A method to assess the dissipation of the [corrected] residual effects of [corrected] hypnotics: eszopiclone versus zopiclone

Shu-Xie decoction alleviates oxidative stress and colon injury in acute sleep-deprived mice by suppressing p62/KEAP1/NRF2/HO1/NQO1 signaling

Introduction: Sleep disorders are common clinical psychosomatic disorders that can co-exist with a variety of conditions. In humans and animal models, sleep deprivation (SD) is closely related with gastrointestinal diseases. Shu-Xie Decoction (SX) is a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) with anti-nociceptive, anti-inflammatory, and antidepressant properties. SX is effective in the clinic for treating patients with abnormal sleep and/or gastrointestinal disorders, but the underlying mechanisms are not known. This study investigated the mechanisms by which SX alleviates SD-induced colon injury in vivo. Methods: C57BL/6 mice were placed on an automated sleep deprivation system for 72 h to generate an acute sleep deprivation (ASD) model, and low-dose SX (SXL), high-dose SX (SXH), or S-zopiclone (S-z) as a positive control using the oral gavage were given during the whole ASD-induced period for one time each day. The colon length was measured and the colon morphology was visualized using hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. ROS and the redox biomarkers include reduced glutathione (GSH), malondialdehyde (MDA), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) were detected. Quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR), molecular docking, immunofluorescence and western blotting assays were performed to detect the antioxidant signaling pathways. Results: ASD significantly increased FBG levels, decreased colon length, moderately increased the infiltration of inflammatory cells in the colon mucosa, altered the colon mucosal structure, increased the levels of ROS, GSH, MDA, and SOD activity compared with the controls. These adverse effects were significantly alleviated by SX treatment. ASD induced nuclear translocation of NRF2 in the colon mucosal cells and increased the expression levels of p62, NQO1, and HO1 transcripts and proteins, but these effects were reversed by SX treatment. Conclusion: SX decoction ameliorated ASD-induced oxidative stress and colon injury by suppressing the p62/KEAP1/NRF2/HO1/NQO1 signaling pathway. In conclusion, combined clinical experience, SX may be a promising drug for sleep disorder combined with colitis.

Pharmacotherapeutic management of insomnia and effects on sleep processes, neural plasticity, and brain systems modulating stress: A narrative review

Introduction

Insomnia is a stress-related sleep disorder, may favor a state of allostatic overload impairing brain neuroplasticity, stress immune and endocrine pathways, and may contribute to mental and physical disorders. In this framework, assessing and targeting insomnia is of importance.

Aim

Since maladaptive neuroplasticity and allostatic overload are hypothesized to be related to GABAergic alterations, compounds targeting GABA may play a key role. Accordingly, the aim of this review was to discuss the effect of GABAA receptor agonists, short-medium acting hypnotic benzodiazepines and the so called Z-drugs, at a molecular level.

Method

Literature searches were done according to PRISMA guidelines. Several combinations of terms were used such as “hypnotic benzodiazepines” or “brotizolam,” or “lormetazepam” or “temazepam” or “triazolam” or “zolpidem” or “zopiclone” or “zaleplon” or “eszopiclone” and “insomnia” and “effects on sleep” and “effect on brain plasticity” and “effect on stress system”. Given the complexity and heterogeneity of existing literature, we ended up with a narrative review.

Results

Among short-medium acting compounds, triazolam has been the most studied and may regulate the stress system at central and peripheral levels. Among Z-drugs eszopiclone may regulate the stress system. Some compounds may produce more “physiological” sleep such as brotizolam, triazolam, and eszopiclone and probably may not impair sleep processes and related neural plasticity. In particular, triazolam, eszopiclone, and zaleplon studied in vivo in animal models did not alter neuroplasticity.

Conclusion

Current models of insomnia may lead us to revise the way in which we use hypnotic compounds in clinical practice. Specifically, compounds should target sleep processes, the stress system, and sustain neural plasticity. In this framework, among the short/medium acting hypnotic benzodiazepines, triazolam has been the most studied compound while among the Z-drugs eszopiclone has demonstrated interesting effects. Both offer potential new insight for treating insomnia.

