Cenobamate for Adjunctive Treatment in Adult and Pediatric Patients with Refractory Lennox–Gastaut Syndrome: A Retrospective Chart Review
Pediatrix Medical Group-Neurology, 7940 Shoal Creek Blvd, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78746 USA
https://ror.org/01f5ytq51grid.264756.40000 0004 4687 2082Texas A&M University Health Science Center-Round Rock, Round Rock, TX USA
https://ror.org/00hj54h04grid.89336.370000 0004 1936 9924University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX USA
Present Address: Child Neurology and Consultants of Austin, 7940 Shoal Creek Blvd, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78746 USA
Abstract
Introduction
Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a particularly severe developmental epileptic encephalopathy (DEE) characterized by multiple types of drug-resistant, incapacitating seizures. Despite aggressive therapy including polypharmacy, surgery, implanted devices, and dietary therapy, the prognosis remains poor, with frequent ongoing seizures and risk of injury and early death. Cenobamate (CNB) is an antiseizure medication (ASM) approved for the treatment of focal seizures in adults, but real-world experience in patients with DEEs has shown promising reductions in seizure frequency.
Methods
This retrospective chart review determined the effectiveness and tolerability of CNB in 36 adult and pediatric patients with LGS under the treatment of one physician.
Results
Among 36 patients (69% male, median age 15.5 years) with LGS, 86% experienced a reduction in seizure frequency after the addition of CNB (median treatment duration 23 months), including ≥ 75% reduction in 22 patients (61%) and seizure freedom in 5 patients (14%). A substantial proportion of patients (75%, n = 27) successfully reduced their concomitant medications, including the lowering or discontinuation of cannabidiol in 19 patients and clobazam in 21 patients. Adverse events were reported in two-thirds of patients, reflecting the same symptoms reported in the original approval trials, with somnolence being the most common.
Conclusions
This chart review provides promising evidence for the efficacy of CNB in treating LGS. Additional prospective studies will help to clarify CNB’s efficacy and safety profile for patients with LGS.
Key Summary Points
| Why carry out this study? |
| Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a particularly severe developmental epileptic encephalopathy that results in substantial burden of illness to patients and caregivers. |
| Most patients with LGS continue to have seizures despite intensive multimodal therapy. |
| We sought to assess the impact of adjunctive cenobamate (CNB) therapy on seizure frequency, polypharmacy, and adverse events in our patients with LGS experiencing refractory seizures despite multiple trials of other therapies. |
| What was learned from this study? |
| In 36 adult and pediatric patients with LGS, 86% (31/36) experienced a reduction in seizure frequency after the addition of CNB. |
| Seizure frequency reductions ≥ 75% occurred in 61% of patients (22/36), including seizure freedom in 14% (5/36). |
| Successful reductions in concomitant medications occurred in 75% of patients (27/36). |
| CNB was well tolerated, with a side effect profile consistent with that observed in clinical trials for focal seizures. |
Introduction
Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a particularly severe developmental epileptic encephalopathy characterized by drug-resistant, incapacitating seizures of multiple types, abnormal electroencephalogram (EEG) features, and developmental dysfunction [1, 2]. LGS typically presents before the age of 12 years and has a prevalence of 1–2% among people with epilepsy [2, 3]. Accurate diagnosis is difficult since the characteristic seizure types and EEG features may change over time [4]. Although developmental dysfunction is a hallmark of the disorder, it is not always present at syndrome onset and is not a requirement for diagnosis [4]. In 65–75% of patients with LGS, a definite etiology (genetic, structural, or metabolic) can be identified; in some cases the etiology remains unknown [1].
The characteristic seizure types observed in patients with LGS are tonic, atonic, and atypical absence; other frequently occurring types that contribute significantly to morbidity include nonconvulsive status epilepticus, tonic/atonic “drop attacks,” generalized tonic–clonic seizures, and focal seizures [1, 2]. The treatment-refractory nature of the seizures results in substantial burden of illness to patients and caregivers [1, 5]. The majority (75% or more) of patients exhibit serious intellectual impairment within 5 years of diagnosis, and over half of patients surviving to adulthood depend on caretakers for most activities of daily living [1, 2].
