CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04940624Updated Sep 4, 2026Results posted

A Study of Soticlestat as an Add-on Therapy in Children and Young Adults With Dravet Syndrome

A Phase 3 interventional study of Soticlestat and Placebo in Dravet Syndrome (DS), sponsored by Takeda. Completed at 66 sites in 18 countries. Open to participants aged 2 Years to 21 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-04.

Sponsored by Takeda · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
144
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
2 Years to 21 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The main aim of the study is to learn if soticlestat, when given as an add-on therapy, reduces the number of convulsive seizures in children and young adults with DS.

Participants will receive their standard antiseizure therapy, plus either a tablet of soticlestat or placebo for 16 weeks. A placebo looks just like soticlestat but will not have any medicine in it.

Participants may continue treatment in an extension study, based on the extension study's entry criteria. Those that want to stop treatment will have a gradual dose reduction during 1 week and then be followed up for 2 weeks.

Read the detailed description

The drug being tested in this study is called soticlestat (TAK-935). Soticlestat as an adjunctive therapy will be assessed for efficacy, safety, and tolerability in pediatric and adult participants with DS.

The study will enroll approximately 142 pediatric and young adult patients. Participants will be randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive standard of care (SOC) plus one of the following adjunctive therapies:

  • Soticlestat or
  • Placebo

The total daily dose of study drug will be calculated based on body weight in the 4 weeks Titration Period. Following the Titration Period, participants will continue to receive the same dose in the 12-weeks Maintenance Period.

This multi-center trial will be conducted worldwide. The overall time to participate in the study will be from 22-25 weeks. At the end of the Full Treatment Period, participants have the option to either complete the study and taper off the investigational product or to enter the OLE if they meet eligibility requirements. If participants discontinue, they will be followed-up on phone call approximately 14 days after the last dose of study drug for safety.

02

Conditions studied

  • Dravet Syndrome (DS)

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Drug Therapy
03

In context

Epilepsies, Myoclonic

87 studies on the registry are indexed under Epilepsies, Myoclonic; 23 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 144 is above the median of 25 across 54 interventional studies indexed under Epilepsies, Myoclonic.

Browse Epilepsies, Myoclonic studies →

Lead sponsor

Takeda is the lead sponsor of 1,002 studies on the registry; 92 are open to participants now.

Of its 173 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 149 (86%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
2 Years to 21 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  1. Has documented clinical diagnosis of DS.
  2. Had ≥12 convulsive seizures over 12 weeks before screening based on the historical information and has had ≥4 convulsive seizures per 28 days during the 4- to 6-week prospective baseline period.
  3. Weighs ≥10 kg at the screening visit (Visit 1).
  4. Failure to control seizures despite appropriate trials of at least 1 ASM based on historical information and is currently on an antiseizure therapy or other treatment options considered as SOC.
  5. Artisanal cannabidiols are allowed at a stable dose for at least 4 weeks before the screening visit (Visit 1); the dosing regimen and manufacturer should remain constant throughout the study (Artisanal cannabidiols will not be counted as ASMs.).
  6. Currently taking 0 to 4 ASMs at stable doses for at least 4 weeks before the screening visit (Visit 1); benzodiazepines used chronically (daily) to treat seizures are considered ASMs. Fenfluramine and cannabidiol (Epidiolex) are allowed where available and should be counted as an ASM. ASM dosing regimen must remain constant throughout the study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Unstable, clinically significant neurologic (other than the disease being studied), psychiatric, cardiovascular, ophthalmologic, pulmonary, hepatic, renal, metabolic, gastrointestinal, urologic, immunologic, hematopoietic, endocrine disease, malignancy including progressive tumors, or other abnormality that may impact the ability to participate in the study or that may potentially confound the study results. It is the responsibility of the investigator to assess the clinical significance; however, consultation with the medical monitor may be warranted.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
144 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Placebo comparator
    Placebo

    Soticlestat placebo-matching mini-tablets or tablets, orally or via gastrostomy tube (G-tube) or low-profile gastric tube (MIC-KEY) button or jejunostomy tube (J-tube), twice daily (BID), up to 4 weeks during titration. Participants continued to receive the soticlestat placebo-matching mini-tablets or tablets for 12 weeks during maintenance. The total duration of the treatment was up to 16 weeks (Full Treatment Period). Soticlestat matching tapering was done to maintain the blind if participants decided to discontinue the treatment.