British Association for Psychopharmacology consensus statement on evidence-based treatment of insomnia, parasomnias and circadian rhythm disorders: An update

This British Association for Psychopharmacology guideline replaces the original version published in 2010, and contains updated information and recommendations. A consensus meeting was held in London in October 2017 attended by recognised experts and advocates in the field. They were asked to provide a review of the literature and identification of the standard of evidence in their area, with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials where available, plus updates on current clinical practice. Each presentation was followed by discussion, aiming to reach consensus where the evidence and/or clinical experience was considered adequate, or otherwise to flag the area as a direction for future research. A draft of the proceedings was circulated to all speakers for comments, which were incorporated into the final statement.

Sleep Physiology, Circadian Rhythms, Waking Performance and the Development of Sleep-Wake Therapeutics

Disturbances of the sleep-wake cycle are highly prevalent and diverse. The aetiology of some sleep disorders, such as circadian rhythm sleep-wake disorders, is understood at the conceptual level of the circadian and homeostatic regulation of sleep and in part at a mechanistic level. Other disorders such as insomnia are more difficult to relate to sleep regulatory mechanisms or sleep physiology. To further our understanding of sleep-wake disorders and the potential of novel therapeutics, we discuss recent findings on the neurobiology of sleep regulation and circadian rhythmicity and its relation with the subjective experience of sleep and the quality of wakefulness. Sleep continuity and to some extent REM sleep emerge as determinants of subjective sleep quality and waking performance. The effects of insufficient sleep primarily concern subjective and objective sleepiness as well as vigilant attention, whereas performance on higher cognitive functions appears to be better preserved albeit at the cost of increased effort. We discuss age-related, sex and other trait-like differences in sleep physiology and sleep need and compare the effects of existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological sleep- and wake-promoting treatments. Successful non-pharmacological approaches such as sleep restriction for insomnia and light and melatonin treatment for circadian rhythm sleep disorders target processes such as sleep homeostasis or circadian rhythmicity. Most pharmacological treatments of sleep disorders target specific signalling pathways with no well-established role in either sleep homeostasis or circadian rhythmicity. Pharmacological sleep therapeutics induce changes in sleep structure and the sleep EEG which are specific to the mechanism of action of the drug. Sleep- and wake-promoting therapeutics often induce residual effects on waking performance and sleep, respectively. The need for novel therapeutic approaches continues not at least because of the societal demand to sleep and be awake out of synchrony with the natural light-dark cycle, the high prevalence of sleep-wake disturbances in mental health disorders and in neurodegeneration. Novel approaches, which will provide a more comprehensive description of sleep and allow for large-scale sleep and circadian physiology studies in the home environment, hold promise for continued improvement of therapeutics for disturbances of sleep, circadian rhythms and waking performance.

Eszopiclone for insomnia

BACKGROUND

Insomnia is a major public health issue affecting between 6% to 10% of the adult population in Western countries. Eszopiclone is a hypnotic drug belonging to a newer group of hypnotic agents, known as new generation hypnotics, which was marketed as being just as effective as benzodiazepines for this condition, while being safer and having a lower risk for abuse and dependence. It is the aim of the review to integrate evidence from randomised controlled trials and to draw conclusions on eszopiclone's efficacy and safety profile, while taking methodological features and bias risks into consideration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of eszopiclone for the treatment of insomnia compared to placebo or active control.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX and registry databases (WHO trials portal, ClinicalTrials.gov) with results incorporated from searches to 10 February 2016. To identify trials not registered in electronic databases, we contacted key informants and searched reference lists of identified studies. We ran an update search (21 February 2018) and have placed studies of interest in awaiting classification/ongoing studies. These will be incorporated into the next version of the review, as appropriate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing eszopiclone with either placebo or active control were included in the review. Participants were adults with insomnia, as diagnosed with a standardised diagnostic system, including primary insomnia and comorbid insomnia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted outcome data; one reviewer assessed trial quality and the second author cross-checked it.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 14 RCTs, with 4732 participants, were included in this review covering short-term (≤ 4 weeks; 6 studies), medium-term (> 4 weeks ≤ 6 months; 6 studies) and long-term treatment (> 6 months; 2 studies) with eszopiclone. Most RCTs included in the review included participants aged between 18 and 64 years, three RCTs only included elderly participants (64 to 85 years) and one RCT included participants with a broader age range (35 to 85 years). Seven studies considered primary insomnia; the remaining studies considered secondary insomnia comorbid with depression (2), generalised anxiety (1), back pain (1), Parkinson's disease (1), rheumatoid arthritis (1) and menopausal transition (1).Meta-analytic integrations of participant-reported data on sleep efficacy outcomes demonstrated better results for eszopiclone compared to placebo: a 12-minute decrease of sleep onset latency (mean difference (MD) -11.94 min, 95% confidence interval (CI) -16.03 to -7.86; 9 studies, 2890 participants, moderate quality evidence), a 17-minute decrease of wake time after sleep onset (MD -17.02 min, 95% CI -24.89 to -9.15; 8 studies, 2295 participants, moderate quality evidence) and a 28-minute increase of total sleep time (MD 27.70 min, 95% CI 20.30 to 35.09; 10 studies, 2965 participants, moderate quality evidence). There were no significant changes from baseline to the first three nights after drug discontinuation for sleep onset latency (MD 17.00 min, 95% CI -4.29 to 38.29; 1 study, 291 participants, low quality evidence) and wake time after sleep onset (MD -6.71 min, 95% CI -21.25 to 7.83; 1 study, 291 participants, low quality evidence). Adverse events during treatment that were documented more frequently under eszopiclone compared to placebo included unpleasant taste (risk difference (RD) 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.21; 9 studies, 3787 participants), dry mouth (RD 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.06; 6 studies, 2802 participants), somnolence (RD 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.06; 8 studies, 3532 participants) and dizziness (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05; 7 studies, 2933 participants). According to the GRADE criteria, evidence was rated as being of moderate quality for sleep efficacy outcomes and adverse events and of low quality for rebound effects and next-day functioning.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Eszopiclone appears to be an efficient drug with moderate effects on sleep onset and maintenance. There was no or little evidence of harm if taken as recommended. However, as certain patient subgroups were underrepresented in RCTs included in the review, findings might not have displayed the entire spectrum of possible adverse events. Further, increased caution is required in elderly individuals with cognitive and motor impairments and individuals who are at increased risk of using eszopiclone in a non-recommended way.

Effect of 1 month of zopiclone on obstructive sleep apnoea severity and symptoms: a randomised controlled trial

Hypnotic use in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is contraindicated due to safety concerns. Recent studies indicate that single-night hypnotic use worsens hypoxaemia in some and reduces OSA severity in others depending on differences in pathophysiology. However, longer clinical trial data are lacking. This study aimed to determine the effects of 1 month of zopiclone on OSA severity, sleepiness and alertness in patients with low-moderate respiratory arousal thresholds without major overnight hypoxaemia.69 participants completed a physiology screening night with an epiglottic catheter to quantify arousal threshold. 30 eligible patients (apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) 22±11 events·h^-1) then completed standard in-laboratory polysomnography (baseline) and returned for two additional overnight sleep studies (nights 1 and 30) after receiving either nightly zopiclone (7.5 mg) or placebo during a 1-month, double-blind, randomised, parallel trial (ANZCTR identifier ANZCTRN12613001106729).The change in AHI from baseline to night 30 was not different between zopiclone versus placebo groups (-5.9±10.2 versus -2.4±5.5 events·h^-1; p=0.24). Similarly, hypoxaemia, next-day sleepiness and driving simulator performance were not different.1 month of zopiclone does not worsen OSA severity, sleepiness or alertness in selected patients without major overnight hypoxaemia. As the first study to assess the effect of a hypnotic on OSA severity and sleepiness beyond single-night studies, these findings provide important safety data and insight into OSA pathophysiology.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits, reassessing and updating advice presented to the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (United States FDA). Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality, especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, infections, cancer, depression and suicide, automobile crashes, falls, and other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. Short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics have usually been prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse, not better, and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits. Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality (especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, and suicides), infections, cancer, depression, automobile crashes, falls, other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. Short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with even greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics have usually been prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse (not better) and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits, reassessing and updating advice presented to the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (United States FDA). Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). This review includes new information on the growing USA overdose epidemic, eight new epidemiologic studies of hypnotics' mortality not available for previous compilations, and new emphasis on risks of short-term hypnotic prescription. The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality, especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, infections, cancer, depression and suicide, automobile crashes, falls, and other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. The short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics are usually prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse, not better, and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders might offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

Zopiclone Increases the Arousal Threshold without Impairing Genioglossus Activity in Obstructive Sleep Apnea

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of the nonbenzodiazepine sedative zopiclone on the threshold to arousal with increasing respiratory effort and genioglossus muscle activity and to examine potential physiological factors mediating disparate effects of zopiclone on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity between patients.

METHODS

Twelve patients with OSA (apnea-hypopnea index = 41 ± 8 events/h) were studied during 2 single night sleep studies conducted approximately 1 w apart after receiving 7.5 mg of zopiclone or placebo according to a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover design. The respiratory arousal threshold (epiglottic pressure immediately prior to arousal during naturally occurring respiratory events), genioglossus activity and its responsiveness to pharyngeal pressure during respiratory events, and markers of OSA severity were compared between conditions. Genioglossus movement patterns and upper airway anatomy were also assessed via magnetic resonance imaging in a subset of participants (n = 7) during wakefulness.

RESULTS

Zopiclone increased the respiratory arousal threshold versus placebo (-31.8 ± 5.6 versus -26.4 ± 4.6 cmH2O, P = 0.02) without impairing genioglossus muscle activity or its responsiveness to negative pharyngeal pressure during respiratory events (-0.56 ± 0.2 versus -0.44 ± 0.1 %max/-cmH2O, P = 0.48). There was substantial interindividual variability in the changes in OSA severity with zopiclone explained, at least in part, by differences in pathophysiological characteristics including body mass index, arousal threshold, and genioglossus movement patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

In a group of patients with predominantly severe OSA, zopiclone increased the arousal threshold without reducing genioglossus muscle activity or its responsiveness to negative pharyngeal pressure. These properties may be beneficial in some patients with OSA with certain pathophysiological characteristics but may worsen hypoxemia in others.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, http://www.anzctr.org.au, trial ID: ACTRN12614000364673.

Treatment of chronic insomnia disorder in menopause: evaluation of literature

OBJECTIVE

Insomnia both as a symptom and as part of chronic insomnia disorder is quite common in menopause. Comorbid conditions, such as restless legs syndrome and obstructive sleep apnea, occur with high prevalence among perimenopausal women with insomnia. Insomnia in this population group is associated with adverse health outcomes, and there are no clear standards on how to treat it.

METHODS

Based on extensive literature search, 76 articles were identified. Two authors independently graded evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence.

RESULTS

Evaluation and treatment of other comorbid sleep disorders are recommended, as is cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia. Hormone therapy, eszopiclone, escitalopram, gabapentin, isoflavones, valerian, exercise, and hypnosis are suggested. Zolpidem, quiteiapine XL, citalopram, mirtazapine followed by long-acting melatonin, ramelteon, Pycnogenol, Phyto-Female Complex, yoga, and massage may be considered. Kampo formulas are not recommended. Acupuncture may not be suggested, and cognitive-behavioral therapy that is not tailored for insomnia probably should not be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a variety of interventions are shown to be helpful in improving sleep in menopause, there is a need for well-designed head-to-head trials with uniform outcome measures.

Eszopiclone versus zopiclone in the treatment of insomnia

OBJECTIVE

To determine the therapeutic effects of two selective GABA-A agonists, zopiclone and eszopiclone, in the treatment of insomnia.

METHODS

This study comprised a phase III, single-center, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial. Patients were randomized to receive zopiclone 7.5 mg or eszopiclone 3 mg, both orally, for four weeks. In total, 199 patients were evaluated during two visits and then followed for at least six weeks. The primary endpoint was the Insomnia Severity Index after four weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints were obtained through polysomnography data, including total sleep time, sleep latency and sleep efficiency. The frequency of adverse events was also analyzed. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01100164.

RESULTS

The primary efficacy analysis demonstrated the non-inferiority of eszopiclone over zopiclone. Analysis of objective parameters assessed by polysomnography showed that eszopiclone increased total sleep time and also improved sleep efficiency. The safety profile of both study treatments was similar and the most common events reported in both groups were dysgeusia, headache, dizziness, irritability and nausea. Adverse events were observed in 223 patients, 109 (85.2%) in the eszopiclone group and 114 (87.7%) in the zopiclone group.

CONCLUSION

Based on the Insomnia Severity Index at the end of four weeks of treatment, eszopiclone demonstrated efficacy comparable to that of zopiclone in the treatment of insomnia, increasing total sleep time as well as sleep efficiency according to polysomnography.

Is suvorexant a better choice than alternative hypnotics?

Suvorexant is a novel dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) newly introduced in the U.S. as a hypnotic, but no claim of superiority over other hypnotics has been offered.  The manufacturer argued that the 5 and 10 mg starting doses recommended by the FDA might be ineffective.  The manufacturer's main Phase III trials had not even included the 10 mg dosage, and the 5 mg dosage had not been tested at all in registered clinical trials at the time of approval.  Popular alternative hypnotics may be similarly ineffective, since the FDA has also reduced the recommended doses for zolpidem and eszopiclone.  The "not to exceed" suvorexant dosage of 20 mg does slightly increase sleep.  Because of slow absorption, suvorexant has little effect on latency to sleep onset but some small effect in suppressing wakening after sleep onset and in improving sleep efficiency. The FDA would not approve the manufacturer's preferred 40 mg suvorexant dosage, because of concern with daytime somnolence, driving impairment, and possible narcolepsy-like symptoms.  In its immediate benefits-to-risks ratio, suvorexant is unlikely to prove superior to currently available hypnotics—possibly worse—so there is little reason to prefer over the alternatives this likely more expensive hypnotic less-tested in practice.  Associations are being increasingly documented relating hypnotic usage with incident cancer, with dementia risks, and with premature death.  There is some basis to speculate that suvorexant might be safer than alternative hypnotics in terms of cancer, dementia, infections, and mortality.  These safety considerations will remain unproven speculations unless adequate long-term trials can be done that demonstrate suvorexant advantages.

In the Zzz zone: the effects of Z-drugs on human performance and driving

Despite their improved pharmacokinetic profile, the Z-drugs, zolpidem, zopiclone, and zaleplon, have a spectrum of adverse effects comparable to benzodiazepines. This review focuses on the impairment from Z-drugs on cognition, behavior, psychomotor performance, and driving ability. Z-drugs are short-acting GABA agonists that reduce sleep latency without disturbing sleep architecture. Bizarre behavioral effects have prompted warnings on the prescription, dispensation, and use of Z-drugs. Psychomotor impairment, falls, and hip fractures are more likely to occur with Z-drugs that have longer half-lives, that are taken at higher-than-recommended doses and when mixed with other psychoactive substances including alcohol. Zopiclone and higher doses of zolpidem are more likely to cause anterograde amnesia than zaleplon. Z-drugs, especially zolpidem, are associated with complex behaviors such as sleepwalking, sleep-driving, and hallucinations. Patients taking zopiclone and zolpidem have an increased risk of motor vehicle collisions, over double that of unexposed drivers. Driving impairment occurs with zopiclone and higher doses of zolpidem but is unlikely to occur after 4 h post-zaleplon administration. The residual effect of Z-drugs on next-day cognitive and psychomotor performance has significant impact on lifestyle, safety, and occupational considerations, including motor vehicle and machine operation. The risk-benefit analysis of Z-drugs in the treatment of insomnia, particularly in the elderly, may not favor treatment due to the increased risks of falls and motor vehicle collisions. Prescribers should warn patients taking Z-drugs of minimum time thresholds before they operate machinery or drive motor vehicles.