First-line pharmacological therapies for LGS include valproate, lamotrigine, and topiramate [1]. Other antiseizure medication (ASM) with demonstrated efficacy includes rufinamide, clobazam, felbamate, and most recently, cannabidiol and fenfluramine [1, 3]. In addition to aggressive polypharmacy, treatment for LGS includes surgery, implanted devices, and dietary therapy [1, 6]. Because most patients with LGS continue to have seizures despite intensive multimodal therapy, assessment of novel medications with promise for efficacy should be explored to optimize seizure control, possibly with more favorable side effect profiles.
Cenobamate (CNB) is an ASM that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in November 2019 for the treatment of refractory focal epilepsy in patients 18 years of age and older [7]. In clinical studies, adult patients experienced significant reductions in focal seizure frequency with CNB, including responder rates (≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency) ranging from 40% to 64% (at doses of 100–400 mg/day) [8, 9] and sustained seizure freedom (median duration 45 months) in 16.4% of patients during an open-label extension (median modal dose, 300 mg/day) [10]. A small number of case series and retrospective studies have indicated the potential for broad-spectrum efficacy with CNB across other types of seizures and epilepsy syndromes in adult and pediatric patients [11–15]. Phase 1 and phase 3 clinical studies of CNB in pediatric patients with focal epilepsy are in progress, as are phase 3 studies of CNB to treat primary generalized tonic–clonic seizures (PGTC) in adults and adolescents [16–20].
Based on evidence from clinical studies of adult patients with focal epilepsy, we began using CNB to treat patients with LGS experiencing refractory seizures that persisted despite multiple trials of other therapies. The objective of this retrospective chart review was to quantify the impact of adjunctive CNB therapy on motor seizure frequency, polypharmacy, and adverse events in these patients.
Methods
Patients and Interventions
This retrospective single-center chart review included Dr. Keough’s pediatric, adolescent, and adult patients with LGS treated with CNB at Pediatrix Medical Group in Austin, Texas (USA), between June 2020 and October 2023. The study was reviewed and determined to be exempt from institutional review board (IRB) requirements by WCG [WIRB-Copernicus Group] IRB (Puyallup, WA, USA). The authors confirm that they have read the Journal’s position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines.
We reviewed medical records for patients with an LGS diagnosis who continued to experience refractory seizures despite multiple trials of other therapies. LGS diagnosis had to have been established by overnight EEG. EEG findings required a slow background with at least multifocal and/or generalized interictal epileptiform activity. Generalized paroxysmal fast activity and/or slow spike wave activity were often present but were not required, as not all patients will display slow spike/wave at all points of illness, especially with increasing age [21–23]. Additional diagnostic requirements were the presence of multiple seizure types, including but not limited to drop seizures and/or tonic seizures, childhood onset (defined as age < 18 years at onset), and associated encephalopathy. We then searched for patients with at least 7 months of CNB therapy during the assessment period.
CNB was titrated according to the approved titration schedule for focal seizures to a target dose of 200 mg/day if the patient weight was ≥ 50 kg and 100 mg/day if < 50 kg, or to the highest tolerated dose. CNB titration and concomitant ASM doses could be adjusted based on individual patient response. Because none of the patients were sexually active, pregnancy status was not monitored.
Outcomes and Analysis
We collected the following information from previously documented notes in electronic medical records: patient age and weight, number of previously failed treatments, final CNB dose, CNB treatment duration, and concomitant treatments. There were no predefined criteria regarding number of previously failed ASMs; however, all patients who received CNB were refractory to standard treatments. Seizure frequency was documented at clinic visits based on patient/caregiver-reported daily/weekly countable motor seizures; standardized patient diaries were not used. Seizure frequency was reported as recent daily seizure frequency for patients experiencing daily seizures or recent weekly seizure frequency for patients with less than daily seizure frequency. Countable motor seizures included either focal motor seizures or generalized motor seizures not including myoclonic seizures or spasms. The clinical records did not further define changes in subtypes of seizures; therefore, change in seizure frequency was documented based on countable motor seizures as previously defined. Response to treatment was analyzed by comparing caregiver-reported daily or weekly seizure frequency at the last clinic follow-up visit to the caregiver-reported seizure frequency at the last visit prior to starting CNB therapy. The responses were categorized into broad groups (e.g, 50% to < 75%, 75% to < 90%, 100% reduction) of percent seizure reduction. The exception was for three patients who had a long period of seizure freedom followed by recurrence of seizures, and that group was further analyzed to determine the period of seizure freedom prior to recurrence.
