The home secretary, Sajid Javid, is considering whether cannabis could be made easier to prescribe for medical use, Downing Street has said.

It comes after a review last month was published in which the chief medical officer of England, Sally Davies, concluded there was evidence of “therapeutic benefit” for some conditions.

Javid ordered part one of the review last month after a number of high-profile cases involving children being denied access to cannabis oil to control epileptic seizures.

The home secretary said: “Recent cases involving sick children made it clear to me that we needed to take a fresh look at the scheduling of cannabis-related medicinalproducts.

“I would like to thank the chief medical adviser for her initial review and have now asked my independent advisory committee to commence the second stage of this process. When I have received its advice I will consider what next steps need to be taken.”

The cases that received the most attention focused on 12-year-old Billy Caldwell and Alfie Dingley, six, who have forms of intractable epilepsy that appear to be eased by the use of cannabis oil.

The Home Office has rubber-stamped a special exemption licence meaning Billy can go home with his medicinal cannabis.

Alfie and Billy are among about 20,000 children who do not respond to the medication prescribed by the NHS.

The prime minister’s official spokesman said: “Prof Dame Sally Davies examined existing research into therapeutic and medicinal benefits of cannabis-related products. This has led today to the commissioning of the second part of the review that will be completed by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

“The ACMD will be advising on whether cannabis-related medicinal products should be rescheduled within the next three weeks.”

Davies said: “There is clear evidence from highly respected and trusted research institutions that some cannabis-based medicinal products have therapeutic benefits for some medical conditions.

“As schedule 1 drugs by definition have little or no therapeutic potential, it is therefore now clear that from a scientific point of view keeping cannabis-based medicinal products in schedule 1 is very difficult to defend.

“Let me be emphatic: this report does not look at recreational cannabis use and does not endorse or condone recreational use. There is well-established evidence on the potential harm of recreational cannabis use. This is about helping patients, in exceptional circumstances, get access to treatment which could work.”

Val Curran, the professor of psychopharmacology at University College London, welcomed Javid’s initiative and said she hoped progress would be made as a result of the two reviews.

“Regulations around medicines are complicated,” she said. “We did suggest that schedule 2 would be the right schedule but other things have to happen in terms of getting the product available and issues about purity.”

Cannabis is currently a schedule 1 drug, which means it is thought to have no therapeutic value and cannot be legally possessed or prescribed. It can be used for the purposes of research but a Home Office licence is required.

“It’s a bit of a catch 22 … If you cannot do research on it, it’s difficult to investigate its medical use. Something like heroin is schedule 2 as it does have a medical use,” Curran said.

The prime minister’s official spokesman was asked whether the changes would result in reclassification, to which they responded: “No this is rescheduling. Schedule 1 drugs are those that have little or no therapeutic potential. We are looking at whether we move cannabis into another schedule which makes it simpler to be prescribed.

“Recreational use of cannabis will remain illegal; this is looking at how it could be made available as a therapeutic treatment.”