    Drug: Placebo

  • Experimental
    Soticlestat

    Participants weighing \<45 kg: Soticlestat, mini-tablets, at the dose of 40 mg to 200 mg, orally or via G-tube or MIC-KEY button or J-tube, BID based on the body weight up to 4 weeks during titration. Participants continued to receive the dose that they were on at the end of the titration, for 12 weeks during maintenance. The total duration of the treatment was up to 16 weeks (Full Treatment Period) with dose tapered down if participants decided to discontinue the treatment. Participants weighing ≥45 kg: Soticlestat mini-tablets or tablets with a starting dose of 100 mg BID followed by 200 mg BID and, then 300 mg BID, up to 4 weeks during titration. Participants continued to receive 300 mg BID for 12 weeks during maintenance. The total duration of the treatment was up to 16 weeks (Full Treatment Period) with dose tapered down if participants decided to discontinue the treatment.

    Drug: Soticlestat

Interventions

  • DrugSoticlestat

    Soticlestat mini-tablets or tablets.

    Also known as: TAK-935

  • DrugPlacebo

    Soticlestat placebo-matching mini-tablets or tablets.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period

    Convulsive seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of convulsive seizures reported during the period divided by the number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Full Treatment Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Baseline; Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

  2. Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period

    Convulsive seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of convulsive seizures reported during the period divided by number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during Maintenance Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Baseline; Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Responders During Maintenance Period

    Responders were defined as those with ≥50% reduction from Baseline in convulsive seizures during the Maintenance Period. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16

  2. Percentage of Responders During the Full Treatment Period

    Responders were defined as those with ≥50% reduction from Baseline in convulsive seizures during the Full Treatment Period. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

  3. Percentage of Participants With ≤0%, >0% to ≤25%, >25% to ≤50%, >50% to ≤75%, and >75% to ≤100% Reduction in Convulsive Seizures During the Full Treatment Period

    Percent reduction from Baseline (%) was defined as \[(Full Treatment Period Convulsive Seizure Frequency - Baseline Convulsive Seizure Frequency) divided by Baseline Convulsive Seizure Frequency\] multiplied by 100. Data was reported as reduction of ≤0%, \>0% to ≤25%, \>25% to ≤50%, \>50% to ≤75%, \>75% to ≤100% or more in seizures from Baseline. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

  4. Percentage of Participants With Caregiver Global Impression of Improvement (Care GI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16

    The Care GI-I is a 7-point Likert scale that the caregiver used to rate improvement in overall seizure control, behavior, safety and tolerability after the initiation of study drug relative to Baseline (before treatment with the study drug). The participant was rated as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). The parent/caregiver completed the Care GI-I via interview. Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Week 16

  5. Percentage of Participants With Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16

    The CGI-I (Clinician) is a 7-point Likert scale that the investigator used to rate a participant's change (improvement) in overall seizure control, behavior, safety and tolerability, after the initiation of study drug relative to Baseline (before treatment with the study drug). The participant was rated as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). The investigator or designee completed the CGI-I. Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Week 16

  6. Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Nonseizure Symptoms Instrument Responses for Each Domain as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16

    The CGI-I non-seizure symptoms instrument is a series of single-item assessments that the investigator used to rate improvement in the symptoms and impacts in select non-seizure domains (alertness, communication, and disruptive behaviors) since initiating the study drug. The participant was rated by the investigator for each domain as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). Lower scores indicated improvement. Data for percentage of participants categorized based on the responses for each domain are presented. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Week 16

  7. Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Inventory-Disability (QI-Disability) Total Score at Week 16

    The QI-Disability tool is a parent/caregiver-reported questionnaire that evaluated the quality of life in children with intellectual disabilities. It contains 32 items covering 6 domains of quality of life: physical health, positive emotions, negative emotions, social interaction, leisure and the outdoors, and independence. Each QI-Disability item is rated on a Likert scale of: Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, and Very Often. Items were linearly transformed to a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing better quality of life. Domain scores are calculated by averaging item scores. The domain scores are summed and divided by 6 to yield a total score. The total score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. A negative change from Baseline implies deteriorating quality of life. Mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) was used for analysis.