Seizure responses examined were 50% to < 75% reduction, 75% to < 90% reduction, ≥ 90% reduction, and seizure freedom (100% reduction). Additional categories examined were unchanged seizure frequency and unquantified seizure increase/decrease (used when documented frequency changes were not clearly defined by the above categories). We measured the impact of CNB on polypharmacy by counting the number of concomitant ASMs at the start of CNB therapy and at the last clinic visit (data cutoff). Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and ketogenic diet (KGD) were counted as treatments and tracked separately from ASMs. Given the number of patients taking clobazam or cannabidiol at the time of CNB initiation and the known pharmacokinetic interactions between these medications, we tracked changes to clobazam and cannabidiol dosing from the start of CNB until the last clinic visit. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed through patient/caregiver reports. TEAEs were primarily reported by caregivers, since most patients had intellectual impairments that limited their reporting ability. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.
Results
Efficacy
Thirty-six patients with LGS were treated with CNB for a median duration of 23.0 months (range 7.0–39.0 months) (Table 1). At the start of treatment, patients ranged in age from 3.0 to 24.8 years (median 15.5 years), and 69% were male. Most patients (56%) had LGS of structural or genetic etiology. Consistent with the treatment-refractory nature of LGS, patients’ seizures were unresponsive following a median of 8.0 (range 2.0–15.0) treatments prior to initiating CNB. Five patients had no response to KGD, four patients had an inactive or removed VNS, and three patients had previously undergone other surgical procedures. Upon initiation of CNB, patients were receiving a median of 5.0 (range 2.0–7.0) ongoing treatments that included a median of 4.0 (range 2.0–7.0) concomitant ASMs, active VNS in 25 patients, and KGD in two patients (Table 1). The final median CNB dose was 4.0 mg/kg/day (range 1.6–11.0) in patients weighing < 50 kg and 187.5 mg/day (range 75.0–400.0) in patients weighing ≥ 50 kg.Baseline demographics n (%) Age at time of first CNB prescription, years, median (range) 15.5 (3.0–24.8) 0 to 11 years, n (%) 5 (14) 12 to 17 years, n (%) 17 (47) ≥ 18 years, n (%) 14 (39) Sex, n (%) Male 25 (69) Female 11 (31) Etiology of LGS Structural (congenital or acquired), n (%) 10 (28) Genetic (specific pathogenic variant), n (%) 10 (28) Unknown, n (%) 16 (44) Number of failed treatments, median (range) 8.0 (2.0–15.0) Failed KGD, n (%) 5 (14) Failed VNSa, n (%) 4 (11) Failed callosotomy, n (%) 2 (6) Failed cortical resection, n (%) 1 (3) Number of ASMs at start of CNB, median (range) 4.0 (2.0–6.0) Number of ongoing treatments (ASMs + VNS + KGD) at start of CNB, median (range) 5.0 (2.0–7.0)
Eighty-six percent of patients (31/36) experienced a reduction in seizure frequency after the addition of CNB, including ≥ 75% reduction in 61% of patients (22/36) and seizure freedom in 14% of patients (5/36) (Fig. 1). In addition to the five patients with seizure freedom, three patients experienced initial periods of seizure freedom followed by recurrence of seizures at a lower frequency than their initial baseline. In these patients, initial seizure freedom lasted for 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively, prior to recurrence. With dose escalation and adjustment of concomitant medications, two of these patients remained at ≥ 90% reduction, and one had < 50% reduction at last clinic follow-up. Of the remaining patients, three had no change in seizure frequency after starting CNB, and two patients had an increase in seizure frequency after starting CNB.
A substantial proportion of patients (72%, 26/36) successfully reduced their concomitant ASM burden, including two patients who were on CNB monotherapy at last visit. Cannabidiol 100 mg/mL (Epidiolex®) was the most commonly discontinued prescription ASM. Among 27 patients taking cannabidiol 100 mg/mL at the start of CNB therapy, 19/27 (70%) were able to reduce (n = 4) or discontinue (n = 15) their dose (Table 2). For one patient, the cannabidiol 100 mg/mL dose was increased, and one patient discontinued cannabidiol 100 mg/mL and switched to a low dose of nonprescription cannabidiol/tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Four patients were taking nonprescription cannabidiol products at the start of CNB, and all four continued treatment at the last visit. Six patients who were taking THC products discontinued those products after initiating CNB. Other commonly discontinued prescription ASMs were clobazam, lacosamide, and zonisamide (each stopped in four patients). Among 25 patients taking clobazam at the start of CNB therapy, 21/25 (84%) were able to reduce (n = 17) or discontinue (n = 4) their dose after initiation of CNB (Table 2). Four patients gained additional seizure control with initiation of low-dose clobazam (5–15 mg/day) after starting CNB. Other treatments initiated after the start of CNB were as follows: two patients were started on fenfluramine, one patient was started on THC, one patient entered a bexicaserin clinical trial, and two patients underwent VNS placement.ASM Patients taking ASM at start of CNB, n (%) Median (mean) dose at start of CNB, mg/day Patients with dose reduction, n (%) Patients with discontinuation, n (%) Patients with dose increase, n (%) Patients starting ASM after start of CNB, n (%) Median (mean) % dose reductiona Median (mean) dose at last visit, mg/day Cannabidiolb 27 (75) 730 (672) 4 (15) 15 (55) 1 (4) 0 66 (100) 520 (609) Clobazam 25 (69) 30 (29) 17 (68) 4 (16) 0 3 (8) 50 (47) 15 (16)
Safety
Adverse events were reported by two-thirds of the caregivers or patients, with somnolence being the most common (16/36, 44%) (Table 3). The next most frequently reported side effects were ataxia and aggression/agitation, each reported in three (8.3%) patients. Two patients reported increased seizure frequency while taking CNB. At the last study visit, both patients remained on CNB treatment and had improved with continued dose adjustments of CNB and/or concomitant ASMs, although neither had experienced substantial reductions in seizure frequency.Adverse event n (%) Somnolence 16 (44.4) Ataxia 3 (8.3) Aggression/agitation 3 (8.3) Lethargy 2 (5.6) Dizziness 1 (2.8) Drooling 1 (2.8) Loss of appetite 1 (2.8)
Discussion
In this chart review, 31/36 patients (86%) with LGS experienced a reduction in seizure frequency after the addition of CNB, including 22 patients (61%) with a ≥ 75% reduction in seizures and five (14%) who achieved seizure freedom. Three patients exhibited dramatic improvement initially followed by a recurrence of seizures at a lower level, often referred to in clinical practice as a temporary “honeymoon” from seizures when a new drug is first introduced [24]. These recurrences were further examined for duration of maximal impact and ultimate seizure reduction compared with baseline. At last follow-up, two of these patients remained at ≥ 90% reduction, and one had < 50% reduction.
Although there are limited reports examining CNB’s effectiveness in LGS, results from previous case series and retrospective studies indicate broad-spectrum efficacy of CNB for other types of seizures and epilepsy syndromes in adult and pediatric patients [11–15]. In a small case series (n = 4), adult patients with LGS experienced seizure frequency reductions ranging from 25% to 74% at 12 months, including two patients with ≥ 50% seizure reduction [11]. Other study cohorts that have included adult and pediatric patients with LGS have reported substantial reductions in seizure frequency and good tolerability, but did not examine specific LGS subgroup outcomes [12, 25]. Two ongoing prospective studies are currently evaluating CNB dosing in specific pediatric weight-based cohorts [16–18]. Our findings contribute additional data to support the potential efficacy of CNB in LGS.
