Modafinil/armodafinil in obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluating pharmacological treatments for excessive daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea: A comprehensive network meta-analysis and systematic review

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). Pharmacotherapy offers a potential treatment approach for EDS in OSA patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for alleviating EDS in patients with OSA. Following PRISMA guidelines, we included randomized controlled trials investigating pharmacological treatments for EDS in adult OSA until August 2023. We conducted meta-analysis, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses using a random effects model. Finally, a network meta-analysis synthesized direct and indirect evidence, followed by a comprehensive safety analysis. We included 32 articles in the meta-analysis (n = 3357). Pharmacotherapy showed a significant improvement in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score (Mean Difference (MD) -2.73, (95 % Confidence Interval (CI) [-3.25, -2.20], p < 0.01) and Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) score (MD 6.00 (95 % CI [2.66, 9.33] p < 0.01). Solriamfetol, followed by Pitolisant and modafinil, exhibited the greatest ESS reduction, while Danavorexton, followed by Solriamfetol and MK-7288, had the strongest impact on MWT. MK-7288 had the most total adverse events (AEs), followed by Danavorexton and armodafinil. Pharmacological Interventions significantly alleviate EDS in OSA patients but with heterogeneity across medications. Treatment decisions should involve a personalized assessment of patient factors and desired outcomes.

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS) affects 13-33% of males and 6-9% of females globally and poses significant treatment challenges, including poor adherence to Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) and residual excessive sleepiness (RES). This review aims to elucidate the emerging interest in pharmacological treatments for OSAS, focusing on recent advancements in this area. A thorough analysis of extensive clinical trials involving various drugs, including selective dopamine reuptake inhibitors, selective norepinephrine inhibitors, combined antimuscarinic agents, and orexin agonists, was conducted. These trials focused on ameliorating respiratory metrics and enhancing sleep quality in individuals affected by OSAS. The studied pharmacological agents showed potential in improving primary outcomes, notably the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS). These improvements suggest enhanced sleep quality and symptom management in OSAS patients. With a deeper understanding of OSAS, pharmacological interventions are emerging as a promising direction for its effective management. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of drug research in OSAS, highlighting the potential of these treatments in addressing the disorder's complex challenges.

The orexin story and orexin receptor antagonists for the treatment of insomnia

Insomnia is present in up to one third of the adult population worldwide, and it can present independently or with other medical conditions such as mental, metabolic, or cardiovascular diseases, which highlights the importance of treating this multifaceted disorder. Insomnia is associated with an abnormal state of hyperarousal (increased somatic, cognitive, and cortical activation) and orexin has been identified as a key promotor of arousal and vigilance. The current standards of care for the treatment of insomnia recommend non-pharmacological interventions (cognitive behavioural therapy) as first-line treatment and, if behavioural interventions are not effective or available, pharmacotherapy. In contrast to most sleep medications used for decades (benzodiazepines and 'Z-drugs'), the new orexin receptor antagonists do not modulate the activity of γ-aminobutyric acid receptors, the main inhibitory mechanism of the central nervous system. Instead, they temporarily block the orexin pathway, causing a different pattern of effects, e.g., less morning or next-day effects, motor dyscoordination, and cognitive impairment. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of these drugs are the basis of the different characteristics explained in the package inserts, including the recommended starting dose. Orexin receptor antagonists seem to be devoid of any dependence and tolerance-inducing effects, rendering them a viable option for longer-term treatment. Safety studies did not show exacerbation of existing respiratory problems, but more real-world safety and pharmacovigilance experience is needed. This review provides an overview of the orexin history, the mechanism of action, the relation to insomnia, and key features of available drugs mediating orexin signalling.

Recovery Mimicking "Ideal" CPAP Adherence Does Not Improve Wakefulness or Cognition in Chronic Murine Models of OSA: Effect of Wake-Promoting Agents

INTRODUCTION

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a chronic condition characterized by intermittent hypoxia (IH) and sleep fragmentation (SF). OSA can induce excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and is associated with impaired cognition and anxiety. Solriamfetol (SOL) and modafinil (MOD) are widely used wake-promoting agents in OSA patients with EDS.

METHODS

Male C57Bl/6J mice were exposed to SF along with sleep controls (SC) or to IH and room air (RA) controls during the light (inactive) phase for 4 and 16 weeks, respectively. Both IH and SF exposures were then discontinued to mimic "ideal" continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) adherence. All groups were then randomly assigned to receive once daily intraperitoneal injections of SOL, MOD, or vehicle (VEH) for 6 days. Sleep/wake activity was assessed along with tests of explicit memory, anxiety and depression were performed before and after treatments.

RESULTS

IH and SF exposures increased sleep percentage in the dark phase and reduced wake bouts lengths (i.e., EDS), and induced cognitive deficits and impulsivity in mice. Both SOL and MOD treatments effectively mitigated EDS when combined with recovery, while recovery alone did not improve EDS over the 6-day period. Furthermore, improvements explicit memory emerged only after SOL.

CONCLUSION

Chronic IH and SF induce EDS in young adult mice that is not ameliorated by recovery except when combined with either SOL or MOD. SOL, but not MOD, significantly improves IH-induced cognitive deficits. Thus, SOL emerges as a viable adjuvant medication for residual EDS in OSA along with its positive impact on cognition.