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 16

  8. Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Seizure Intensity and Duration Instrument Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16

    The CGI-I seizure intensity and duration instrument was used by the parent/caregiver to rate changes in intensity and/or duration of the most impactful seizures from the first assessment. The participant's symptoms were rated on 7-point scale as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

    Time frame: Week 16

  9. Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period

    Seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of seizures reported during the period divided by the number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Maintenance Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Baseline; Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16

  10. Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period

    Seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of seizures reported during the period divided by number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Full Treatment Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

    Time frame: Baseline; Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

  11. Change From Baseline in Percentage of Convulsive Seizure-free Days During the Full Treatment Period

    Convulsive seizure-free days was defined as number of days a participant remained convulsive seizure-free after initiation of the treatment. The change from baseline in percentage of convulsive seizure-free days, was defined as the percentage of seizure-free days during the Full Treatment Period minus the percentage of seizure-free days during the Baseline. A linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors and baseline percentage as a covariate was used for analysis.

    Time frame: Baseline up to Week 16

  12. Longest Convulsive Seizure-free Interval During the Full Treatment Period

    Longest convulsive seizure-free interval was defined as the longest time period that the participant remained convulsive seizure free after initiation of the treatment. A linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors was used for analysis.

    Time frame: Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

  13. Number of Days When Rescue Antiseizure Medication (ASM) is Used During the Full Treatment Period

    Use of rescue ASM was recorded in the case report form (CRF) along with start and end date of medication. Based on the start and end dates for all rescue ASMs taken by a participant, the number of days during the Full Treatment Period when rescue ASM was used was derived.

    Time frame: Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16

07

Results

Posted Jan 1, 2025

Participant flow

A total of 144 participants participated in the study at multiple investigative sites globally from 28 October 2021 to 11 April 2024.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestonePlaceboSoticlestat
Started7173
Completed6360
Not completed813
Withdrew: Adverse event411
Withdrew: Withdrawal by parent/guardian12
Withdrew: Physician decision10
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up10
Withdrew: Reason not specified10

Outcome measures

PrimaryPercent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period

Convulsive seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of convulsive seizures reported during the period divided by the number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Full Treatment Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Baseline; Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Median · percent change
Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period
percent changePlaceboSoticlestat
Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period-8.64 (-30.13 to 14.83)-22.16 (-53.64 to 22.73)
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · ANCOVA · p = =0.061 (The p-value was calculated by Rank Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model using treatment group, age stratum (≤6 years, \>6 years), and rank of Baseline seizure frequency per 28 days as predictors.) · Hodges-lehmann location shift estimate: -15.64 · 95% CI -31.30 to 0.24The location shift between soticlestat and placebo (soticlestat - placebo) and its asymptotic 95% confidence interval (CI) were based on the Hodges-Lehmann estimation.
PrimaryPercent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period

Convulsive seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of convulsive seizures reported during the period divided by number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during Maintenance Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Baseline; Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16
Reported as:
Median · percent change
Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period
percent changePlaceboSoticlestat
Percent Change From Baseline in Convulsive Seizure Frequency Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period-11.99 (-31.93 to 9.75)-23.29 (-56.92 to 14.15)
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · ANCOVA · p = =0.089 (The p-value was calculated by the Rank ANCOVA model using treatment group, age stratum (≤6 years, \>6 years), and rank of baseline seizure frequency per 28 days as predictors.) · Hodges-lehmann location shift estimate: -14.29 · 95% CI -30.51 to 1.53The location shift between soticlestat and placebo (soticlestat - placebo) and its asymptotic 95% CI were based on the Hodges-Lehmann estimation.
SecondaryPercentage of Responders During Maintenance Period

Responders were defined as those with ≥50% reduction from Baseline in convulsive seizures during the Maintenance Period. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Responders During Maintenance Period
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Percentage of Responders During Maintenance Period11.830.4
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel · p = =0.010 · Odds ratio (or): 3.22 · 95% CI 1.30 to 7.96The p-value was based on Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test stratified by age stratum (≤6 years, \>6 years).
SecondaryPercentage of Responders During the Full Treatment Period