Patients being treated for drug-refractory epilepsy may experience decreased quality of life and have a greater potential for toxicities due to the need for polytherapy and potentially high ASM doses [26, 27]. After initiating CNB, a substantial proportion of our patients were able to reduce their concomitant ASM burden. Cannabidiol, clobazam, and lacosamide were chosen to taper earlier due to potential medication interactions [28]. These interactions may manifest early in CNB titration, requiring close observation and dose adjustments of the concomitant ASMs [29]. CNB inhibits CYP2C19 and therefore increases plasma concentrations of CYP2C19 substrates such as clobazam and cannabidiol [28, 29]. Concomitant administration of CNB and the prescription formulation of cannabidiol may result in somnolence, especially when administered in conjunction with clobazam [28]. In particular, the proactive, early reduction of clobazam dosing may reduce CNS-related adverse events including somnolence [28]. In our study, a substantial proportion of patients reduced or discontinued cannabidiol or clobazam. CNB has a dual mechanism of action that combines a block of the persistent current of voltage-gated sodium channels and positive allosteric modulation of GABAA receptors [30, 31]. Although clobazam and CNB both exhibit GABA agonistic activity, many patients needed 5–15 mg/day of clobazam to optimize seizure control. In these cases, the combination appeared to serve as a rationale for polypharmacy [32, 33]. The side effect profile of CNB in our patient population was consistent with that observed in clinical trials, with somnolence being the most common [7].
The retrospective single-center nature of the study presents inherent constraints that may limit its generalizability. These include the potential for incomplete or missing documentation. In our study, adverse event reporting and seizure frequency assessments were based on non-standardized caregiver reports, which may be prone to bias. In addition, our definition of LGS was broader than that outlined in the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) diagnostic criteria [34]. Although we required patients to have an EEG with a slow background and at least frequent interictal multifocal or generalized epileptiform discharges, we did not require the presence of generalized paroxysmal fast activity and/or slow spike/wave complex, as not all patients will display slow spike/wave at all points of illness, especially with increasing age [21–23]. All other diagnostic criteria were consistent with ILAE guidelines.
It is difficult for caregivers to monitor and quantify the polymorphic seizures associated with LGS (e.g., tonic seizures that occur during sleep and atypical absences). Although the efficacy of CNB in various seizure types is of great interest to clinicians, the clinical records did not further define changes in subtypes of seizures; therefore, only countable motor seizures were followed for change in frequency. Because this was a retrospective real-world study, titration patterns and reductions to concomitant medications were variable, and changes to concomitant treatments occurred. As treatment progressed, we based dose adjustments on individual patient responses and our increasing experience with managing concomitant ASMs during the addition of CNB to existing therapy. We measured changes in polypharmacy by counting the number of concomitant medication discontinuations and changes to clobazam and cannabidiol doses, which under-represents the impact of dose reductions on tolerability. Although the small sample size is a limitation of our study, it should be noted that LGS is a rare disorder, which by necessity decreases sample size.
Conclusions
This chart review provides promising evidence for the efficacy of CNB in treating LGS, including seizure freedom in five patients (14%), ≥ 75% reduction in 22 patients (61%), and successful reduction in concomitant medications in 26 patients (72%). Adverse events were reported in two-thirds of patients, with somnolence being the most common. Additional prospective studies of CNB treatment (including an ongoing phase 3 study in PGTC seizures and the pediatric dose-finding study) with diligent seizure diary tracking will help to clarify CNB’s efficacy and safety profile for patients with LGS.
Acknowledgements
Medical Writing and Editorial Assistance
Medical writing and editing assistance were provided by June Stevens, PharmD, Don Fallon, ELS, and Stephen Bublitz, ELS of MedVal Scientific Information Services, LLC (Princeton, NJ, USA) and were funded by SK Life Science, Inc.
Funding
Development of this article was funded by SK Life Science, Inc. The journal’s Rapid Service Fee was funded by SK Life Science, Inc.
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
Declarations
Conflicts of Interest
Karen Keough: Speaker, SK Life Science, Inc. Affiliation at time of study: Pediatrix Medical Group. Current affiliation: Child Neurology and Consultants of Austin. Alec Romick: Nothing to disclose.
Ethical Approval
The study was determined to be exempt from IRB requirements by WCG IRB (Puyallup, WA, USA). The authors confirm that they have read the Journal’s position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines.