ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Real-world utilization of Cenobamate as adjunct therapy in office-based neurology: practical tips and insights for titration.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Advances in Sodium Channel Modulation in Epilepsy Therapy: Focus on Eslicarbazepine, Lacosamide and Cenobamate.Biomedicines · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Epilepsy poses significant management challenges, particularly in patients with refractory epilepsy where conventional antiseizure medications (ASMs) are ineffective. Cenobamate (CNB), a recently approved third-generation ASM, has shown unprecedented efficacy as an adjunctive therapy in clinic-based practice. However, to date, its use by office-based neurologists in Germany remains relatively limited. One reason for this is its perceived complexity and false perception as a medication of last resort. This study focuses on the logistics of German care pathways, CNB titration, and ASM combinations in a first cohort of office-based outpatients. It also gives a glimpse into which ASMs are being used in the office-based setting in comparison to population and clinic-based data sources. Methods: The cohort comprised 55 patients from two office-based outpatient practices ( Results: Prior to CNB initiation, patients at both office-based practices had similar levels of 1-2 concurrent ASMs (Berlin 80%; Hamburg 77%). The most common ASMs were voltage-gated sodium channel blockers (VGSC), Levetiracetam (LEV)/Brivaracetam (BRV) synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) inhibitors, and Perampanel (PER). CNB titration was configured into a quarterly office-based outpatient schedule. All patients had seizure reductions in-line with published and real-world evidence, and were compliant. Discussion and conclusion: CNB is a valuable adjunctive therapy suitable for refractory epilepsy outpatients attending office-based neurologists. A slow titration schedule helped mitigate most side effects. Despite differences to clinic-based practice, in office-based outpatient practice CNB can be broadly used. It can be prescribed to patients on conventional therapy who are still having seizures and have failed two or more other ASMs. By reporting experiences of CNB titration, seizure, and drug load reduction outcomes in office-based neurology, this study will give German office-based outpatient neurologists evidence to support both CNB and other third-generation ASM use in their practice.
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.