Responders were defined as those with ≥50% reduction from Baseline in convulsive seizures during the Full Treatment Period. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Responders During the Full Treatment Period
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Percentage of Responders During the Full Treatment Period9.927.4
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel · p = =0.008 · Odds ratio (or): 3.59 · 95% CI 1.36 to 9.49The p-value was based on CMH test stratified by age stratum (≤6 years, \>6 years).
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With ≤0%, >0% to ≤25%, >25% to ≤50%, >50% to ≤75%, and >75% to ≤100% Reduction in Convulsive Seizures During the Full Treatment Period

Percent reduction from Baseline (%) was defined as \[(Full Treatment Period Convulsive Seizure Frequency - Baseline Convulsive Seizure Frequency) divided by Baseline Convulsive Seizure Frequency\] multiplied by 100. Data was reported as reduction of ≤0%, \>0% to ≤25%, \>25% to ≤50%, \>50% to ≤75%, \>75% to ≤100% or more in seizures from Baseline. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With ≤0%, >0% to ≤25%, >25% to ≤50%, >50% to ≤75%, and >75% to ≤100% Reduction in Convulsive Seizures During the Full Treatment Period
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
≤0% Reduction39.431.5
>0% to ≤25% Reduction32.420.5
>25% to ≤50% Reduction18.320.5
>50% to ≤75% Reduction8.513.7
>75% to ≤100% Reduction1.413.7
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Caregiver Global Impression of Improvement (Care GI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16

The Care GI-I is a 7-point Likert scale that the caregiver used to rate improvement in overall seizure control, behavior, safety and tolerability after the initiation of study drug relative to Baseline (before treatment with the study drug). The participant was rated as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). The parent/caregiver completed the Care GI-I via interview. Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Week 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Caregiver Global Impression of Improvement (Care GI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Score 1: Very Much Improved1.54.5
Score 2: Much Improved11.827.3
Score 3: Minimally Improved22.128.8
Score 4: No Change47.127.3
Score 5: Minimally Worse10.37.6
Score 6: Much Worse5.93.0
Score 7: Very Much Worse1.51.5
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = =0.004 · Odds ratio (or): 2.51 · 95% CI 1.33 to 4.72P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16

The CGI-I (Clinician) is a 7-point Likert scale that the investigator used to rate a participant's change (improvement) in overall seizure control, behavior, safety and tolerability, after the initiation of study drug relative to Baseline (before treatment with the study drug). The participant was rated as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). The investigator or designee completed the CGI-I. Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Week 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Responses as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Score 1: Very Much Improved2.87.0
Score 2: Much Improved8.525.4
Score 3: Minimally Improved15.519.7
Score 4: No Change59.238.0
Score 5: Minimally Worse5.68.5
Score 6: Much Worse8.51.4
Score 7: Very Much Worse0.00.0
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = =0.003 · Odds ratio (or): 2.58 · 95% CI 1.37 to 4.87P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With CGI-I Nonseizure Symptoms Instrument Responses for Each Domain as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16