The impact of obstructive sleep apnea on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is characterized by episodic sleep state-dependent collapse of the upper airway, with consequent hypoxia, hypercapnia, and arousal from sleep. OSA contributes to multisystem damage; in severe cases, sudden cardiac death might occur. In addition to causing respiratory, cardiovascular and endocrine metabolic diseases, OSA is also closely associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). As the prevalence of OSA and NAFLD increases rapidly, they significantly exert adverse effects on the health of human beings. The authors retrieved relevant documents on OSA and NAFLD from PubMed and Medline. This narrative review elaborates on the current knowledge of OSA and NAFLD, demonstrates the impact of OSA on NAFLD, and clarifies the underlying mechanisms of OSA in the progression of NAFLD. Although there is a lack of sufficient high-quality clinical studies to prove the causal or concomitant relationship between OSA and NAFLD, existing evidence has confirmed the effect of OSA on NAFLD. Elucidating the underlying mechanisms through which OSA impacts NAFLD would hold considerable importance in terms of both prevention and the identification of potential therapeutic targets for NAFLD.

Pharmacological management of co-morbid obstructive sleep apnoea and insomnia

INTRODUCTION

Clinical presentation of both insomnia and obstructive sleep apnea (COMISA) is common. Approximately 30% of clinical cohorts with OSA have insomnia symptoms and vice versa. The underlying pathophysiology of COMISA is multifactorial. This poses a complex clinical challenge. Currently, there are no clinical guidelines or recommendations outside of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi). Clinically translatable precision medicine approaches to characterize individual causes or endotypes may help optimize future pharmacological management of COMISA.

AREAS COVERED

This review article provides an up-to-date account of COMISA and its consequences, the underlying pathophysiology of sleep apnea, insomnia and COMISA, current treatment approaches and limitations, pharmacotherapy targets and future priorities.

EXPERT OPINION

There are multiple promising emerging therapies, but clinical trial data specifically in COMISA populations are lacking. This is a priority for future investigation to inform development of evidence-based guidelines. Pharmacotherapies, particularly for insomnia, do not target the underlying causes of the disorder thus, are indicated for short-term use only and should remain second line. Future multidisciplinary research should be directed toward the multifactorial nature of COMISA and the challenges of adapting COMISA treatment in clinical practice and overcoming the practical barriers that health-care providers and consumers encounter.

Solriamfetol enhances wakefulness and improves cognition and anxiety in a murine model of OSA

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a chronic condition characterized by intermittent hypoxia (IH). Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is a common consequence of OSA and is associated with cognitive deficits and anxiety. Modafinil (MOD) and Solriamfetol (SOL) are potent wake-promoting agents clinically used to improve wakefulness in OSA patients with EDS.

METHODS

Male C57Bl/6J mice were exposed to either IH or room air (RA) controls during the light phase for 16 weeks. Both groups were then randomly assigned to receive once-daily intraperitoneal injections of SOL (200 mg/kg), MOD (200 mg/kg) or vehicle (VEH) for 9 days while continuing IH exposures. Sleep/wake activity was assessed during the dark (active) phase. Novel object recognition (NOR), elevated-plus maze test (EPMT), and forced swim test (FST) were performed before and after drug treatment.

RESULTS

IH exposure increased dark phase sleep percentage and reduced wake bouts lengths and induced cognitive deficits and anxiogenic effects. Both SOL and MOD treatments decreased sleep propensity under IH conditions, but only SOL promoted improvements in NOR performance (explicit memory) and reduced anxiety-like behaviors.

CONCLUSION

Chronic IH, a hallmark feature of OSA, induces EDS in young adult mice that is ameliorated by both SOL and MOD. SOL, but not MOD, significantly improves IH-induced cognitive deficits and promotes anxiolytic effects. Thus, SOL could potentially benefit OSA patients beyond EDS management.

Armodafinil to reduce the sleepiness related side-effects of sleep restriction therapy being used to treat insomnia disorder: An open label clinical trial pilot study compared with historical controls

Sleep restriction therapy (SRT) is an effective stand-alone behavioural intervention for insomnia disorder. However, its daytime side effects, particularly sleepiness, may be troubling for patients and/or may be a necessary part of the patient's treatment journey. This pilot trial aims to explore the potential benefit of armodafinil, a wakefulness promoter. Patients were treated with SRT with open label adjunctive armodafinil (150 mg/day). Thirty-three patients from previous studies that have undergone exactly the same SRT intervention acted as controls. The primary outcome measure was the insomnia severity index (ISI), and secondary outcomes were the Epworth sleepiness scale, sleep restriction adherence scale (SRAS), and safety from baseline through to 12 weeks. We recruited 25 patients into the trial. Data for the primary end point (ISI at 12 weeks) was available for 20 of the participants. The baseline insomnia severity index was 20.2 (SD 3.3) and decreased to 9.1 (SE 1.1), with no change, to 10.2 and 11.2 at weeks 6 and 12 respectively (all p > 0.05 compared with baseline). The insomnia severity index values for armodafinil patients were statistically inferior to historical controls at the primary time point of 12 weeks (11.2 vs. 6.7, p < 0.01). Sleep restriction therapy plus armodafinil treatment was associated with frequent minor side effects but was generally safe and acceptable to patients. Sleep restriction therapy was associated with a robust clinical response in the insomnia severity index values for insomnia patients. Based upon historical control data, armodafinil does not appear to have beneficial adjunctive effects in addition to sleep restriction therapy alone.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Multiple Wake-Promoting Agents for the Treatment of Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in Narcolepsy: A Network Meta-Analysis

Purpose

Narcolepsy is a rare debilitating disorder for which multiple novel pharmacological options have been approved as treatment for the past few years. The current study systematically updates the comparative efficacy and detailed safety analysis of approved wake-promoting agents in narcolepsy.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched for diagnosed narcolepsy with approved interventions. Efficacy outcomes included the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C). Safety outcomes including overall adverse event (AE) risk were measured. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD 42022334915).

