Comparison of Lemborexant With Placebo and Zolpidem Tartrate Extended Release for the Treatment of Older Adults With Insomnia Disorder: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rosenberg R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6991236 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Comparison of Lemborexant With Placebo and Zolpidem Tartrate Extended Release for the Treatment of Older Adults With Insomnia Disorder: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.
Rosenberg Russell R Murphy Patricia P Zammit Gary G Mayleben David D Kumar Dinesh D Dhadda Shobha S Filippov Gleb G LoPresti Antonia A Moline Margaret M
JAMA network open 20191202 12
<h4>Importance</h4>Insomnia disorder is prevalent and associated with health risks in older adults; however, efficacy and safety issues with existing treatments create significant unmet needs in this patient population.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare treatment with the orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant with placebo and zolpidem tartrate extended release in participants with insomnia disorder.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>The Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lemborexant in Subjec ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Study objectivesChanges to sleep architecture that occur as a result of the normal aging process may also exacerbate insomnia in older individuals. Therefore, this study assessed the impact of lemborexant compared with placebo and zolpidem tartrate extended release on objective sleep architecture parameters, as measured by polysomnography, in older adults (ages ≥ 55 years) with insomnia disorder from a phase 3 study.MethodsStudy E2006-G000-304 (SUNRISE 1; NCT02783729) was a global, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active comparator (zolpidem)-controlled, parallel-group study comparing 2 dose levels of lemborexant (5 mg and 10 mg). Sleep architecture was measured using polysomnography. Assessments were collected at baseline during a single-blind placebo run-in and during the first 2 nights and last 2 nights of treatment. Mean values for each sleep stage were based on the 2 consecutive polysomnograms.ResultsTreatment with lemborexant resulted in significantly greater increases from baseline in total sleep time compared with both placebo and zolpidem. Significant increases from baseline in rapid eye movement sleep and significant decreases from baseline in latency to rapid eye movement sleep were also observed with lemborexant compared with placebo and zolpidem.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that treatment with lemborexant may address some of the alterations in sleep architecture normally observed in older individuals with insomnia.Clinical trial registrationRegistry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lemborexant in Subjects 55 Years and Older With Insomnia Disorder (SUNRISE 1); URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02783729; Identifier: NCT02783729.
| S-EPMC8314653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesPatients with chronic insomnia may respond differently to therapeutic modalities. This study examined differences in response of individuals with 2 insomnia phenotypes-short sleep duration (I-SSD; < 6 hours) and normal sleep duration (I-NSD; ≥ 6 hours) determined by polysomnography-to treatment with lemborexant and zolpidem tartrate extended-release 6.25 mg (zolpidem ER), compared with placebo.MethodsStudy E2006-G000-304 (Study 304; SUNRISE-1; NCT02783729) was a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo, and active comparator-controlled, parallel-group study comparing lemborexant 5 and 10 mg in individuals aged ≥ 55 years with insomnia disorder. In this analysis, changes in subjective (self-reported) variables based on sleep diaries and objective variables based on polysomnographs were assessed after 1-month administration of study drugs. Data from participants with I-SSD and I-NSD were compared.ResultsIn the I-SSD subgroup, both lemborexant doses provided significant benefit for sleep-onset latency (SOL), total sleep time (TST), and wake after sleep onset (WASO) vs placebo; zolpidem ER also provided significant benefit for TST and WASO, but not SOL, on both measures vs placebo. In the I-NSD subgroup, lemborexant and zolpidem ER provided significant benefit for TST and WASO vs placebo objectively but not subjectively; both doses of lemborexant provided significant benefit for SOL vs placebo subjectively, but not objectively.ConclusionsBoth drugs, but lemborexant more consistently, showed subjective and objective benefits compared with placebo in participants with insomnia with objective short sleep duration. However, neither lemborexant nor zolpidem provided consistent benefits for participants with normal sleep duration on sleep-onset and sleep maintenance variables.Clinical trial registrationRegistry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lemborexant in Subjects 55 Years and Older With Insomnia Disorder (SUNRISE 1); URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02783729; Identifier: NCT02783729.CitationInoue Y, Nishida M, Kubota N, et al. Comparison of the treatment effectiveness between lemborexant and zolpidem tartrate extended-release for insomnia disorder subtypes defined based on polysomnographic findings. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(3):519-528.