The CGI-I non-seizure symptoms instrument is a series of single-item assessments that the investigator used to rate improvement in the symptoms and impacts in select non-seizure domains (alertness, communication, and disruptive behaviors) since initiating the study drug. The participant was rated by the investigator for each domain as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). Lower scores indicated improvement. Data for percentage of participants categorized based on the responses for each domain are presented. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Week 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Nonseizure Symptoms Instrument Responses for Each Domain as Per the Investigator Reported Impression at Week 16
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Alertness: Score 1: Very Much Improved2.87.0
Alertness: Score 2: Much Improved8.54.2
Alertness: Score 3: Minimally Improved14.114.1
Alertness: Score 4: No Change67.670.4
Alertness: Score 5: Minimally Worse5.64.2
Alertness: Score 6: Much Worse1.40.0
Alertness: Score 7: Very Much Worse0.00.0
Communication: Score 1: Very much Improved1.44.2
Communication: Score 2: Much Improved11.35.6
Communication: Score 3: Minimally Improved18.322.5
Communication: Score 4: No Change62.062.0
Communication: Score 5: Minimally Worse4.24.2
Communication: Score 6: Much Worse2.81.4
Communication: Score 7: Very Much Worse0.00.0
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 1: Very Much Improved1.41.4
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 2: Much Improved4.25.6
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 3: Minimally Improved14.116.9
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 4: No Change69.064.8
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 5: Minimally Worse11.38.5
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 6: Much Worse0.01.4
Disruptive Behaviors: Score 7: Very Much Worse0.01.4
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = =0.741 · Odds ratio (or): 1.12 · 95% CI 0.56 to 2.26P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = =0.901 · Odds ratio (or): 1.04 · 95% CI 0.54 to 2.02P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = =0.693 · Odds ratio (or): 1.15 · 95% CI 0.58 to 2.28P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Quality of Life Inventory-Disability (QI-Disability) Total Score at Week 16

The QI-Disability tool is a parent/caregiver-reported questionnaire that evaluated the quality of life in children with intellectual disabilities. It contains 32 items covering 6 domains of quality of life: physical health, positive emotions, negative emotions, social interaction, leisure and the outdoors, and independence. Each QI-Disability item is rated on a Likert scale of: Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often, and Very Often. Items were linearly transformed to a scale of 0 to 100, with higher scores representing better quality of life. Domain scores are calculated by averaging item scores. The domain scores are summed and divided by 6 to yield a total score. The total score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. A negative change from Baseline implies deteriorating quality of life. Mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) was used for analysis.

Time frame:
Baseline, Week 16
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Inventory-Disability (QI-Disability) Total Score at Week 16
score on a scalePlaceboSoticlestat
Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Inventory-Disability (QI-Disability) Total Score at Week 162.81 ± 10.119-1.23 ± 15.438
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · MMRM · p = =0.189 (P-value was based on MMRM analysis with change from baseline as outcome and baseline score as fixed continuous effect; treatment group, age stratum, analysis visit, and analysis visit by treatment group interaction as fixed categorical effects.) · Least square mean difference: -3.03 · 95% CI -7.59 to 1.52
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With CGI-I Seizure Intensity and Duration Instrument Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16

The CGI-I seizure intensity and duration instrument was used by the parent/caregiver to rate changes in intensity and/or duration of the most impactful seizures from the first assessment. The participant's symptoms were rated on 7-point scale as follows: 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 3 (minimally improved), 4 (no change), 5 (minimally worse), 6 (much worse), and 7 (very much worse). Lower scores indicate improvement. Percentages were rounded off to the nearest single decimal place.

Time frame:
Week 16
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Seizure Intensity and Duration Instrument Responses as Per the Parent/Caregiver Reported Impression at Week 16
percentage of participantsPlaceboSoticlestat
Score 1: Very Much Improved4.310.8
Score 2: Much Improved4.324.6
Score 3: Minimally Improved15.923.1
Score 4: No Change59.433.8
Score 5: Minimally Worse5.81.5
Score 6: Much Worse8.76.2
Score 7: Very Much Worse1.40.0
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Cumulative Logit Model · p = <0.001 · Odds ratio (or): 3.65 · 95% CI 1.87 to 7.13P-value was calculated using the Cumulative Logit model including treatment and age group as factors.
SecondaryPercent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period

Seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of seizures reported during the period divided by the number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Maintenance Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Baseline; Maintenance Period: Weeks 5 to 16
Reported as:
Median · percent change
Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period
percent changePlaceboSoticlestat
Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Maintenance Period-11.89 (-33.78 to 10.50)-17.24 (-56.83 to 23.70)
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · ANCOVA · p = =0.565 · Hodges-lehmann location shift estimate: -9.97 · 95% CI -29.01 to 7.87The location shift between soticlestat and placebo (soticlestat - placebo) and its asymptotic 95% CI were based on the Hodges-Lehmann estimation.
SecondaryPercent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period

Seizure frequency per 28 days was defined as the total number of seizures reported during the period divided by number of days during the period seizures were assessed multiplied by 28. Percent change from Baseline was defined as (frequency of seizures per 28 days during the Full Treatment Period - frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline) divided by the frequency of seizures per 28 days at Baseline multiplied by 100.

