Dataset Information

Effects of armodafinil and cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia on sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness in cancer survivors.

ABSTRACT:

Study objectives

This study involves the analysis of a secondary outcome of a trial examining whether cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), a wake-promoting medication (armodafinil), or both results in greater improvement in prospectively assessed sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness than a placebo-alone group among a heterogeneous group of cancer survivors. Whether or not armodafinil alone, and/or when combined with CBT-I, affected adherence with CBT-I was evaluated.

Design

This study is a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial.

Setting

This study was conducted at two northeastern academic medical centers.

Participants

Eighty-eight cancer survivors with chronic insomnia were recruited between October 2008 and November 2012. Participants were assigned to one of four conditions: 1) CBT-I and placebo (CBT-I+P); 2) CBT-I and armodafinil (CBT-I + A); 2) armodafinil alone (ARM); or 4) placebo alone (PLA).

Interventions

CBT-I was delivered in seven weekly individual therapy sessions (three in person, four via telephone). The armodafinil dosage was 50 mg BID.

Measurements and results

Sleep continuity was measured with daily sleep diaries assessing sleep latency (SL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), and total sleep time (TST). The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) measured daytime sleepiness. Compared to the PLA group, the CBT-I+P and CBT-I+A groups reported a significant reduction in SL with effect sizes of 0.67 and 0.58, respectively. A significant reduction was observed in WASO in the CBT-I+A group with an effect size of 0.64. An increasing trend of TST was observed in the CBT-I+P, CBT-I+A, and PLA groups, but not in the ARM group. No statistically significant reductions in daytime sleepiness (ESS) were observed for any of the groups.

Conclusion

CBT-I alone and in combination with armodafinil caused significant improvement in sleep continuity. The addition of armodafinil did not appear to improve daytime sleepiness or enhance adherence to CBT-I.

SUBMITTER: Garland SN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5267578 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of armodafinil and cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia on sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness in cancer survivors.

Garland Sheila N SN Roscoe Joseph A JA Heckler Charles E CE Barilla Holly H Gehrman Philip P Findley James C JC Peoples Anita R AR Morrow Gary R GR Kamen Charles C Perlis Michael L ML

Sleep medicine 20151231

<h4>Study objectives</h4>This study involves the analysis of a secondary outcome of a trial examining whether cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), a wake-promoting medication (armodafinil), or both results in greater improvement in prospectively assessed sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness than a placebo-alone group among a heterogeneous group of cancer survivors. Whether or not armodafinil alone, and/or when combined with CBT-I, affected adherence with CBT-I was evaluated.<h4>De ...[more]

PMID: 27318221

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study objectivesExcessive 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.MethodsEfficacy 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).ResultsA 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.ConclusionsThe 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.CitationRonnebaum 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.

Project description:PurposeFatigue is a prevalent, distressing side effect of cancer and cancer treatment which commonly coexists with insomnia. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been shown to improve insomnia in cancer patients, but less is known about its ability to impact fatigue. This work is the analysis for a secondary aim of a four-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) study assessing the combined and comparative effect of CBT-I and a wakefulness-promoting agent, armodafinil (A), to improve sleep and daytime functioning in cancer survivors. Herein, we examine the effect of CBT-I, with and without A, on fatigue in cancer survivors.Patients and methodsThis study was a four-arm factorial study with CBTI-I (yes/no) versus A (yes/no). It consisted of 96 cancer survivors (average age 56 years; 88 % female; 68 % breast cancer). Fatigue was assessed by the brief fatigue inventory (BFI) and the FACIT-Fatigue scale. The analysis assessed the additive effects of CBT-I and A and possible non-additive effects where the effect of CBT-I changes depending on the presence or absence of A.ResultsAnalyses adjusting for baseline differences showed that CBT-I improved fatigue as measured by two separate scales (BFI: P = 0.002, Std. error = 0.32, effect size (ES) = 0.46; FACIT-Fatigue: P < 0.001, Std. error = 1.74, ES = 0.64). Armodafinil alone did not show a statistically significant effect on fatigue levels (all Ps > 0.40) nor did the drug influence the efficacy of CBT-I. Structural equation analysis revealed that reductions in insomnia severity were directly responsible for improving cancer-related fatigue.ConclusionsCBT-I with and without armodafinil resulted in a clinically and statistically significant reduction of subjective daytime fatigue in cancer survivors with chronic insomnia. Armodafinil did not improve cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and did not change the efficacy of CBT-I. Patients reporting CRF should be screened and, if indicated, treated for insomnia as part of a comprehensive fatigue management program.