| S-EPMC9978424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveFew clinical studies have assessed real-world abrupt transitioning between insomnia medications. This study assessed strategies for directly transitioning patients from zolpidem tartrate (ZOL) immediate/extended release to the dual orexin receptor antagonist, lemborexant (LEM).MethodsThis randomized, open-label, multicenter study (Study 312; E2006-A001-312) enrolled 53 adults age ≥18 years with insomnia disorder and ≥1-month history of intermittent (3-4 nights/week) or frequent (≥5 nights/week) ZOL use. Subjects recorded their ZOL use in a 3-week Pretreatment Phase, followed by a 2-week Treatment Phase (TRT; Titration) during which ZOL was discontinued. Intermittent ZOL users transitioned to LEM 5 mg (LEM5), Cohort 1, and frequent ZOL users were randomized 1:1 to LEM5, Cohort 2A, or LEM 10 mg (LEM10), Cohort 2B. One dose adjustment was permitted during the TRT. Subjects completing the TRT could continue LEM in the 12-week Extension Phase (EXT). The primary outcome was proportion of subjects who successfully transitioned and remained on LEM at the end of the TRT.ResultsMost subjects (43 [81.1 %]) successfully transitioned to LEM (9 [90 %], 17 [81.0 %], and 17 [77.3 %] in Cohorts 1, 2A, and 2B, respectively). By the end of the EXT, 66.7 % in Cohort 1 and 60.0 % in Cohort 2A up-titrated to LEM10, whereas 41.2 % in Cohort 2B down-titrated to LEM5; 61.0 % were receiving LEM10 at study end. At the end of the TRT, more subjects taking LEM reported that it helped them return to sleep after waking, compared with those taking ZOL (71.7 % vs. 49.1 %). There were no important differences between treatments regarding how subjects reported feeling as they fell asleep. Most of the treatment-emergent adverse events with LEM were mild in severity.ConclusionsMost subjects transitioned successfully to LEM from ZOL (intermittent or frequent use). LEM was well tolerated.
| S-EPMC10835435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate effects of lemborexant (LEM), a dual orexin receptor antagonist, on next-morning sleep propensity assessed by a modified Multiple Sleep Latency Test (M-MSLT) in adults with insomnia disorder.MethodsStudy 107 (E2006-A001-107) was a phase 1, randomized, double-blind, four-period crossover study. Subjects (n = 69) received oral single-dose placebo, LEM 5 mg (LEM5), and LEM 10 mg (LEM10) at bedtime in periods 1-3 in a randomized crossover and open-label flurazepam 30 mg in period 4. After an 8-hour overnight sleep opportunity, the M-MSLT measured average sleep onset latency (SOL). Mean change from baseline in average SOL versus placebo of -6.0 min or more was considered clinically meaningful. Other sleep propensity assessments included the proportion of subjects with average SOL >6 min shorter than placebo. LEM plasma concentrations, safety, and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsM-MSLT assay sensitivity was confirmed by a clinically meaningful decrease in average SOL with flurazepam versus placebo (least squares mean [LSM] difference -6.06 min; 1-sided p < 0.0001). In contrast, decreases in average SOL with LEM5 (LSM difference vs. placebo -1.15 min; 1-sided p = 0.0262) and LEM10 (-3.48 min; p < 0.0001) did not meet the predefined threshold for a clinically meaningful effect (LEM5, -2.12; LEM10, -4.46). Some individuals did experience higher sleep propensity (average SOL >6.0 min shorter than placebo), particularly with LEM10 (LEM10, 29.4%; LEM5, 13.2%).ConclusionsIn contrast to flurazepam, LEM5 and LEM10 did not show clinically meaningful mean increases in next-morning sleep propensity versus placebo. The possibility that some subjects may experience residual morning effects cannot be excluded. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02350309.
| S-EPMC10104417 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveInsomnia is common in midlife women. The efficacy and safety of lemborexant (LEM), a competitive dual orexin receptor antagonist, was assessed for 12 months in a subgroup of midlife women (age, 40-58 y) from Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303; SUNRISE-2).MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled (first 6 mo) study of adults with insomnia disorder ( N = 949). During treatment period 1 (TP1), participants received PBO or LEM 5 mg (LEM5) or 10 mg (LEM10). During TP2 (second 6 mo), LEM participants continued their assigned dose; PBO participants were rerandomized to LEM5 or LEM10. Assessments included patient-reported sleep- and fatigue-related measures and treatment-emergent adverse events.ResultsThe midlife female subgroup comprised 280 of 949 participants (TP1: PBO, n = 90 of 318 [28.3%]; LEM5, n = 82 of 316 [25.9%]; LEM10, n = 108 of 315 [34.3%]). At 6 months, median changes from baseline in subjective sleep-onset latency (in minutes) were -17.9, -20.7, and - 30.4 for PBO, LEM5, and LEM10 (vs PBO: LEM5, P = not significant; LEM10, P = 0.0310). At 6 months, mean changes from baseline in subjective wake after sleep onset (in minutes) were -37.0 (59.6), -50.1 (74.5), and -54.5 (65.4) for PBO, LEM5, and LEM10 (vs PBO: LEM5 and LEM10, P = not significant), with benefits sustained through 12 months. Greater decreases from baseline (improvement) in Insomnia Severity Index total score and Fatigue Severity Scale total score were seen with LEM versus PBO at 6 months; benefits continued through 12 months. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate in severity.ConclusionsConsistent with the total population, subjective sleep parameters improved, and improvement was sustained over time in midlife women. LEM was well tolerated, suggesting that LEM may be a potential treatment option for midlife women with insomnia.
