Cenobamate as an Early Adjunctive Treatment in Drug-Resistant Focal-Onset Seizures: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cenobamate (CNB) is a new antiseizure medication (ASM) to treat drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures. Data on its use in early therapy lines are not yet available, and clinicians frequently consider CNB to be a later ASM drug choice. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CNB as an early adjunctive treatment in drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures. METHODS: The study population were patients with drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures who were initiated with CNB after they did not respond to two or three lifetime ASMs, including all prior and concomitant ASMs. These patients were matched (1:2) by sex, age, and seizure frequency to controls who were initiated with any ASM other than CNB. All participants participated in the Mainz Epilepsy Registry. We evaluated the retention rate after 12 months of CNB and after each new adjunctive ASM in the control group. In addition, seizure freedom and the response rate (reduction of seizure frequency by ≥ 50% from baseline) after 12 months were estimated. RESULTS: We included 231 patients aged 44.4 ± 15.8 years. Of these, 33.3% (n = 77) were on CNB, 19.0% (n = 44) on valproate (VPA), 17.3% (n = 40) on lacosamide (LCS), 16.4% (n = 38) on levetiracetam (LEV), and 13.9% (n = 32) on topiramate (TPM). The highest retention rate after 12 months since the beginning of the early adjunctive therapy was observed on CNB (92.0%), compared with LCS (80.0%), LEV (73.3%), VPA (68.2%), or TPM (62.5%) (p < 0.05). Seizure freedom and response rate were also the best on CNB (19.5% and 71.4%, respectively) compared with other ASMs (8.3% and 52.5%, respectively; p < 0.05). No significant differences in adverse events between CNB and other ASMs were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides evidence that CNB is an effective ASM with a good safety profile in the early therapy lines of drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures. This data should support medical decision making in the management of patients with refractory epilepsy. CLINICAL TRIAL ID: NCT05267405.

Cenobamate add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Although most people with epilepsy achieve complete seizure cessation, approximately one-third of those with the condition continue experiencing seizures despite the use of antiseizure medications (ASMs) given as monotherapy or polytherapy. In this review, we summarised the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) about cenobamate as an add-on treatment for focal epilepsy uncontrolled by one or more concomitant ASMs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of add-on oral cenobamate for the treatment of drug-resistant focal-onset seizures, defined as seizures persisting despite treatment with one or more ASMs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE Ovid (September 2022). In addition, we contacted the manufacturer of cenobamate and experts in the field to enquire after any ongoing or unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing add-on cenobamate to placebo or another ASM in people with focal epilepsy uncontrolled by one or more concomitant ASMs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed risk of bias assessment, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were at least a 50% reduction in total seizure frequency, seizure freedom, and the occurrence of adverse events. We used an intention-to-treat approach for our primary analyses. For each outcome we estimated summary risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We summarised the estimates of effects and certainty of the evidence for each outcome in a summary of findings table. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies (659 adult participants, 442 allocated to cenobamate and 217 to placebo). The overall RR for at least a 50% reduction in seizure frequency for add-on cenobamate at any dose compared to placebo was 2.17 (52% versus 24%, 95% CI 1.66 to 2.84; 2 studies, 605 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The RR for seizure freedom for add-on cenobamate at any dose compared to placebo was 4.45 (16% versus 5%, 95% CI 2.25 to 8.78; 2 studies, 605 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The RR for the occurrence of adverse events for add-on cenobamate at any dose compared to placebo was 1.14 (77% versus 67%, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.27; 2 studies, 659 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We judged the two included RCTs as at low or unclear risk of bias. Both studies were sponsored by the drug company that produces cenobamate. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Add-on cenobamate is probably better than placebo in reducing the frequency of seizures by at least 50% and in achieving seizure freedom in adults with focal epilepsy uncontrolled by one or more concomitant ASMs (moderate level of certainty). Its use is probably associated with an increased risk of adverse events (moderate level of certainty). Further prospective, controlled trials are required to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of add-on cenobamate compared to other ASMs. The efficacy and tolerability of cenobamate as adjunctive treatment for focal epilepsy in children should be further investigated. Finally, the long-term efficacy and tolerability of add-on cenobamate treatment in people with other epilepsy types (e.g. generalised epilepsy) or specific epilepsy syndromes, as well as its use as monotherapy, require additional study.