Results

The final analysis included 17 RCTs with five drug treatments: modafinil/armodafinil, sodium oxybate, pitolisant, solriamfetol, and lower-sodium oxybate (LXB). For efficacy measures, interventions included in each outcome were effective compared with placebo. Furthermore, the magnitude of solriamfetol effect on MWT (9.11 minutes; 95% CI=7.05-11.16), ESS (-4.79; 95% CI=-6.56 to -3.01), and PGI-C (9.39; 95% CI= 2.37-37.19), and LXB effect on CGI-C (9.67; 95% CI=2.73-34.26) was greater than that of other treatments included in each outcome compared with placebo. For safety measures, all interventions had an acceptable safety profile with LXB having least risk for overall AEs (0.56; 95% CI=0.20-1.53), serious AEs (0.33; 95% CI=0.09-1.20), AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (0.11; 95% CI=0.01-2.04), and all-cause discontinuation (0.04; 95% CI=0.00-0.67) compared to placebo. Placebo had the lowest risk for exploratory AEs.

Conclusion

All approved interventions were effective in controlling the symptoms of narcolepsy at varying degrees with an acceptable safety profile.

Turning Over a New Leaf-Pharmacologic Therapy in Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Despite extensive research, there is currently no approved drug for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment. OSA is a heterogeneous condition that involves multiple dominating pathophysiological traits. Drug development in this field needs to address both pathophysiological mechanisms and associated comorbid conditions in order to meet requirements for long-term therapy in OSA. Several drug candidates have been proposed and ongoing phase II trials that target various forms of sleep-disordered breathing have been initiated. The field is moving toward tailored therapeutic approaches in patients with OSA.

Investigation and management of residual sleepiness in CPAP-treated patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: the European view

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is a major symptom of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), defined as the inability to stay awake during the day. Its clinical descriptors remain elusive, and the pathogenesis is complex, with disorders such as insufficient sleep and depression commonly associated. Subjective EDS can be evaluated using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, in which the patient reports the probability of dozing in certain situations; however, its reliability has been challenged. Objective tests such as the multiple sleep latency test or the maintenance of wakefulness test are not commonly used in patients with OSA, since they require nocturnal polysomnography, daytime testing and are expensive. Drugs for EDS are available in the United States but were discontinued in Europe some time ago. For European respiratory physicians, treatment of EDS with medication is new and they may lack experience in pharmacological treatment of EDS, while novel wake-promoting drugs have been recently developed and approved for clinical use in OSA patients in the USA and Europe. This review will discuss 1) the potential prognostic significance of EDS in OSA patients at diagnosis, 2) the prevalence and predictors of residual EDS in treated OSA patients, and 3) the evolution of therapy for EDS specifically for Europe.

Pharmacotherapy of residual excessive sleepiness among continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treated patients with sleep apnea

INTRODUCTION

Patients with persistent sleepiness after adequate treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) experience impaired cognition, reduced productivity, and worse quality of life. Although the mechanisms responsible for this phenomenon are not completely understood, neuroimaging studies have identified reduced gray matter in the frontal cortex and alterations in white matter integrity suggestive of axonal and myelin damage. The intermittent hypoxia with resulting oxidative injury is considered a prime culprit behind the loss of wake-promoting catecholaminergic neurons.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review gives an overview of the pathophysiology and approaches to managing patients with residual sleepiness. The authors explore different targeted strategies aimed at improving selection of appropriate pharmacotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Wake-stimulant medications (modafinil and armodafinil) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing sleepiness in adequately treated OSA. The recent FDA approval of pitolisant and solriamfetol complements the use of modafinil by substituting for direct sympathomimetic agents. The distinctive pharmacologic profile and mode of action of each of these agents offer the opportunity of a personalized approach to the management of this disorder. Further studies should be conducted on the long-term effect of these agents alone or in combination on brain structural and functional changes.

Intranasal Hydrogel of Armodafinil Hydroxypropyl-β-Cyclodextrin Inclusion Complex for the Treatment of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Armodafinil inclusion complex (AIC) hydrogel was prepared and evaluated for its therapeutic effect on Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). After computer simulation and physicochemical property investigation, the AIC was formed by lyophilization of armodafinil with ethanol as solvent and hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD) aqueous solution, in which the molar ratio of armodafinil and HP-β-CD was 1–1. The AIC encapsulation efficiency (EE) was (90.98 ± 3.72)% and loading efficiency (LE) was (13.95 ± 0.47)% and it increased the solubility of armodafinil in aqueous solution to 21 times. AIC hydrogel was prepared by adding AIC to methylcellulose (MC) hydrogels (3.33% w/v), and its higher drug release amount and slower release rate were testified by the in-vitro release assay and the rheological test. The mucosa irritation of AIC hydrogel was also evaluated. Healthy group, Model group, Sertraline group with 30 mg/kg sertraline gavage, AIC Hydrogel group with 20 mg/kg AIC hydrogel intranasal administration and AIC Aqueous Solution group with 20 mg/kg AIC aqueous solution gavage were set up for the treatment of mice with PTSD generated from foot shock method. Based on freezing response test in fear-conditioning box and open field test, compared with other groups, PTSD mice in AIC Hydrogel group showed significant improvement in behavioral parameters after 11 days of continuous drug administration and 5 days of drug withdrawal. After sacrifice, the plasma CORT level of PTSD mice in AIC Hydrogel group was elevated compared to Model group. Besides, the western blot (WB) of hippocampal brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and amygdala dopamine transporter (DAT) immunohistochemistry sections indicated that AIC hydrogel had a protective effect on the brain tissue of PTSD mice. The brain targeting of intranasal administration was evaluated by fluorescence imaging characteristics of Cy7 hydrogel in the nasal route of drug administration, pharmacokinetics and in-vivo distribution of armodafinil. In short, AIC hydrogel is a promising formulation for the treatment of PTSD based on its high brain delivery and anti-PTSD effect.