| S-EPMC10389212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPharmacologic treatments are available to treat insomnia, a common and burdensome sleep disorder, but may be contraindicated in older adults who are prone to side effects from sleep-promoting drugs. These analyses of sleep diary data from Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303) investigated the benefits of lemborexant 5 mg (LEM5) and 10 mg (LEM10) in the subgroup age ≥ 65 years with insomnia.MethodStudy 303, a 12-month, double-blind study of LEM5 and LEM10 in adults (age ≥ 18 years) with insomnia disorder (sleep onset and/or maintenance difficulties) assessed subject-reported (subjective) sleep-onset latency (sSOL), sleep efficiency (sSE), wake after sleep onset (sWASO), and total sleep time (sTST). Morning sleepiness/alertness, insomnia severity (Insomnia Severity Index [ISI]), fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale [FSS]), perceptions of sleep-related medication effects (Patient Global Impression-Insomnia [PGI-I] questionnaire), and safety were also evaluated.ResultsIn this subgroup of older adults (≥ 65 years; n = 262), there were significantly larger changes from baseline for sSOL, sSE, sTST, and sWASO with LEM5 and LEM10 versus placebo through month 6 (except sWASO month 1), indicating improvement; these improvements were sustained through month 12. Subject-reported increases in morning alertness were significantly greater with one or both LEM doses versus placebo through month 6 and sustained through month 12. There were significantly larger ISI total and daytime functioning score decreases (improvement) from baseline with LEM versus placebo at months 1, 3, and 6 (total score: both doses; daytime functioning: LEM5 month 1 and both doses months 3 and 6) and decreases from baseline FSS at months 1 and 3 (LEM5) and month 6 (both doses), sustained to month 12. Compared with placebo, more subjects reported that LEM (both doses) positively impacted ability to sleep, time to fall asleep, and TST through month 6, sustained to month 12, with no rebound after drug withdrawal. LEM was well tolerated to month 12; mild somnolence was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event.ConclusionsImprovements in subject-reported efficacy in LEM-treated adults age ≥ 65 years with insomnia were observed as early as the first week of treatment and sustained through end of month 12. LEM was well tolerated.Clinical trials registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02952820: E2006-G000-303; Study 303; SUNRISE-2 (First posted: October 2016); EudraCT 2015-001463-39 (First posted: November 2016).
| S-EPMC11263438 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of a 5 mg sublingual dose of zolpidem, compared to a 10 mg oral dose, at bedtime and "as needed" following middle-of-the-night awakenings.MethodsParticipants were randomized into an oral group (oral zolpidem 10 mg and sublingual placebo at bedtime and "as-needed") and a sublingual group (oral placebo and sublingual zolpidem 5 mg at bedtime and "as-needed"). Participants underwent medical evaluation, polysomnography, the psychomotor vigilance test, and completed questionnaires.ResultsOf 85 patients, 67 met the criteria for insomnia (48±10 years; 79% women) and were randomized. Of these, 46 completed 92±5 days of treatment. Mild-to-moderate adverse events were reported by 25% of the participants, including headache, sleepiness, and dizziness. Both treatments decreased middle-of-the-night awakenings by an average of -3.1±2.3 days/week and increased total sleep time by 1.5 hours. Changes in sleep quality and insomnia severity scores were also favorable and comparable between groups: variation depended on continuation of treatment. Regarding PSG findings, sleep latency decreased more in the sublingual group than the oral group (-14±42 vs. 10±29 min; p = 0.03). The psychomotor vigilance test showed minor residual effects 30 minutes after awakening, which reversed after 2 hours.ConclusionsThe safety and efficacy of both zolpidem formulations are comparable. The sublingual 5 mg dose induced sleep more rapidly.Clinical trial registrationNCT01896336.
| S-EPMC7115453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesLemborexant (LEM) is a dual orexin receptor antagonist approved for treating adults with insomnia. We analyzed the efficacy (subjective sleep outcomes) and safety of LEM over 12 months in the subgroup of Asian subjects from Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303).MethodsStudy 303 was a 12-month, randomized, placebo-controlled (first 6 months), double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 study of adults with insomnia disorder. During the 6-month Period 1, subjects were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, LEM 5 mg (LEM5), or LEM 10 mg (LEM10); LEM subjects continued treatment in the following 6-month Period 2. Outcome measures included subject-reported (subjective) sleep onset latency (sSOL), sleep efficiency (sSE), wake after sleep onset (sWASO), total sleep time (sTST), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Patient Global Impression-Insomnia version (PGI-I). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed.ResultsOverall, 178 Asian subjects (Japanese, n = 161; Chinese, n = 4; other Asian, n = 13) were included. Greater decreases in sSOL and sWASO and increases in sSE and sTST from baseline were observed with LEM vs placebo at 6 months; LEM benefits were sustained through 12 months. Greater decreases in ISI total score were seen with LEM vs placebo at 6 months; improvements from baseline with LEM continued through 12 months. For each PGI-I item, LEM-treated subjects had more positive medication effects than placebo-treated subjects at 6 months; these effects were maintained with LEM in Period 2. TEAEs were generally mild to moderate.ConclusionsLEM improved subjective sleep parameters and was well-tolerated in Asian subjects with insomnia disorder over 12 months.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02952820; ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu, EudraCT Number 2015-001463-39.
| S-EPMC8987601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesTo identify dose(s) of lemborexant that maximize insomnia treatment efficacy while minimizing next-morning residual sleepiness and evaluate lemborexant effects on polysomnography (PSG) measures (sleep efficiency [SE], latency to persistent sleep [LPS], and wake after sleep onset [WASO]) at the beginning and end of treatment.MethodsAdults and elderly subjects with insomnia disorder per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Bayesian, adaptive, parallel-group study, receiving lemborexant (1, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 25 mg) or placebo for 15 nights. Efficacy assessments included a utility function that combined efficacy (SE) and safety (residual morning sleepiness as measured by Karolinska Sleepiness Scale [KSS]), PSG measures, and sleep diary. Safety assessments included KSS, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, computerized reaction time tests, and adverse events (AEs).ResultsA total of 616 subjects were screened; 291 were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar between lemborexant groups and placebo (∼63% female, median age: 49.0 years). The study was stopped for early success after the fifth interim analysis when the 15-mg dose met utility index/KSS criteria for success; 3 other doses also met the criteria. Compared with placebo, subjects showed significant improvements in SE, subjective SE, LPS, and subjective sleep onset latency at the beginning and end of treatment for lemborexant doses ≥ 5 mg (P < .05). WASO and subjective WASO showed numerically greater improvements for doses > 1 mg. AEs, mostly mild to moderate, included dose-related somnolence.ConclusionsLemborexant doses ranging from 2.5-10 mg provided efficacy for the treatment of insomnia while minimizing next-morning residual sleepiness.Clinical trial registrationTitle: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Bayesian Adaptive Randomization Design, Dose Response Study of the Efficacy of E2006 in Adults and Elderly Subjects With Chronic Insomnia; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01995838; Identifier: NCT01995838.
| S-EPMC5656478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy, safety, and clinical benefit of a once-daily formulation of trazodone (Trazodone Contramid((c)) OAD) in the treatment of major depressive disorder.Design/participantsIn this double-blind study, 412 patients with major depressive disorder (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria) were randomized 1:1 to receive either Trazodone Contramid OAD (150 to 375mg) or placebo. Treatment was titrated over two weeks to each individual optimal dose. Patients then continued six weeks of treatment; further dose adjustments were allowed based on efficacy and tolerability.MeasurementsThe primary end point was change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score from baseline to last study visit. Secondary end points included Hamilton Depression Rating Scale responders/remitters, change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Clinician and Patient Global Improvement Scales, and quality of sleep.ResultsFrom the end of titration to the end of the six-week treatment period, the mean maximum daily dose of the intent-to-treat population was 310mg for the active group and 355mg for the placebo group. There was a statistically significant difference between trazodone and placebo on the mean HAMD-17 score (-11.4 vs. -9.3, P=0.012). A significant difference was present as early as Week 1 and was maintained at all subsequent study visits. Many secondary end points supported these findings, including improvements in quality of sleep. The most frequent adverse events were the same for both the treatment and placebo groups: headache and somnolence. There were no serious adverse events that were considered related to treatment. There were no clinically significant electrocardiogram or laboratory abnormalities.ConclusionsThe trazodone Contramid formulation was more effective than placebo in major depressive disorder and was well tolerated.
| S-EPMC2719441 | biostudies-literature