Treatment simplification to optimize cenobamate effectiveness and tolerability: A real-world retrospective study in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the impact of co-antiseizure medication (co-ASM) optimization on the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate (CNB) in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy in a real-world setting. METHODS: This unicentric, retrospective, observational study included adults with focal-onset seizures who had received ≥2 previous ASMs. The main effectiveness endpoints included responder rates and seizure frequency reduction at 3, 6, and 12-month visits. The number of co-ASMs and defined daily dose (DDD) were analyzed at every visit. Safety endpoints included adverse drug reactions (ADRs). RESULTS: Thirty-four patients with a median epilepsy duration of 22 years and a median of 15.5 seizures/month were analyzed. The median number of prior ASMs was 12, and the mean number of co-ASMs was 2.9 (SD 1). There was a reduction in seizure frequency/month from baseline to the last visit (p < 0.0001). Between baseline and the end of the study, the mean number of co-ASMs in the per-protocol (PP) population was reduced from 2.9 to 1.6 (p < 0.0001), and DDD was reduced from 3.6 to 1.4 (p < 0.0001). Sodium channel blockers (carbamazepine and lacosamide) and GABAergic drugs (clobazam) were the agents with the most significant reductions in DDD after 12 months. The percentage of patients in the PP population with ≥3 co-ASMs was reduced from 61.8% at baseline to 14.3% at 12 months; 1 patient was receiving CNB as monotherapy at the last visit. At the last visit, 85.7% of the PP population were ≥50% responders, and 33.3% were seizure-free. The percentage of patients with ADRs in the PP population was 71.9% at 3 months and 52.3% at 12 months. SIGNIFICANCE: Following rational polytherapy, optimization of co-ASM management during CNB treatment allowed high seizure freedom rates despite meaningful reductions in co-medication, while also achieving both good tolerability and patient satisfaction scores in a highly drug-resistant population. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Many patients with epilepsy still have seizures, even after being treated with several different epilepsy drugs. In this study of 34 patients from a Spanish clinic, we show that the epilepsy drug cenobamate can reduce the number of seizures in these patients, even after many other epilepsy drugs have failed. We also show that patients treated with cenobamate can reduce the dose or even stop taking certain other epilepsy drugs. This allows them to simplify their treatment and reduce adverse effects while still keeping control of their epilepsy.

Spanish consensus on the management of concomitant antiseizure medications when using cenobamate in adults with drug-resistant focal seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Cenobamate is an antiseizure medication (ASM) associated with high rates of seizure freedom and acceptable tolerability in patients with focal seizures. To achieve the optimal cenobamate dose for maximal potential effectiveness while avoiding or minimizing drug-related adverse events (AEs), the administration of cenobamate with other ASMs must be managed through concomitant ASM load reduction. A panel of Spanish epilepsy experts aimed to provide a Spanish consensus on how to adjust the dose of concomitant ASMs in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) in order to improve the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate. METHODS: A three-stage modified Delphi consensus process was undertaken, including six Spanish epileptologists with extensive experience using cenobamate. Based on current literature and their own expert opinion, the expert panel reached a consensus on when and how to adjust the dosage of concomitant ASMs during cenobamate titration. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed that tailored titration and close follow-up are required to achieve the best efficacy and tolerability when initiating cenobamate in patients receiving concomitant ASMs. When concomitant clobazam, phenytoin, phenobarbital, and sodium channel blockers are taken at high dosages, or when the patient is receiving two or more sodium channel blockers, dosages should be proactively lowered during the cenobamate titration period. Other concomitant ASMs should be reduced only if the patient reports a moderate/severe AE at any stage of the titration period. SIGNIFICANCE: Cenobamate is an effective ASM with a dose-dependent effect. To maximize effectiveness while maintaining the best tolerability profile, co-medication management is needed. The recommendations included herein provide practical guidance for proactive and reactive management of co-medication in cenobamate-treated patients with DRE and a high drug load. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patients with epilepsy may continue to have seizures even after treatment with several different antiseizure medications (ASMs). Cenobamate is an ASM that can reduce seizures in these patients. In this study, six Spanish experts in epilepsy discussed the best way to use cenobamate in drug-resistant epilepsy. They provide practical guidance on when and how the dose of other ASMs might be adjusted to reduce side effects and optimize the use of cenobamate.