Indirect treatment comparison of solriamfetol, modafinil, and armodafinil for excessive daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Excessive daytime sleepiness associated with obstructive sleep apnea affects 9%-22% of continuous positive airway pressure-treated patients. An indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis was performed to compare efficacy and safety of medications (solriamfetol, modafinil, and armodafinil) approved to treat excessive daytime sleepiness associated with obstructive sleep apnea.

METHODS

Efficacy and safety measures assessed in this indirect treatment comparison included Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), 20-minute Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT20), Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (any, serious, or leading to discontinuation).

RESULTS

A systematic literature review identified 6 parallel-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials that randomized 1,714 total participants to placebo, solriamfetol, modafinil, or armodafinil. In this indirect treatment comparison, all comparators were associated with greater improvements than placebo on the ESS, MWT20, and CGI-C after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of treatment. Relative to comparators and placebo at 12 weeks, solriamfetol at 150 mg or 300 mg had the highest probabilities of improvement in the ESS, MWT20, and CGI-C. Modafinil (200 or 400 mg) and solriamfetol (150 or 300 mg) were associated with greater improvement on the FOSQ than placebo at 12 weeks. Less than 2% of patients using placebo or comparators experienced serious or discontinuation-related treatment-emergent adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this indirect treatment comparison show 12 weeks of treatment with solriamfetol, modafinil, and armodafinil resulted in varying levels of improvement on the ESS, MWT20, and CGI-C and similar safety risks in participants with excessive daytime sleepiness associated with obstructive sleep apnea.

CITATION

Ronnebaum S, Bron M, Patel D, et al. Indirect treatment comparison of solriamfetol, modafinil, and armodafinil for excessive daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(12):2543-2555.

Current Management of Residual Excessive Daytime Sleepiness Due to Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Insights for Optimizing Patient Outcomes

Although excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) attributable to obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) can be resolved by consistent usage of and effective treatment (often with the use of continuous positive airway pressure therapy), 12–58% of patients report residual EDS (REDS). While REDS is difficult to treat, a proportion of cases are possibly due to reversible issues, and wake-promoting medications can prove useful for the remaining cases. Given the challenges associated with effective management of REDS and its relationship to multiple comorbidities, multidisciplinary management of patients with REDS is often recommended. Here we aim to bridge the knowledge gap on the burden, risk factors, prevalence, and potential pathophysiologic mechanisms of REDS in patients with OSA after first-line treatment. The roles of primary care physicians and sleep specialists, as well as the importance of the use of objective assessment tools for the evaluation of REDS and the effective management of comorbidities, are discussed. An update of approved treatments and emerging candidate treatments is also presented.

Residual excessive daytime sleepiness in patients treated for obstructive sleep apnea: guidance for assessment, diagnosis, and management

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) affects approximately half of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and can persist in some despite normalization of breathing, oxygenation, and sleep quality with primary OSA therapy, such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). EDS is often overlooked and under discussed in the primary care setting and in the follow-up of CPAP-treated patients due to difficult assessment of such a multi-dimensional symptom. This review aims to provide suggestions for procedures that can be implemented into routine clinical practice to identify, evaluate, and manage EDS in patients treated for OSA, including how to appropriately use various self-report and objective assessments along the clinical pathway and options for pharmacotherapy. In addition, examples of when it is appropriate to refer a patient to a sleep specialist for evaluation are discussed.

Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in Obstructive Sleep Apnea. Mechanisms and Clinical Management

Many patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) experience excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), which can negatively affect daily functioning, cognition, mood, and other aspects of well-being. Although EDS can be reduced with primary OSA treatment, such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, a significant proportion of patients continue to experience EDS despite receiving optimized therapy for OSA. This article reviews the pathophysiology and clinical evaluation and management of EDS in patients with OSA. The mechanisms underlying EDS in CPAP-treated patients remain unclear. Experimental risk factors include chronic intermittent hypoxia and sleep fragmentation, which lead to oxidative injury and changes in neurons and brain circuit connectedness involving noradrenergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission in wake-promoting regions of the brain. In addition, neuroimaging studies have shown alterations in the brain's white matter and gray matter in patients with OSA and EDS. Clinical management of EDS begins with ruling out other potential causes of EDS and evaluating its severity. Tools to evaluate EDS include objective and self-reported assessments of sleepiness, as well as cognitive assessments. Patients who experience residual EDS despite primary OSA therapy may benefit from wake-promoting pharmacotherapy. Agents that inhibit reuptake of dopamine or of dopamine and norepinephrine (modafinil/armodafinil and solriamfetol, respectively) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing EDS and improving quality of life in patients with OSA. Additional research is needed on the effects of wake-promoting treatments on cognition in these patients and to identify individual or disorder-specific responses.