Time frame:
Baseline; Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Median · percent change
Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period
percent changePlaceboSoticlestat
Percent Change From Baseline in Frequency of All Seizures Per 28 Days During the Full Treatment Period-7.46 (-32.37 to 14.83)-9.27 (-54.11 to 30.00)
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · ANCOVA · p = =0.637 · Hodges-lehmann location shift estimate: -8.13 · 94% CI -26.31 to 10.13The location shift between soticlestat and placebo (soticlestat - placebo) and its asymptotic 95% CI were based on the Hodges-Lehmann estimation.
SecondaryChange From Baseline in Percentage of Convulsive Seizure-free Days During the Full Treatment Period

Convulsive seizure-free days was defined as number of days a participant remained convulsive seizure-free after initiation of the treatment. The change from baseline in percentage of convulsive seizure-free days, was defined as the percentage of seizure-free days during the Full Treatment Period minus the percentage of seizure-free days during the Baseline. A linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors and baseline percentage as a covariate was used for analysis.

Time frame:
Baseline up to Week 16
Reported as:
Least squares mean · percentage of days
Change From Baseline in Percentage of Convulsive Seizure-free Days During the Full Treatment Period
percentage of daysPlaceboSoticlestat
Change From Baseline in Percentage of Convulsive Seizure-free Days During the Full Treatment Period2.74 ± 1.7843.54 ± 1.719
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Least square mean difference: 0.79 · 95% CI -3.81 to 5.40A linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors and baseline percentage as a covariate was used for analysis.
SecondaryLongest Convulsive Seizure-free Interval During the Full Treatment Period

Longest convulsive seizure-free interval was defined as the longest time period that the participant remained convulsive seizure free after initiation of the treatment. A linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors was used for analysis.

Time frame:
Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Least squares mean · days
Longest Convulsive Seizure-free Interval During the Full Treatment Period
daysPlaceboSoticlestat
Longest Convulsive Seizure-free Interval During the Full Treatment Period16.7 ± 2.1522.3 ± 2.08
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Least square mean difference: 5.6 · 95% CI 0.1 to 11.2
SecondaryNumber of Days When Rescue Antiseizure Medication (ASM) is Used During the Full Treatment Period

Use of rescue ASM was recorded in the case report form (CRF) along with start and end date of medication. Based on the start and end dates for all rescue ASMs taken by a participant, the number of days during the Full Treatment Period when rescue ASM was used was derived.

Time frame:
Full Treatment Period: Weeks 1 to 16
Reported as:
Least squares mean · days
Number of Days When Rescue Antiseizure Medication (ASM) is Used During the Full Treatment Period
daysPlaceboSoticlestat
Number of Days When Rescue Antiseizure Medication (ASM) is Used During the Full Treatment Period4.0 ± 0.812.9 ± 0.78
Statistical analysis
  • Placebo vs Soticlestat · Least square mean difference: -1.1 · 95% CI -3.1 to 1.0Least square mean difference was estimated using a linear model with treatment group and age stratum as factors.

Adverse events

Collected over From the first dose up to Week 19. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Placebo0/71 (0%)10/71 (14.1%)37/71 (52.1%)
Soticlestat1/73 (1.4%)7/73 (9.6%)40/73 (54.8%)
Most frequent serious events
Showing 10 of 11
Most frequent serious events
EventPlaceboSoticlestat
Status epilepticusNervous system disorders4/712/73
Seizure clusterNervous system disorders1/712/73
Adenovirus infectionInfections and infestations1/710/73
COVID-19 pneumoniaInfections and infestations1/710/73
Infectious mononucleosisInfections and infestations1/710/73
PneumoniaInfections and infestations1/710/73
Respiratory tract infectionInfections and infestations1/711/73
SeizureNervous system disorders1/710/73
BronchitisInfections and infestations0/711/73
Pneumonia mycoplasmalInfections and infestations0/711/73
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventPlaceboSoticlestat
Change in seizure presentationNervous system disorders9/7110/73
SomnolenceNervous system disorders8/7110/73
NasopharyngitisInfections and infestations9/719/73
PyrexiaGeneral disorders9/718/73
Upper respiratory tract infectionInfections and infestations8/716/73
ConstipationGastrointestinal disorders0/716/73
InsomniaPsychiatric disorders1/716/73
Decreased appetiteMetabolism and nutrition disorders4/715/73
FatigueGeneral disorders4/712/73