A comparison of cenobamate with other newer antiseizure medications for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cenobamate with other newer anti-seizure medications (ASMs) including brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, perampanel, and zonisamide, approved for adjunctive treatment of drug-resistant focal-onset seizures (FOS) in adults with epilepsy. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to obtain relevant efficacy, safety, and tolerability data for ASMs for the treatment of drug-resistant FOS. All studies were thoroughly assessed for potential sources of heterogeneity and analysed via Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs). Efficacy outcomes were ≥50 % responder rate and seizure freedom during the maintenance period, which were modelled simultaneously using a multinomial Bayesian NMA. Safety and tolerability outcomes were the proportion of patients who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and the proportion who experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. RESULTS: The SLR identified 76 studies, of which 23 were included in the Bayesian NMAs. Cenobamate was associated with statistically significant higher rates for the ≥50 % responder rate and seizure freedom outcomes compared with all ASMs analysed. The point estimates indicated that cenobamate was associated with higher rates of experiencing at least one TEAE and at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation compared with brivaracetam, lacosamide, and zonisamide; however, no results were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Cenobamate was associated with increased efficacy compared with all ASMs analysed. There were no statistically significant differences in the safety and tolerability outcomes. The results presented corroborate the conclusions drawn from previous published NMAs, which also highlight the notable efficacy of cenobamate in comparison with other ASMs.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive cenobamate based on patient etiology: Post-hoc analysis of YKP3089C017 randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Adjunctive cenobamate was effective and safe for the treatment of uncontrolled focal onset seizures in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study (YKP3089C017; NCT01866111). This post-hoc analysis assessed the efficacy of adjunctive cenobamate in the treatment of patients with different epileptic etiologies during the study. METHODS: Adult patients with uncontrolled focal seizures who previously received 1 to 3 antiseizure medications (ASMs) were randomly assigned in a ratio of 1:1:1:1 to receive placebo or cenobamate 100, 200 or 400 mg/day. Patients were further stratified based on their etiologic causes as genetic/presumed genetic, unknown cause, structural cause, and not reported (NR) groups. The frequency per 28 days for an 18-week double-blind treatment period, responder rates (≥50 %, ≥75 %, ≥90 %, and 100 %) during the maintenance phase (12 weeks), and safety were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 394 patients were categorized into the genetic/presumed genetic (n = 9; 2.28 %), unknown cause (n = 199; 50.51 %), structural cause (n = 177; 44.92 %), and NR (n = 13; 3.30 %) groups, with 4 patients were classified into either of the two etiological causes each. The baseline characteristics were comparable. The percentage of reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days was significantly higher in the cenobamate-treated structural (p = 0.01) and unknown cause (p = 0.0003) groups compared with the placebo group. Responder rates of ≥50 %, ≥75 %, ≥90 %, and 100 % were also higher with cenobamate therapy. Notably, no serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were observed in the genetic/presumed genetic group treated with cenobamate. The most common TEAEs (≥10 %) occurring in patients treated with cenobamate were nervous system disorders by system organ class, and somnolence was the most commonly reported TEAE. CONCLUSION: Cenobamate reduces seizures in adult patients previously treated with ASMs, with high responder rates and acceptable safety, regardless of underlying causes.

Third-Generation Antiseizure Medications for Adjunctive Treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures. So far, no randomised controlled trial directly compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs. OBJECTIVE: We estimated the comparative efficacy and safety of these ASMs for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with epilepsy using a network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: We systematically searched (June week 4, 2021) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomised, double-blinded, controlled, parallel-group, add-on studies that compared oral BRV, CNB, ESL, LCM, and PER versus any comparator over maintenance periods of at least 12 weeks and included adult patients with focal seizures uncontrolled by concomitant ASMs were identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes were the proportions of participants who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework. The hierarchy of competing interventions was established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Sixteen trials (BRV: n = 3, CNB: n = 1, ESL: n = 4, LCM: n = 4, PER: n = 4) were included, overall enrolling 4507 patients randomised to add-on active treatments (BRV = 803, CNB = 221, ESL =9 90, LCM = 1104, and PER = 1389) and 2246 to add-on placebo. Cenobamate was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction than BRV [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.66], ESL (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07-3.48), LCM (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04-3.32), and PER (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.16-3.70). There was a not statistically significant trend favouring CNB over ESL, LCM and PER for the seizure freedom outcome. Brivaracetam (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.86) and LCM (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.88) were associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing TEAEs compared to ESL, and patients treated with PER were associated with a higher risk to experience at least one TEAE (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.96) than BRV. According to SUCRA, CNB had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction, and BRV and LCM had the highest probabilities of being the best-tolerated treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Cenobamate ranked best for efficacy, and BRV and LCM were best tolerated over the other comparators. Although NMAs cannot replace direct comparisons, they may support physicians in clinical decision making.