Diagnostik und Therapie der residualen Tagesschläfrigkeit bei Patienten mit therapierter obstruktiver Schlafapnoe

Die residuale Tagesschläfrigkeit tritt bei 12–65 % der Schlafapnoe-Patienten unter eingeleiteter Positivdrucktherapie („positive airway pressure“) auf. Eine häufige Ursache ist die geringe PAP-Nutzungszeit. Mögliche weitere Gründe sind ein hoher Rest-Apnoe-Hypopnoe-Index und eine vorhandene Komorbidität. Prädiktoren sind ein initial hoher Epworth-Schläfrigkeitsscore, jüngeres Alter und die erst kurze PAP-Nutzung. Gesichert wird die Restschläfrigkeit mittels objektiver Testverfahren (z. B. multipler Wachbleibetest oder Oxford Sleep Resistance Test [Osler-Test]). Eine der wesentlichen Ursachen für die residuale Schläfrigkeit nach Ausschluss konkurrierender Auslöser ist die stattgehabte intermittierende nächtliche Hypoxämie, die zu nervalen Zellschädigungen, zu hormonellen und genetischen Veränderungen und zu Änderungen des Mikrobioms führen kann.

Die klinischen Beschwerden werden bestimmt durch eine ausgeprägte Tagesschläfrigkeit, depressive Verstimmung und eine Minderung der Lebensqualität.

Nach Ausschluss möglicher therapiebedingter Ursachen kann die residuale Tagesschläfrigkeit medikamentös mit u. a. Modafinil, Armodafinil, Pitolisant oder Solriamfetol behandelt werden. Die genannten Arzneimittel haben unterschiedliche Wirkmechanismen. Die Studien und die Effekte der Substanzen auf die Tagesschläfrigkeit, die Lebensqualität und die Leistungsfähigkeit der Betroffenen werden vorgestellt. Das Nebenwirkungsprofil der Wirkstoffe ist ähnlich. Für die Indikation residuale Schläfrigkeit einer therapierten obstruktiven Schlafapnoe ist in Europa derzeit nur Solriamfetol zugelassen.

Ein vom Autorenteam entworfener Behandlungspfad für Patienten mit therapierter obstruktiver Schlafapnoe mit residualer Tagesschläfrigkeit, von der Erstvorstellung nach Therapiebeginn über die Therapieoptimierung bis hin zu einer medikamentösen Behandlung, wird vorgestellt.

Pitolisant versus placebo for excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy and obstructive sleep apnea: A meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials

Excessive daytime sleepiness is considered as the prominent symptom in narcolepsy and Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA). Pitolisant is a novel selective histamine H3 receptor antagonist approved for improving excessive daytime sleepiness. The meta-analysis is conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of pitolisant versus placebo for excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy and OSA. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from earliest date to November 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were mean changes in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), mean sleep latency, European quality-of-life questionnaire (EQ-5D), and risk ratio of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). We pooled 678 patients from four RCTs and found pitolisant significantly decreased ESS by mean difference (MD) of - 2.86 points (95% CI: -3.75 to -1.96), increased mean sleep latency by MD of 3.14 min (95% CI: 2.18-4.11), and increased EQ-5D by MD of 3.32 points (95% CI: 0.26-6.39) compared with placebo. The risk ratio of TEAE was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.08-1.74). Insomnia was the only TEAE significantly associated with pitolisant treatment. In conclusion, pitolisant showed great efficacy and controllable security versus placebo for excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy and OSA. Compared with narcolepsy, patients with OSA were deemed to benefit more from pitolisant especially in terms of improving mobility and quality of life of patients without continuous positive airway pressure therapy.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Solriamfetol for Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in OSA: An Analysis of Subgroups Adherent or Nonadherent to OSA Treatment

BACKGROUND

Solriamfetol, a dopamine-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, is approved in the United States to improve wakefulness in adults with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) associated with OSA (37.5-150 mg/d).

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does solriamfetol have differential effects on EDS based on adherence to primary OSA therapy and does solriamfetol affect primary OSA therapy use?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Participants were randomized to 12 weeks of placebo or solriamfetol 37.5, 75, 150, or 300 mg/d (stratified by primary OSA therapy adherence). Coprimary end points were week 12 change from baseline in 40-min Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) in the modified intention-to-treat population. Primary OSA therapy use (hours per night, % nights) and safety were evaluated.

RESULTS

At baseline, 324 participants (70.6%) adhered to OSA therapy (positive airway pressure use ≥ 4 h/night on ≥ 70% nights, surgical intervention, or oral appliance use on ≥ 70% nights) and 135 participants (29.4%) did not adhere. Least squares (LS) mean differences from placebo in MWT sleep latency (minutes) in the 37.5-, 75-, 150-, and 300-mg/d groups among adherent participants were 4.8 (95% CI, 0.6-9.0), 8.4 (95% CI, 4.3-12.5), 10.2 (95% CI, 6.8-13.6), and 12.5 (95% CI, 9.0-15.9) and among nonadherent participants were 3.7 (95% CI, -2.0 to 9.4), 9.9 (95% CI, 4.4-15.4), 11.9 (95% CI, 7.5-16.3), and 13.5 (95% CI, 8.8-18.3). On ESS, LS mean differences from placebo in the 37.5-, 75-, 150-, and 300-mg/d groups among adherent participants were -2.4 (95% CI, -4.2 to -0.5), -1.3 (95% CI, -3.1 to 0.5), -4.2 (95% CI, -5.7 to -2.7), and -4.7 (95% CI, -6.1 to -3.2) and among nonadherent participants were -0.7 (95% CI, -3.5 to 2.1), -2.6 (95% CI, -5.4 to 0.1), -5.0 (95% CI, -7.2 to -2.9), and -4.6 (95% CI, -7.0 to -2.3). Common adverse events included headache, nausea, anxiety, decreased appetite, nasopharyngitis, and diarrhea. No clinically meaningful changes were seen in primary OSA therapy use with solriamfetol.