Baseline characteristics

Safety Analysis Set included all participants who had taken at least one dose of study drug.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)PlaceboSoticlestatTotal
Mean10.5 ± 5.0610.1 ± 5.0410.3 ± 5.04
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)PlaceboSoticlestatTotal
Female353772
Male363672
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)PlaceboSoticlestatTotal
Hispanic or Latino6511
Not Hispanic or Latino6268130
Unknown or Not Reported303
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)PlaceboSoticlestatTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native011
Asian242751
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American033
White433982
More than one race011
Unknown or Not Reported426
08

Study locations

66 sites
  • Phoenix Childrens Hospital
    Phoenix, Arizona 85016-7710, United States
  • David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
    Los Angeles, California 90095-3075, United States
  • University of California Benioff Children's Hospital
    San Francisco, California 94143-2350, United States
  • Clinical Integrative Research Center of Atlanta
    Atlanta, Georgia 30328, United States
  • University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics - (CRS)
    Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1009, United States
  • NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center
    New York, New York 10016, United States
  • University of Toledo
    Toledo, Ohio 43606-3818, United States
  • Medical University of South Carolina
    Charleston, South Carolina 29403, United States
  • Seattle Children's Hospital
    Seattle, Washington 98105-3901, United States
  • Multicare Health System - Mary Bridge Pediatrics
    Tacoma, Washington 98405, United States
  • Queensland Childrens Hospital
    South Brisbane, Queensland 4101, Australia
  • Instituto de Neurologia de Curitiba (INC)
    Curitiba, Paraná 81210-310, Brazil
  • Hospital Sao Lucas Da Pontificia Universidade Catolica Do Rio Grande Do Sul (PUCRS)
    Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul 90610-000, Brazil
  • Universidade de Sao Paulo
    São Paulo, 04039-032, Brazil
  • Alberta Childrens Hospital
    Calgary, Alberta T3B 6A8, Canada
  • Child and Family Research Institute
    Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 4H4, Canada
  • Hospital For Sick Children
    Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X8, Canada
  • Peking University First Hospital
    Beijing, Beijing Municipality 100034, China
  • Beijing Children's Hospital,Capital Medical University
    Beijing, Beijing Municipality 100045, China
  • Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University
    Chongqing, Chongqing Municipality 400014, China
  • The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
    Guangzhou, Guangdong 510260, China
  • Shenzhen Children's Hospital
    Shenzhen, Guangdong 518026, China
  • Wuhan Childrens hospital
    Wuhan, Hubei 430010, China
  • Xiangya Hospital Central South University
    Changsha, Hunan 410008, China
  • The First Hospital of Jilin University
    Changchun, Jilin 130021, China
  • Children's Hospital of Shanghai
    Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality 200040, China
  • Children's Hospital of Fudan University
    Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality 201102, China
  • Hopitaux de La Timone
    Marseille, 13386, France
  • Hopital Necker - Enfants Malades
    Paris, 75015, France
  • Hopital Robert Debre
    Paris, 75019, France
  • Schon Klinik Vogtareuth
    Vogtareuth, Bavaria 83569, Germany
  • Klinikum der Johann-Wolfgang Goethe-Universitat
    Frankfurt am Main, Hesse 60528, Germany
  • Krankenhaus Mara gGmbH - Epilepsiezentrum Bethel
    Bielefeld, North Rhine-Westphalia 33617, Germany
  • Attikon University General Hospital
    Chaïdári, Attica 124 62, Greece
  • Orszagos Mentalis, Ideggyogyaszati es Idegsebeszeti Intezet
    Budapest, 1145, Hungary
  • IRCCS Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesu - INCIPIT - PIN