New Drugs 2021, Part 2.

ABSTRACT: The second of a two-part series, this article describes eight recently approved drugs, including the first drug approved for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2, a first-in-class HIV attachment inhibitor, and a new intravenous injection indicated for the treatment of acute pain in adults for whom other treatments are ineffective.

Is Cenobamate the Breakthrough We Have Been Wishing for?

Close to one-third of patients with epilepsies are refractory to current anti-seizure medications; however, trials with cenobamate suggest effectiveness in such patients with focal onset seizures. We searched for data published or otherwise reported on cenobamate and outlined these here. Despite being marketed in the USA, few studies are yet published in full, and trials are ongoing. Nevertheless, cenobamate showed potential for a high degree of efficacy in reducing seizures with an unprecedented seizure-free rate of up to 28%. Rare cases of hypersensitivity reactions seen in early trials seem to be avoided by the current recommended titration schedule. Other adverse events were rated mild-to-moderate and most commonly included dizziness, drowsiness, and headache. If data are confirmed in further published trials, cenobamate will be a welcome new treatment and further analyses may identify those that will benefit the most.

Efecto del 4-Clorofenol sobre el músculo liso vascular de aorta abdominal de ratas Wistar / Effect of 4-Chlorophenol on the vascular smooth muscle of the abdominal aorta of Wistar rats

Introducción: Uno de los derivados de los clorofenoles más utilizado en Estomatología, lo constituye el p-clorofenol (4-clorofenol), empleado como agente antibacteriano en la desinfección del conducto radicular durante el tratamiento pulporradicular. Son escasos los reportes científicos sobre sus efectos en la musculatura lisa vascular arterial y la regulación del flujo sanguíneo local. Objetivo: Determinar el efecto del 4-clorofenol sobre el músculo liso vascular de aorta abdominal de ratas Wistar. Material y Métodos: Se realizó una investigación experimental preclínica, utilizando 30 anillos de aorta abdominal (porción superior) obtenidos de ratas Wistar adultas. Las preparaciones de unos 5 mm se colocaron en baño de órganos, registrándose la tensión desarrollada por el músculo liso vascular tras la adición de 4-clorofenol en diferentes concentraciones y durante diferentes intervalos de tiempo. Resultados: El 4-clorofenol, tras la preactivación del musculo liso vascular de anillos de aorta abdominal, indujo relajación del vaso, la que se incrementó durante todo el tiempo de estudio y al aumento de la concentración del medicamento. Existieron diferencias significativas entre los valores de tensión promedios registrados en los diferentes intervalos de tiempo con los de la tensión base inicial. Conclusiones: El p-clorofenol indujo in vitro, relajación del músculo liso vascular de aorta abdominal de ratas Wistar(AU)

Introduction: In Dentistry, p-chlorophenol (4-chlorophenol) is one of the most widely used derivatives of chlorophenols. It is used as an antibacterial agent in root canal disinfection during pulp-radicular treatment. There are few scientific reports on its effects on vascular smooth musculature and the regulation of local blood flow. Objective: To determine the effect of 4-chlorophenol on vascular smooth muscle of abdominal aorta from Wistar rats. Material and Methods: A preclinical experimental research was carried out using 30 abdominal aortic rings (upper portion) obtained from adult Wistar rats. The preparations of about 5 mm were placed in an organ bath, recording the tension developed by the vascular smooth muscle after the addition of 4-chlorophenol at different concentrations and during different time intervals. Results: The results demonstrate that 4-Chlorophenol induced vasorelaxation after the preactivation of the vascular smooth muscle of the abdominal aortic rings, which increased during the entire study time and with increased drug concentration. There were significant differences among average tension values registered at different intervals of time in relation to the initial base tension. Conclusions: It is concluded that in vitro, p-chlorophenol induced relaxation of abdominal aorta vascular smooth muscle in Wistar rats(AU)

The ups and downs of alkyl-carbamates in epilepsy therapy: How does cenobamate differ?

Since 1955, several alkyl-carbamates have been developed for the treatment of anxiety and epilepsy, including meprobamate, flupirtine, felbamate, retigabine, carisbamate, and cenobamate. They have each enjoyed varying levels of success as antiseizure drugs; however, they have all been plagued by the emergence of serious and sometimes life-threatening adverse events. In this review, we compare and contrast their predominant molecular mechanisms of action, their antiseizure profile, and where possible, their clinical efficacy. The preclinical, clinical, and mechanistic profile of the prototypical γ-aminobutyric acidergic (GABAergic) modulator phenobarbital is included for comparison. Like phenobarbital, all of the clinically approved alkyl-carbamates share an ability to enhance inhibitory neurotransmission through modulation of the GABAA receptor, although the specific mechanism of interaction differs among the different drugs discussed. In addition, several alkyl-carbamates have been shown to interact with voltage-gated ion channels. Flupirtine and retigabine share an ability to activate K+ currents mediated by KCNQ (Kv7) K+ channels, and felbamate, carisbamate, and cenobamate have been shown to block Na+ channels. In contrast to other alkyl-carbamates, cenobamate seems to be unique in its ability to preferentially attenuate the persistent rather than transient Na+ current. Results from recent randomized controlled clinical trials with cenobamate suggest that this newest antiseizure alkyl-carbamate possesses a degree of efficacy not witnessed since felbamate was approved in 1993. Given that ceno-bamate's mechanistic profile is unique among the alkyl-carbamates, it is not clear whether this impressive efficacy reflects an as yet undescribed mechanism of action or whether it possesses a unique synergy between its actions at the GABAA receptor and on persistent Na+ currents. The high efficacy of cenobamate is, however, tempered by the risk of serious rash and low tolerability at higher doses, meaning that further safety studies and clinical experience are needed to determine the true clinical value of cenobamate.

Anti-seizure medications and efficacy against focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures: A systematic review with relevance for SUDEP prevention.

We conducted a systematic review of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and their efficacy for the control of focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS). FBTCS, especially when nocturnal, are recognized as one of the major risk factors for Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP). We searched different online databases for all the randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled clinical trials of ASMs that were FDA-approved after 1990 and that reported specifically on the reduction in FBTCS; when possible, this was compared to reduction in focal impaired awareness (FIA) seizures. The ASMs that yielded the most data (3 or more studies) were topiramate (TPM), followed by tiagabine (TGB), brivaracetam (BRV), and lamotrigine (LTG). TPM trials showed a reduction in FBTCS of 44.8% to 100% (4.5-99% over placebo); TGB 21.8% to 46.7% (21.8-61% over placebo); BRV 33.9% to 82.1% (11.6-57.4% over placebo); and LTG 55.2% (20.3-52% over placebo). Promising results, but with data from only one or two studies, were seen with cenobamate (18-59% efficacy above placebo), lacosamide (45.1-78.7%), levetiracetam (40.1-60.3%), oxcarbazepine (58.5-81.5%), and gabapentin (50-53.8%). Higher responses were often seen at higher doses, including at doses above those currently approved by the FDA. Results specific to nocturnal FBTCS were never reported for any ASM. Moreover, complete freedom from FBTCS specifically was very rarely reported, despite its relevance for SUDEP prevention. In conclusion, there are few data specifically comparing the efficacy of ASMs for prevention of FBTCS despite the known strong association of BTCS with SUDEP. This review was our attempt at filling a gap in the literature and calling for universal reporting of data specific to BTC seizure reduction in all future studies, preferably including specific reporting on nocturnal BTCS. This will help enable rational ASM selection to minimize BTC seizures and thereby decrease the risk of SUDEP.

Pharmacological treatment of focal epilepsy in adults: an evidence based approach.

INTRODUCTION: Focal seizures represent the most common seizure type and focal epilepsies the most common epilepsy type. Anti-seizure medications (ASMs) still represent the main form of treatment for epilepsy. AREAS COVERED: The aim of this review article is to provide an overview of available evidence about current and upcoming pharmacological options and strategies for adults with focal epilepsy focusing on the last 5 years. EXPERT OPINION: Seventeen drugs are currently approved for the treatment of focal seizures including cenobamate as the very latest option. Ten of these drugs are also licensed for monotherapy. Level A evidence for initial monotherapy is available for seven drugs with no robust data supporting that one drug is superior to the other. Safety, tolerability as well as pharmacoeconomic reasons would then drive treatment decisions. Data on adjunctive treatment are available for 13 ASMs showing again no obvious difference in terms of efficacy. Evidence on specific drug combinations is almost non-existent and the final decision of combining specific drugs is based on the experience of the individual clinician rather than on robust evidence. Current outcome measures do not consider number of previously failed drugs and the observation period is often too short.

