treatment of patients with refractory focal, genetic generalised and other epilepsies.Neurological research and practice · 2025Article
- Cenobamate: A Review in Focal-Onset Seizures.CNS drugs · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn randomised controlled trials, adjunctive cenobamate (CNB) has been shown to reduce seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Studies conducted in real-world settings provide valuable complementary data to further characterise the drug's profile.
objectiveTo assess the efficacy, retention and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate (CNB), and to identify factors that might predict these outcomes in the clinical treatment of focal epilepsies.
methodsThis multicentre, retrospective cohort study included all patients who began CNB treatment between October 2020 and April 2023 at seven participating epilepsy centres. Baseline and follow-up data were collected from patients' medical records, covering clinical characteristics and outcome data such as seizure frequency, dosing of CNB, physician-assessed Clinical Global Impression of Change, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), CNB retention and reasons for discontinuation.
resultsA total of 234 patients [mean age 40.7 ± 14 years, median 40 years, range 11-82 years; five adolescents under 18 years; 99 (42.3%) males] were analysed. The mean epilepsy duration at study entry was 23.2 ± 14.5 years (median 21 years, range 0.75-63 years), with the average age of epilepsy onset being 17.5 ± 13.0 years (median 17 years, range 0.1-71 years). The patients were taking a mean of 2.6 ± 0.8 (median 3) anti-seizure medications (ASMs) before starting CNB, and had failed a mean of 6 ± 3.3 (median 6) of further ASMs in the past. CNB exposure ranged from 5 to 1162 days, amounting to a total exposure time of 264.7 years. The retention rate was 92.6% at 3 months, 87.2% at 6 months and 77.8% at 12 months. At 3 months, 52.6% achieved a 50% seizure reduction, with 14.5% reporting seizure freedom; by 12 months, 47.7% maintained a 50% response rate and 11.9% were seizure-free. No significant differences in responder rates were observed based on sex, aetiology, seizure localisation, number of ASMs or target dose. The mean maximum CNB dose was 236.7 ± 97.4 mg (median 200 mg, range 12.5-450 mg), with 28 patients (12.0%) titrated up to 400 mg or above. During CNB treatment, 43.6% of patients were able to discontinue, and a further 24.4% were able to reduce the dose of a concomitant ASM. During CNB treatment, 144 patients (61.5%) experienced TEAEs. The most common TEAEs were sedation (n = 84, 35.9%), dizziness (n = 58, 24.8%) and ataxia (n = 23, 9.8%).
conclusionsCNB showed a relatively high and clinically useful 50% responder rate of 47.7% and an overall retention of 77.8% at 1 year. We were unable to identify specific predictors for response and retention, indicating that CNB may be beneficial for patients with a history of multiple failed ASMs, a high number of concomitant ASMs and any localisation or aetiology of focal epilepsy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.