INTERPRETATION

Solriamfetol improved EDS in OSA regardless of primary OSA therapy adherence. Primary OSA therapy use was unaffected with solriamfetol.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02348606; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov; EU Clinical Trials Register; No.: EudraCT2014-005514-31; URL: www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu.

Efficacy and safety of solriamfetol for excessive sleepiness in narcolepsy and obstructive sleep apnea: findings from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Solriamfetol is developed for the treatment of excessive sleepiness in adult patients with narcolepsy and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). No systematic review of existing literature has been investigated before. Therefore, the meta-analysis is conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of solriamfetol for excessive sleepiness in narcolepsy and OSA.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from earliest date to July 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the primary outcomes were change from baseline in mean sleep latency and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS).

RESULTS

We pooled 1177 patients from five RCTs and found solriamfetol led to a significant increment in mean sleep latency (MD = 9.52, 95% CI: 7.60 to 11.44, P < 0.00001) and a reduction in ESS score (MD = -3.74, 95% CI: -4.38 to -3.09, P < 0.00001) compared with placebo. The proportion of patients with at least one adverse event was significantly increased in solriamfetol group (RR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.64, P < 0.00001), while no statistical differences existed in the risk of at least one serious adverse event between solriamfetol and controlled group (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.24 to 3.77, P = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

A dose of 150 mg solriamfetol is proved to be the appropriate and stable dose for excessive sleepiness. In addition, solriamfetol showed good efficacy for excessive sleepiness in narcolepsy and OSA but also significantly increases the risk of adverse events.

Pitolisant for Residual Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in OSA Patients Adhering to CPAP: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in individuals with OSA syndrome persisting despite good adherence to CPAP is a disabling condition. Pitolisant is a selective histamine H3-receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is pitolisant effective and safe for reducing daytime sleepiness in individuals with moderate to severe OSA adhering to CPAP treatment but experiencing residual EDS?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was titrated individually at up to 20 mg/day and taken over 12 weeks. The primary end point was change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary end points were maintenance of wakefulness assessed by the Oxford Sleep Resistance Test, Clinical Global Impressions scale of severity, the patient's global opinion, EuroQoL quality-of-life questionnaire score, Pichot fatigue questionnaire score, and safety.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-four OSA participants (82.8% men; mean age, 53.1 years; mean Apnea Hypopnea Index with CPAP, 4.2/h; baseline ESS score, 14.7) were randomized to pitolisant (n = 183) or placebo (n = 61). ESS significantly decreased with pitolisant compared with placebo (-2.6; 95% CI, -3.9 to -1.4; P < .001), and the rate of responders to therapy (ESS ≤ 10 or change in ESS ≥ 3) was significantly higher with pitolisant (71.0% vs 54.1%; P = .013). Adverse event occurrence (mainly headache and insomnia) was higher in the pitolisant group compared with the placebo group (47.0% and 32.8%, respectively; P = .03). No cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Pitolisant used as adjunct to CPAP therapy for OSA with residual sleepiness despite good CPAP adherence significantly reduced subjective and objective sleepiness and improved participant-reported outcomes and physician-reported disease severity.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01071876; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov; EudraCT N°: 2009-017248-14; URL: eudract.ema.europa.eu.

European Respiratory Society statement on sleep apnoea, sleepiness and driving risk

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is highly prevalent and is a recognised risk factor for motor vehicle accidents (MVA). Effective treatment with continuous positive airway pressure has been associated with a normalisation of this increased accident risk. Thus, many jurisdictions have introduced regulations restricting the ability of OSA patients from driving until effectively treated. However, uncertainty prevails regarding the relative importance of OSA severity determined by the apnoea–hypopnoea frequency per hour and the degree of sleepiness in determining accident risk. Furthermore, the identification of subjects at risk of OSA and/or accident risk remains elusive. The introduction of official European regulations regarding fitness to drive prompted the European Respiratory Society to establish a task force to address the topic of sleep apnoea, sleepiness and driving with a view to providing an overview to clinicians involved in treating patients with the disorder. The present report evaluates the epidemiology of MVA in patients with OSA; the mechanisms involved in this association; the role of screening questionnaires, driving simulators and other techniques to evaluate sleepiness and/or impaired vigilance; the impact of treatment on MVA risk in affected drivers; and highlights the evidence gaps regarding the identification of OSA patients at risk of MVA.

Efficacy and safety of solriamfetol for excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy and obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is the inability to maintain wakefulness and alertness during the major waking episodes of the day, with sleep occurring unintentionally or at inappropriate times. Solriamfetol is a selective norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitor approved for EDS. This review was done to assess the efficacy and safety of solriamfetol in patients with EDS in narcolepsy or OSA.

METHODS

A systematic search of the electronic database was conducted for relevant studies. Any randomized controlled trial with outcome measures on the efficacy or safety of solriamfetol in EDS were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes were mean difference in the maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT), Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) score, and risk ratio of adverse events. The random-effects model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates.

RESULTS

We identified 336 records from the database search. We analyzed eight articles reported from six clinical trials. We pooled outcome measures from five trials. The overall mean difference for MWT was 9.93 min (95% CI: 8.25-11.61), and the mean difference of ESS score was -4.44 (95% CI: -5.50 to -3.38), both in favor of solriamfetol over placebo. The overall risk ratio of adverse events with solriamfetol was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.28-1.69). The most common adverse events reported were headache, nausea, decreased appetite, anxiety, nasopharyngitis, and insomnia.