Cenobamate: A New Adjunctive Agent for Drug-Resistant Focal Onset Epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of oral cenobamate in the treatment of uncontrolled focal epilepsy. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed database and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the following terms: cenobamate, Xcopri, and YKP3089. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles published in English between January 2000 and April 2020 related to pharmacology, safety, and clinical trials were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: In a phase 2 trial, cenobamate reduced the median percentage change in seizure frequency from baseline by 56% compared with 22% for placebo (P < 0.0001). In another phase 2 trial of multiple cenobamate doses, cenobamate reduced seizure frequency by 36% (P = 0.0071) in the 100-mg group and 55% (P < 0.0001) in both the 200- and 400-mg groups, compared to 24% with placebo. Adverse effects of cenobamate appear to be similar to those of other antiseizure medications and primarily affect the neurological system. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: In patients taking antiseizure medications who continue to have focal seizures, cenobamate has efficacy at multiple doses and is generally well tolerated. Cenobamate may be distinguished from other antiseizure medications by high rates of seizure freedom not seen in previous placebo-controlled trials, which has the potential to significantly improve quality of life. However, despite this efficacy, Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms may remain a significant concern with cenobamate. CONCLUSION: As seen in clinical trials, cenobamate as an adjunctive, once-daily treatment represents an efficacious and generally well-tolerated therapy for patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

Cenobamate: Neuroprotective Potential of a New Antiepileptic Drug.

Central nervous system (CNS) injuries annually afflict approximately 2.7 million people in United States only, inflicting costs of nearly 100 billion US dollars. The gravity of this problem is a consequence of severe and prolonged disability of patients due to a scarce regeneration of CNS, along with the lack of efficient neuroprotective and neuroregenrative therapies. Therefore, the first and most important task in managing the CNS injury is reduction of the damaged area, and apoptosis of neurons occurs not only during the trauma, but in great extent within the following minutes and hours. This process, called secondary injury phase, is a result of trauma-induced metabolic changes in nervous tissue and neuron apoptosis. Cenobamate is a new antiepileptic drug approved by FDA on November 21, 2019. Regardless of its primary purpose, cenobamate, as a blocker of voltage-gated sodium channels and positive modulator of GABAa receptors, it appears to be a promising neuroprotective agent. Moreover, through activation of PI3K/Akt-CREB-BDNF pathway, it leads to the increase of anti-apoptotic factor levels and the decrease of pro-apoptotic factor levels, which induce inhibition of apoptosis and increase neuron survival. Similarly to riluzole, cenobamate could be an important part of a perioperative procedure in neurosurgery, decreasing the occurrence of neurological deficits. Provided that cenobamate will be effective in aforementioned conditions, it could improve treatment outcomes of millions of patients every year, thereby an extensive investigation of its efficacy as a neuroprotective treatment after central nervous system trauma should follow.

Cenobamate (XCOPRI): Can preclinical and clinical evidence provide insight into its mechanism of action?

Approximately one-third of people living with epilepsy are unable to obtain seizure control with the currently marketed antiseizure medications (ASMs), creating a need for novel therapeutics with new mechanisms of action. Cenobamate (CBM) is a tetrazole alkyl carbamate derivative that received US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2019 for the treatment of adult partial onset (focal) seizures. Although CBM displayed impressive seizure reduction in clinical trials across all seizure types, including focal aware motor, focal impaired awareness, and focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures, the precise mechanism(s) through which CBM exerts its broad-spectrum antiseizure effects is not known. Experimental evidence suggests that CBM differentiates itself from other ASMs in that it appears to possess dual modes of action (MOAs); that is, it predominately blocks persistent sodium currents and increases both phasic and tonic γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) inhibition. In this review, we analyze the preclinical efficacy of CBM alongside ASMs with similar MOAs to better understand the mechanism(s) through which CBM achieves such broad-spectrum seizure protection. CBM's preclinical performance in tests, including the mouse 6-Hz model of treatment-resistant seizures, the chemoconvulsant seizure models of generalized epilepsy, and the rat hippocampal kindling model of focal epilepsy, was distinct from other voltage-gated sodium channel blockers and GABAA modulators. This distinction, in light of its proposed mechanism(s) of action, provides insight into the impressive clinical efficacy of CBM in the adult patient with focal onset epilepsy. The results of this comparative reverse translational analysis suggest that CBM is a mechanistically distinct ASM that offers an important advancement in drug development for treatment of therapy-resistant epilepsy.

Cenobamate for the treatment of focal epilepsies.

INTRODUCTION: Antiseizure drugs (ASDs) play a central and crucial role in the treatment of epilepsy patients because the majority require anticonvulsant treatment for an extended period of time. Due to the fact that 30% of patients are refractory to medical treatment, new therapeutic options are necessary. Cenobamate is the latest approved antiepileptic drug in focal epilepsy, and its mode of action is thought to be mediated by blocking voltage-gated sodium channels and interaction with the GABAergic system. AREAS COVERED: This article reviews animal studies, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and the phase 1 to 3 trials and open-label extension data on cenobamate. EXPERT OPINION: Cenobamate has the potential to perform as an important ASD because trial data are indicative of remarkable responder and seizure freedom rates so far not seen with other ASDs. Cenobamate demonstrated significant efficacy at a dosage between 100 and 400 mg per day. The side-effect profile of this drug is comparable to other ASDs and is mainly CNS related; in particular, somnolence, dizziness, headache, diplopia, and nystagmus. However, slow titration is mandatory to decrease the risk of drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) that was observed in several patients with fast uptitration schemes.

Cenobamate for the treatment of focal epilepsy.

Focal-onset or partial seizures are localized to a specific brain area or areas of the cerebral hemisphere. Cenobamate (CNB, Xcopri, YKP-3089; SK Life Science) is a recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in the adult population. CNB has demonstrated broad-spectrum efficacy in alternative preclinical models of epilepsy. The molecule exerts an antiseizure effect due to its dual mechanism of action: besides inhibiting the voltage-gated persistent component of the sodium currents, CNB is additionally an allosteric GABA(A) channel modulator in a non-benzodiazepine fashion. The superior clinical effect of this molecule over placebo in reducing seizure frequency may be observed after 2 weeks following a starting oral dose of 50 mg/day. The drug can be titrated up to a maximum daily maintenance dose of 400 mg/day. CNB has mild to moderate side effects. During initial development, a critical drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome was noticed in 3 patients. However, the DRESS effect was not observed in the large C021 safety study involving 1,347 patients, suggesting a maximum potential risk of no more than 0.3%. The present monograph describes the background, preclinical and clinical pharmacology, indication and safety of CNB for the treatment of partial/focal seizures.

An Ex Vivo Evaluation of Cenobamate Administered via Enteral Tubes.

BACKGROUND: Cenobamate is a new, Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved oral antiepileptic drug for treatment of focal seizures in adults. This study examined recovery of cenobamate from suspensions administered through ex vivo enteral feeding tubes. METHODS: Suspensions containing 100 and 200 mg of cenobamate were prepared (five duplicates for each dose), passed through five vertically standing tubes, and collected into flasks. The flasks containing the suspensions were rinsed with deionized water, and this content was also injected into the tubes and collected in the flasks. Acetonitrile, isopropyl alcohol, and trifluoroacetic acid were added to the flasks, followed by deionized water to a concentration of 500 (100-mg cenobamate) and 400 (200-mg cenobamate) µg/mL. A 3-mL aliquot from each suspension was placed into a 10-mL flask, diluted to volume, and mixed, resulting in final concentrations of 150 and 120 µg/mL, respectively. All suspensions were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography (LC). The % LC recovery of cenobamate was calculated for each suspension, and mean % LC for duplicates. RESULTS: The % LC recovery of cenobamate from the 100-mg suspensions ranged from 96.2 to 99.1%, with mean % LC recovery between 96.3 and 98.3%. The % LC recovery of cenobamate from the 200-mg suspensions ranged from 97.1 to 102.6%, with mean % LC recovery between 98.5 and 101.7%. CONCLUSION: The mean % LC recovery of cenobamate was within the predetermined acceptable range of 90.0-110.0%, suggesting no adhesion or adsorption of cenobamate to enteral feeding tubes. Delivery of cenobamate suspension via enteral feeding tubes may be a viable route of administration for patients who cannot swallow tablets.