    Rome, Lazio 164, Italy
  • Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli
    Rome, Lazio 168, Italy
  • ASST di Pavia - Fondazione Istituto Neurologico Mondino IRCCS
    Pavia, Lombardy 27100, Italy
  • Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria A Meyer - INCIPIT - PIN
    Florence, Tuscany 50139, Italy
  • Aichi Medical University Hospital
    Nagakute-Shi, Aiti 480-1195, Japan
  • Kumamoto-Ezuko Medical Center for The Severely Disabled
    Kumamoto, Kumamoto 862-0947, Japan
  • National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center
    Omura-Shi, Nagasaki 856-0835, Japan
  • National Hospital Organization Nishi-Niigata Chuo National Hospital
    Niigata, Niigata 950-2074, Japan
  • Osaka City General Hospital
    Osaka, Osaka 534-0021, Japan
  • Osaka University Hospital
    Suita-Shi, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
  • National Hospital Organization Shizuoka Institute of Epilepsy and Neurological Disorders
    Shizuoka, Shizuoka 420-0953, Japan
  • Hokkaido University Hospital
    Chuo-Ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan
  • National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry
    Kodaira-Shi, Tokyo 187-0031, Japan
  • Childrens University Hospital
    Riga, LV-1004, Latvia
  • Kempenhaeghe - PPDS
    Heeze, North Brabant 5591 VE, Netherlands
  • Stichting Epilepsie Instellingen Nederland
    Zwolle, Overijssel 8025 BV, Netherlands
  • Centrum Medyczne Plejady
    Krakow, Lesser Poland Voivodeship 30-363, Poland
  • Neurosphera SP. Z O.O
    Warsaw, Masovian Voivodeship 02-952, Poland
  • Uniwersyteckie Centrum Kliniczne
    Gdansk, 80-952, Poland
  • Szpital Kliniczny im. H.Swiecickiego Uniwersytetu Medycznego im. Karola Marcinkowskiego w Poznaniu
    Poznan, 60-355, Poland
  • Russian National Research Medical University n.a. N.I.Pirogov
    Moscow, Moscow 117437, Russia
  • Krasnoyarsk State Medical University n.a. V.F. Voyno-Ysenetskiy
    Krasnoyarsk, 660022, Russia
  • Clinic for Neurology and Psychiatry for Children and Youth
    Belgrade, 11000, Serbia
  • Mother and Child Health Care Institute of Serbia Dr Vukan Cupic
    Belgrade, 11000, Serbia
  • University Clinical Center Nis
    Niš, 18 000, Serbia
  • Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron - PPDS
    Barcelona, 8035, Spain
  • Hospital Regional Universitario de Malaga Hospital General
    Málaga, 29010, Spain
  • Hospital Universitari i Politecnic La Fe de Valencia
    Valencia, 46026, Spain
  • Communal Non-profit Enterprise City Childrens Clinical Hospital #6 of DCC
    Dnipro, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast 49101, Ukraine
  • Communal Non-commercial Enterprise Iv-Frank Regional Childrens Clinical Hosp of Iv-Frank RC
    Ivano-Frankivsk, 76018, Ukraine
  • CNPE Clinical Hospital Psychiatry of the Executive Body of the Kyiv City Council KCSA
    Kyiv, 4080, Ukraine
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Apr 22, 2022
  • Statistical analysis plan · Mar 29, 2022

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Takeda provides access to the de-identified individual participant data (IPD) for eligible studies to aid qualified researchers in addressing legitimate scientific objectives (Takeda's data sharing commitment is available on https://clinicaltrials.takeda.com/takedas-commitment?commitment=5). These IPDs will be provided in a secure research environment following approval of a data sharing request, and under the terms of a data sharing agreement.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf, Csr

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 4, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04940624
Lead sponsor
Takeda
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 25, 2021
Start date
Oct 28, 2021
Primary completion
Apr 11, 2024
Completion
Apr 11, 2024
Results posted
Jan 1, 2025
Last update
Sep 4, 2026

Study contacts

Study Director
study director · Takeda (Note: This product was divested to Mistrau Bio, Inc. in 2026)

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion