Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40963942›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025

Real-world safety comparison between cenobamate and lacosamide: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.

Shenglan Shang, Dongxin Chen, Zhirui Song, Chengrui Zhou, Qiuyue Chang, Lu Xiang, Mengchen Yu, Yan Zhao, Weiliang Li, Fan Zhou and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

11 authors.

Shenglan Shang *Department of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Dongxin Chen *Department of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Zhirui SongDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Chengrui ZhouDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Qiuyue ChangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Lu XiangDepartment of Neurosurgery, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Mengchen YuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Yan ZhaoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Weiliang LiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Fan ZhouDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.
Airong YuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, General Hospital of Central Theater Command, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cenobamate (CNB) and lacosamide (LCM) are two common used third-generation anti-seizure medications (ASMs) for third-line treatment of the drug-resistant epilepsy. The real-world data on adverse events (AEs) related to them remains limited. Methods: All data obtained from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, covering the period from 2008 to 2024. The reporting odds ratio, proportional reporting ratio and bayesian confidence propagation neural network to assess and compare the safety signals of CNB and LCM for comparison. Results: A total of 50,323,324 AE reports were recorded, with 3,584 for CNB and 13,874 for LCM. The most significant signals were primarily in nervous system and psychiatric disorders, resembling those of traditional sodium channel blockers. Unreported AEs in the drug dispensatory were identified in LCM (multiple-drug resistance). Notable differences between LCM and CNB emerged: Certain numbers of AE signals associated with LCM were found in cardiac disorders, while no such relevant signals were detected for CNB; among the signals that detected in both drugs, most signals from CNB are stronger than those from LCM; The initial titration dose of CNB (12.5 mg, qd) reported a significantly higher number of AEs compared to the other dose groups. Conclusion: Choosing the right ASMs requires consideration of the type of epilepsy, the individual tolerance and potential severe toxicity of different medications. Although the disproportionality analysis is a hypothesis generating, we provide a reference for the clinical safety of CNB and LCM.

Indexed as

adverse eventscenobamateepilepsylacosamidepharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID40963942
PMCPMC12439497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.