CONCLUSIONS

Solriamfetol is efficacious and has a favorable safety profile in the treatment of EDS in patients with narcolepsy and OSA. Solriamfetol is well tolerated and may be recommended for the treatment of EDS in these patients.

Stem cell therapies as a therapeutic option to counter chemo brain: a negative effect of cancer treatment

Chemo brain, a constellation of cognitive deficiencies followed by chemotherapy drugs, used to treat different types of cancers and adversely impacts the quality of life of a cancer survivor. The underlying mechanism of chemo brain remains vague, thus delaying the advancement of efficient treatments. Unfortunately, there is no US FDA approved medicine for chemo brain and often medicines considered for chemo brain are already the ones approved for other diseases. Nevertheless, researches exploring stem cell transplantation in different neurodegenerative diseases demonstrate that cellular transplantation could reverse chemotherapy-induced chemo brain. This review talks about the mechanism behind the cognitive impairments instigated by different chemotherapy drugs used in cancer treatment, and how stem cell therapy could be advantageous to overcome this disease.

Pitolisant for Daytime Sleepiness in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Who Refuse Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Treatment. A Randomized Trial

Rationale: Excessive daytime sleepiness is a common disabling symptom in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects, for the treatment of daytime sleepiness in patients with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea refusing continuous positive airway pressure treatment.

Methods: In an international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was individually titrated at up to 20 mg/d over 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score. Key secondary endpoints were maintenance of wakefulness assessed on the basis of the Oxford Sleep Resistance test, safety, Clinical Global Impression of severity, patient’s global opinion, EuroQol quality-of-life questionnaire, and Pichot fatigue questionnaire.

Measurements and Main Results: A total of 268 patients with obstructive sleep apnea (75% male; mean age, 52 yr; apnea–hypopnea index, 49/h; baseline sleepiness score, 15.7) were randomized (200 to pitolisant and 68 to placebo) and analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale score was reduced more with pitolisant than with placebo (−2.8; 95% confidence interval, −4.0 to −1.5; P < 0.001). Wake maintenance tests were not improved. The Pichot fatigue score was reduced with pitolisant. The overall impact of pitolisant was confirmed by both physicians’ and patients’ questionnaires. Adverse event incidence, mainly headache, insomnia, nausea, and vertigo, was similar in the pitolisant and placebo groups (29.5% and 25.4%, respectively), with no cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns.

Conclusions: Pitolisant significantly reduced self-reported daytime sleepiness and fatigue and improved patient-reported outcomes and physician disease severity assessment in sleepy patients with obstructive sleep apnea refusing or nonadherent to continuous positive airway pressure.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01072968) and EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2009-017251-94).

Understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms of cardiometabolic complications in obstructive sleep apnoea: towards personalised treatment approaches

In January 2019, a European Respiratory Society research seminar entitled "Targeting the detrimental effects of sleep disturbances and disorders" was held in Dublin, Ireland. It provided the opportunity to critically review the current evidence of pathophysiological responses of sleep disturbances, such as sleep deprivation, sleep fragmentation or circadian misalignment and of abnormalities in physiological gases such as oxygen and carbon dioxide, which occur frequently in respiratory conditions during sleep. A specific emphasis of the seminar was placed on the evaluation of the current state of knowledge of the pathophysiology of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Identification of the detailed mechanisms of these processes is of major importance to the field and this seminar offered an ideal platform to exchange knowledge, and to discuss pitfalls of current models and the design of future collaborative studies. In addition, we debated the limitations of current treatment strategies for cardiometabolic complications in OSA and discussed potentially valuable alternative approaches.

Redesigning Care for OSA

Constrained by a limited supply of specialized personnel, health systems face a challenge in caring for the large number of patients with OSA. The complexity of this challenge is heightened by the varied clinical presentations of OSA and the diversity of treatment approaches. Innovations such as simplified home-based care models and the incorporation of nonspecialist providers have shown promise in the management of uncomplicated patients, producing comparable outcomes to the resource-intensive traditional approach. However, it is unclear if these innovations can meet the needs of all patients with OSA, including those with mild disease, atypical presentations, and certain comorbid medical and mental health conditions. This review discusses the diversity of needs in OSA care, the evidence base behind recent care innovations, and the potential limitations of each innovation in meeting the diversity of care needs. We propose how these innovations can fit within the stepped care and hub and spoke models in a way that addresses the full spectrum of OSA, and we discuss future research directions to assess the deployment of these innovations.