Project description:Study objectivesSleep restriction therapy (SRT) has been shown to be comparably effective relative to cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), but with lower requirements for patient contact. As such, SRT appears to be a viable alternate treatment for those who cannot complete a full course of CBT-I. However, it is unclear whether SRT-a treatment solely focusing on restricting time in bed-increases risk for sleepiness comparably to CBT-I. The current study tested objective sleepiness as an outcome in a randomized controlled trial comparing SRT, CBT-I, and attention control in a sample of postmenopausal women in whom insomnia was diagnosed according to criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.MethodsSingle-site, randomized controlled trial. A total of 150 postmenopausal women (56.44 ± 5.64 years) with perimenopausal or postmenopausal onset of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition insomnia disorder were randomized to 3 treatment conditions: sleep education control (6 sessions); SRT (2 sessions with interim phone contact); and CBT-I (6 sessions). Blinded assessments were performed at pretreatment and posttreatment. Risk of excessive sleepiness was evaluated using a symmetry analysis of sleepiness measured through the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT).ResultsThe odds ratios (ORs) of being excessively sleepy versus nonsleepy were not different than 1.0 for both SRT (OR = 0.94, 95% confidence interval [0.13-6.96]) and CBT-I (OR = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [0.09-4.46]), indicating that the odds of becoming excessively sleepy following treatment was not different from the odds of being nonsleepy. This suggests that excessive sleepiness is not of unique concern following SRT relative to CBT-I or sleep education.ConclusionsSRT appears to have a comparable risk profile for excessive sleepiness as CBT-I, and thus may be considered a safe alternative to CBT-I. Future research should characterize objective measures of excessive sleepiness immediately following sleep restriction.Clinical trail registrationRegistry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Behavioral Treatment of Menopausal Insomnia; Sleep and Daytime Outcomes; Identifier: NCT01933295.

Project description:PurposeCancer-related insomnia is associated with diminished quality of life (QOL), suggesting that improvement in insomnia may improve QOL in cancer survivors. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been shown to improve insomnia, but less is known regarding its effect on QOL and whether improvement in insomnia corresponds to improved QOL. The present analysis examines the effects of CBT-I, with and without armodafinil, on QOL both directly and indirectly through improvements of insomnia.MethodsThis is an analysis of 95 cancer survivors for a specified secondary aim of a four-arm randomized controlled trial assessing the combined and individual effects of CBT-I and armodafinil to improve insomnia. QOL and insomnia severity were assessed before, during the intervention, at post-intervention, and 3 months later by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General and Insomnia Severity Index, respectively.ResultsMean change in QOL from pre- to post-intervention for CBT-I + placebo, CBT-I + armodafinil, armodafinil, and placebo was 9.6 (SE = 1.8; p < 0.0001), 11.6 (SE = 1.8; p < 0.0001), -0.2 (SE = 3.2; p = 0.964), and 3.3 (SE = 2.0; p = 0.124), respectively. ANCOVA controlling for pre-intervention scores showed that participants receiving CBT-I had significantly improved QOL at post-intervention compared to those not receiving CBT-I (p < 0.0001, effect size = 0.57), with benefits being maintained at the 3-month follow-up. Path analysis revealed that this improvement in QOL was due to improvement in insomnia severity (p = 0.002), and Pearson correlations showed that changes in QOL from pre- to post-intervention were significantly associated with concurrent changes in insomnia severity (r = -0.56; p < 0.0001). Armodafinil had no effect on QOL for those who did or did not receive it (p = 0.976; effect size = -0.004).ConclusionIn cancer survivors with insomnia, CBT-I resulted in clinically significant improvement in QOL via improvement in insomnia. This improvement in QOL remained stable even 3 months after completing CBT-I.Implications for cancer survivorsConsidering the high prevalence of insomnia and its detrimental impact on QOL in cancer survivors and the effectiveness of CBT-I in alleviating insomnia, it is important that evidence-based non-pharmacological sleep interventions such as CBT-I be provided as an integral part of cancer care.

Project description:Study objectivesInsomnia is a chief complaint among postmenopausal women, and insomnia impairs daytime functioning and reduces quality of life. Recent evidence supports the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTI) for menopausal insomnia, but it remains unclear whether treating insomnia improves daytime function in this population. This study evaluated whether CBTI improves daytime fatigue, energy, self-reported sleepiness, work productivity, and quality of life in postmenopausal women with insomnia, and whether sleep restriction therapy (SRT)-a single component of CBTI-is equally efficacious.MethodsSingle-site, randomized control trial. One hundred fifty postmenopausal women (56.44 ± 5.64 years) with perimenopausal or postmenopausal onset or exacerbation of chronic insomnia were randomized to 3 treatment conditions: sleep hygiene education control (SHE), SRT, and CBTI. Blinded assessments were performed at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 6-month follow-up.ResultsCBTI and SRT produced moderate-to-large improvements in fatigue, energy, sleepiness, and work function at posttreatment and 6 months later. The CBTI group reported better quality of life as indicated by substantial improvements in emotional wellbeing and resiliency to physical and emotional problems, whereas the SRT and SHE groups only showed improvements in resiliency to physical problems. Pain complaints decreased as sleep improved but were not associated with specific treatment conditions. Similarly, insomnia remitters reported fewer daytime and nighttime hot flashes, although reductions were not associated with any specific treatment.ConclusionsCBTI and SRT are efficacious options for postmenopausal women with chronic insomnia. Both interventions improve daytime function, quality of life, and work performance, although CBTI produces superior results including the added benefit of improved emotional health.Clinical trial registrationRegistry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Title: Behavioral Treatment of Menopausal Insomnia; Sleep and Daytime Outcomes; Identifier: NCT01933295; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT01933295.

Dataset Information

Effects of armodafinil and cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia on sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness in cancer survivors.

Study objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Measurements and results

Conclusion

Publications

Effects of armodafinil and cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia on sleep continuity and daytime sleepiness in cancer survivors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets