Trial reportEpilepsia2026
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive cenobamate in Asian patients with focal seizures.
Trial report in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04557085 (A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Cenobamate Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects With Partial Onset Seizures, With Optional Open-Label Extension), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Cenobamate Adjunctive Therapy in Subjects With Partial Onset Seizures, With Optional Open-Label Extension
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Adjunctive Cenobamate in Chinese Participants with Focal Seizure.Advances in therapy · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Narrative Review: Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Newer Third-Generation Antiseizure Medications for Focal Epilepsy: A New Benchmark in Treatment Outcomes?Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Cenobamate: An Appraisal Five Years On.Neurology and therapy · 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
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT04557085), conducted in China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea, evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive cenobamate in patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.
methodsAdults 18-70 years of age with ≥8 seizures (focal aware motor, focal impaired awareness, or focal to bilateral tonic-clonic) during an 8-week baseline, despite treatment with 1-3 antiseizure medications (ASMs), were randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo or cenobamate 100, 200, or 400 mg/day. The study included an 18-week titration phase and a 6-week maintenance phase. The primary efficacy analysis was a hierarchical step-down comparison of the percent change from baseline in 28-day seizure frequency vs placebo during the maintenance phase for cenobamate 200, then 400, and then 100 mg/day.
resultsAmong 519 patients randomized, 446 received ≥1 dose of study drug and had ≥1 efficacy measure during the maintenance phase (placebo, n = 117; 100 mg/day, n = 113; 200 mg/day, n = 113; and 400 mg/day, n = 103). Median percent change in seizure frequency during the maintenance phase was -25.9% for placebo vs -42.6%, -78.3%, and -100% for cenobamate 100, 200, and 400 mg/day, respectively (all p's < .001). During the 12-week period encompassing the last 6 weeks of titration and the 6-week maintenance phase (secondary outcome), the median percent change in seizure frequency was -20.1% for placebo vs -42.6%, -77.1%, and -89.2% for cenobamate 100, 200, and 400 mg/day, respectively. Seizure-free rates during the maintenance phase were 2.6% of patients for placebo vs 12.4%, 30.1%, and 52.4% for cenobamate 100, 200, and 400 mg/day, respectively, and during the 12-week period were 0.8% for placebo vs 8.5%, 19.7%, and 30.6% for the cenobamate groups. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in cenobamate patients (≥20%) were dose-related dizziness and somnolence. SIGNIFICANCE: Cenobamate 100, 200, and 400 mg/day reduced focal seizures in Asian patients in a dose-related fashion and was generally well tolerated.
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.