Sleep and Migraine: Assessment and Treatment of Comorbid Sleep Disorders

The relationship of sleep and migraine is unequivocal and familiarity with the nature and magnitude of these associations may inform clinical practice. Recent prospective, longitudinal, and time-series analysis has begun to unravel the magnitude and temporal patterns of sleep and migraine. Prospective evidence has shown that sleep variables can trigger acute migraine, precede and predict new onset headache by several years, and indeed, sleep disturbance and snoring are risk factors for chronification. The presence of a sleep disorder is associated with more frequent and severe migraine and portends a poorer headache prognosis. Interestingly, the disorders linked to migraine are quite varied, including insomnia, snoring and obstructive sleep apnea, restless legs, circadian rhythm disorders, narcolepsy, and others. Insomnia is by far the most common sleep disorder in headache patients. In fact, the majority of patients with chronic migraine presenting for treatment have insomnia. Despite a rapidly expanding literature, very few controlled treatment studies have been published to guide clinical practice. This paper focuses on clinical assessment and treatment of sleep disorders. An algorithm is presented for sleep disorders management in the migraine patient, which highlights major sleep disorders and psychiatric comorbidity. Diagnostic procedures are recommended that are conducive to clinical practice. Suggested tools include the sleep history, screening mnemonics, prediction equation, and sleep diary. New developments in treatment have produced abbreviated and cost-effective therapies for insomnia and obstructive sleep apnea that may reach a larger population. Revisions in the diagnostic manuals for sleep and headache disorders enhance recognition of sleep-related headache. Recommendations include behavioral sleep regulation, shown in recent controlled trials to decrease migraine frequency, management for sleep apnea headache, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for insomnia abbreviated for the physician practice setting, sleep-related headache trigger, and others. There is no empirical evidence that sleep evaluation should delay or supersede usual headache care. Rather, sleep management is complimentary to standard headache practice.

An Overview of the Clinical Uses, Pharmacology, and Safety of Modafinil

Modafinil (MOD) is a wakefulness-inducing compound prescribed for treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness as a consequence of sleep disturbances such as shift work sleep disorder, obstructive sleep apnea, restless leg syndrome, or narcolepsy. While providing effective results in patients with sleepiness, MOD also produces positive outcomes in the management of fatigue associated with different conditions including depression, cancer, or tiredness in military personnel. Although there is clear evidence of the stimulant effects of MOD, current data also show that administration of this drug apparently induces positive neurobiological effects, such as improvement in memory. However, serious concerns have been raised since some reports have suggested MOD dependence. Taken together, these findings highlight the need to characterize the changes induced by MOD which have been observed in several neurobiological functions. Moreover, further work should follow up on the likely long-term effects of this drug if used for treatment of drowsiness and tiredness. Here, we review and summarize recent findings of the medical uses of MOD in the management of sleepiness and fatigue associated with depression or cancer as well as exhaustion in military personnel. We also discuss the available literature related with the cognitive enhancing properties of this stimulant, as well as what is known and unknown about MOD addiction.

R-Modafinil exerts weak effects on spatial memory acquisition and dentate gyrus synaptic plasticity

Modafinil is a wake promoting drug approved for clinical use and also has cognitive enhancing properties. Its enantiomer R-Modafinil (R-MO) is not well studied in regard to cognitive enhancing properties. Hence we studied its effect in a spatial memory paradigm and its possible effects on dentate gyrus long-term potentiation (DG-LTP). Clinically relevant doses of R-MO, vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) or saline were administered for three days during the hole-board test and in in vivo DG-LTP. Synaptic levels of dopamine receptors D1R, D2R, dopamine transporter (DAT), and its phosphorylated form (ph-DAT) in DG tissue 4 h after LTP induction were quantified by western blot analysis. Monoamine reuptake and release assays were performed by using transfected HEK-293 cells. Possible neurotoxic side effects on general behaviour were also studied. R-MO at both doses significantly enhanced spatial reference memory during the last training session and during memory retrieval compared to DMSO vehicle but not when compared to saline treated rats. Similarly, R-MO rescues DG-LTP from impairing effects of DMSO. DMSO reduced memory performance and LTP magnitude when compared to saline treated groups. The synaptic DR1 levels in R-MO groups were significantly decreased compared to DMSO group but were comparable with saline treated animals. We found no effect of R-MO in neurotoxicity tests. Thus, our results support the notion that LTP-like synaptic plasticity processes could be one of the factors contributing to the cognitive enhancing effects of spatial memory traces. D1R may play an important regulatory role in these processes.

Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Excessive Daytime Sleepiness

Sleep-related breathing disorders include obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), central sleep apnea, sleep-related hypoventilation, and sleep-related hypoxemia. Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is frequently reported by patients with OSA but is not invariably present. The efficacy of positive airway pressure therapy in improving EDS is well established for OSA, but effectiveness is limited by suboptimal adherence. Non-OSA causes of sleepiness should be identified and treated before initiating pharmacotherapy for persistent sleepiness despite adequately treated OSA. Further research on the identification of factors that promote EDS in the setting of OSA is needed to aid in the development of better treatment options.

Modafinil for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common and a debilitating neuro-behavior disorder in the pediatric population. Although numerous effective psychostimulants are available, more than 30% of patients still do not show adequate treatment response rendering diverse pharmacological options. We aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of modafinil in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD by conducting a meta-analysis. An extensive search of databases and clinical trial registries resulted in five published short-term randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Primary efficacy measures were mean change in ADHD Rating Scale-IV Home (ADHD-RS-IV Home) and School Version (ADHD-RS-IV School) from baseline to study end point. The results showed that modafinil more significantly improved ADHD-RS-IV Home (SMD, -0.77 [95%CI, -1.11 to -0.44]) and School (SMD, -0.71 [95%CI, -0.96 to -0.47]) than placebo. Dropout rate due to adverse event did not significantly differ between two groups. In terms of commonly observed side effects, modafinil showed significantly higher incidence of decreased appetite (RR = 5.02, 95% CIs, 2.55 to 9.89, P < 0.00001) and insomnia (RR = 6.16, 95% CIs, 3.40 to 11.17, P < 0.00001). Modafinil did not cause a clinically significant increase of heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure. Although we found that modafinil may be another treatment option in children and adolescents with ADHD, the results should be interpreted and translated into clinical practice with caution, as the meta-analysis was based on a limited number of clinical trials.