Efficacy of Pitolisant 20 mg in Reducing Excessive Daytime Sleepiness and Fatigue in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnoea Syndrome: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background and objective
Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and fatigue are major complaints in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) syndrome. Pitolisant is an orally active selective histamine H3 receptor (H3R) antagonist/inverse agonist, which enhances histaminergic transmissions in the brain and thereby elicits strong wake-promoting effects. This article assesses the efficacy and safety of pitolisant 20 mg in patients with OSA, based on existing randomised controlled studies.Methods
An individual patient data (IPD) meta-analytical two-level (study-patient) hierarchical model was used assuming a random treatment effect. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Oxford Sleep Resistance (OSleR) tests were co-primary endpoints.Results
A total of 512 patients, including 384 treated with pitolisant and 128 with placebo, were included in the analysis. Compared with placebo, pitolisant reduced mean ESS by - 3.1 (95% CI [- 4.1; - 2.1]; p < 0.001) and improved OSleR by 1.18 (1.02; 1.35, p = 0.022); 30% more patients had reduced fatigue (risk ratio [RR] = 1.3, [1.11; 1.53]), p = 0.001) and 46% more patients had improved Clinical Global Impression (CGI) (RR = 1.46 [1.12; 1.89], p = 0.005). No significant differences in safety endpoints were found. These results proved homogeneous across studies and subgroups of the population.Conclusion
The results provide evidence of a significant benefit of pitolisant in improving EDS and fatigue, irrespective of baseline conditions.
SUBMITTER: Lehert P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8755655 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of solriamfetol, a dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, on on-the-road driving in participants with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) associated with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA).MethodsEligible participants were aged 21-75 years with OSA and EDS (Maintenance of Wakefulness Test mean sleep latency <30 minutes and Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≥10). Participants were randomised 1:1 to solriamfetol (150 mg/day [3 days], then 300 mg/day [4 days]) or placebo for 7 days, before crossover to the other treatment paradigm. On Day 7 of each period, standardised on-road driving tests occurred (2 and 6 hours postdose). Standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP) was the primary endpoint.ResultsSolriamfetol significantly reduced SDLP at 2 (n = 34; least squares mean difference, -1.1 cm; 95% CI, -1.85, -0.32; p = 0.006) and 6 hours postdose (n = 32; least squares mean difference, -0.8 cm; 95% CI, -1.58, -0.03; p = 0.043). Two hours postdose, 4 placebo-treated and 1 solriamfetol-treated participants had incomplete driving tests; 6 hours postdose, 7 and 3 participants, respectively, had incomplete tests. Common treatment-emergent adverse events included headache, nausea, and insomnia.ConclusionsSolriamfetol 300 mg/day significantly improved on-the-road driving performance in participants with EDS associated with OSA.
| S-EPMC9788130 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC8086534 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess sleepiness, TNF-? plasma levels, and genomic variance in the TNF-? gene in children with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).Study designChildren being evaluated for OSA (n = 60) and matched control children (n = 80) were assessed with a modified Epworth Sleepiness Scale questionnaire and underwent a blood draw the morning after nocturnal polysomnography. TNF-? plasma concentrations were assayed using ELISA, and genomic DNA was extracted. Genotyping and allelic frequencies were determined for 4 TNF-? single nucleotide polymorphisms using real-time polymerase chain reaction genotyping assays.ResultsMorning TNF-? levels and Epworth Sleepiness Scale scores were increased in the presence of OSA, but substantial variability was present. Although TNF-? plasma concentrations were globally increased in OSA, most of the variance was attributable to the presence or absence of TNF-? -308G gene polymorphism.ConclusionsTNF-? levels are increased in a subset of children with OSA, particularly among those harboring the TNF-? -308G single nucleotide polymorphism. Among the latter, significant increases in excessive daytime sleepiness symptoms are also present. The relatively high variability of excessive daytime sleepiness in pediatric OSA may be related to underlying TNF-? gene polymorphisms, particularly -308G.
| S-EPMC3005990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExcessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is a cardinal symptom of narcolepsy and affects many patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). EDS is associated with reduced quality of life, increased accident risk, and poor workplace performance. Given the impact of EDS, the ability to predict health-related utility from sleepiness is valuable for examining the cost effectiveness of novel treatments. The aim of this study was to examine the association between EDS and EQ-5D in patients with OSA and/or narcolepsy by modelling EQ-5D utility scores from Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores.MethodsData were obtained from the Europe 2016/2017 National Health and Wellness Survey, an online, general population survey, designed to represent the age and gender composition of each country's adult population. Analyses included 2,348 patients self-reporting symptomatic and diagnosed OSA (n = 2,277), narcolepsy (n = 48), or both (n = 23). Multivariable models were used to examine ESS as a predictor of EQ-5D utility while adjusting for covariates of interest. Results were validated following the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidelines for predictive modelling.ResultsUtility decreased as EDS severity increased (no EDS: 0.711 ± 0.251, mild: 0.685 ± 0.261, moderate: 0.643 ± 0.268, severe: 0.559 ± 0.323). Whereas participants with only OSA or only narcolepsy did not differ in utility, those with both conditions had lower scores (0.685 ± 0.266 and 0.627 ± 0.325 vs. 0.439 ± 0.340, respectively). Piecewise linear regression identified a single breakpoint at ESS score of 11.29. In the final model, for each point increase in ESS score, the corresponding decrease in EQ-5D utility was larger among patients with ESS scores ≥ 12 compared to patients with ESS scores ≤ 11 (model slopes: -0.0131 vs. -0.0026, respectively). Findings from the validation sample confirmed these results.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the impact of sleepiness on quality of life (QoL) and its negative impact irrespective of sleep condition (OSA or narcolepsy). The breakpoint identified is relatively consistent with the established ESS cutoff score ≥ 11, which demarcates pathological sleepiness. Furthermore, as EDS severity worsens (increases) on the ESS, the impact on QoL is greater.
| S-EPMC9404621 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of the study was to compare REM-dependent and REM-independent, obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA) patients in relation to their daily sleepiness assessed by Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS). The study included 1863 consecutive patients, who were referred to a sleep centre with a presumed diagnosis of OSA. Following polysomnography, 292 patients fulfilled criteria for either REM-dependent OSA (REM-OSA, n = 102) or REM-independent OSA (nREM-OSA, n = 190). Both study groups were matched regarding sex and age. REM-OSA group had two times lower median apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI) compared to nREM-OSA (p < 0.001), yet day-time sleepiness measured by ESS was similar: median score 9.0 (6.0-11.0) and 8.0 (4.8-11.0), p = 0.109, respectively. Subsequent post-hoc ANCOVA analysis, with covariates (BMI, percent of total sleep time spent in REM stage, percent of total sleep time spent in the supine position), has shown statistically significant difference between study groups regarding AHI (p < 0.001) and no difference regarding ESS score (p = 0.063). Despite two times lower AHI, patients with REM-OSA present with similar day-time sleepiness as those with REM independent OSA. Daily sleepiness may be stronger associated with apneas/hypopneas occurring in REM than nREM sleep.
| S-EPMC6949253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSleepiness is a cardinal symptom in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) but most patients have unspecific symptoms. Arterial stiffness, evaluated by pulse wave velocity (PWV), is related to atherosclerosis and cardiovascular (CV) risk. Arterial stiffness was reported to be higher in patients with OSA, improving after treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). This study aims to assess whether the same effect occurs in patients with OSA and without sleepiness.Methods and analysisThis observational study assesses the CV effect of CPAP therapy on a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe OSA; the effect on the subcohorts of sleepy and non-sleepy patients will be compared. A systematic and consecutive sample of patients advised CPAP therapy will be recruited from a single outpatient sleep clinic (Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central-CHLC, Portugal). Eligible patients are male, younger than 65 years, with confirmed moderate-to-severe OSA and apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI) above 15/hour. Other sleep disorders, diabetes or any CV disease other than hypertension are exclusion criteria. Clinical evaluation at baseline includes Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and sleepiness is defined as ESS above 10. OSA will be confirmed by polygraphic study (cardiorespiratory, level 3). Participants are advised to undertake an assessment of carotid-femoral PWV (cf-PWV) and 24 hours evaluation of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), at baseline and after 4 months of CPAP therapy. Compliance and effectiveness of CPAP will be assessed. The main outcome is the variation of cf-PWV over time.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the Ethics Committees of CHLC (reference number 84/2012) and NOVA Medical School (number36/2014/CEFCM), Lisbon. Informed, written consent will be obtained. Its results will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT02273089; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC4947760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPitolisant, a selective histamine 3 receptor antagonist/inverse agonist, is indicated for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness or cataplexy in adults with narcolepsy. The efficacy and safety of pitolisant have been demonstrated in randomized placebo-controlled trials. When evaluating the results of randomized placebo-controlled trials, the clinical impact of a treatment can be assessed using effect size metrics that include Cohen's d (the standardized mean difference of an effect) and number needed to treat (NNT; number of patients that need to be treated to achieve a specific outcome for one person).ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of pitolisant for the reduction in excessive daytime sleepiness or cataplexy in adults with narcolepsy.MethodsThis post hoc analysis incorporated data from two 7-week or 8-week randomized placebo-controlled trials (HARMONY 1, HARMONY CTP). Study medication was individually titrated, with a maximum possible pitolisant dose of 35.6 mg/day. Efficacy was assessed using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and weekly rate of cataplexy (HARMONY CTP only). Cohen's d was derived from the least-squares mean difference between treatment groups (pitolisant vs placebo), and NNTs were calculated from response rates. Treatment response was defined for excessive daytime sleepiness in two ways: (a) reduction in ESS score ≥ 3 or final ESS score ≤ 10 and (b) final ESS score ≤ 10. Treatment response was defined for cataplexy as a ≥ 25%, ≥ 50%, or ≥ 75% reduction in weekly rate of cataplexy.ResultsThe analysis population included 61 patients in HARMONY 1 (pitolisant, n = 31; placebo, n = 30) and 105 patients in HARMONY CTP (pitolisant, n = 54; placebo, n = 51). For pitolisant vs placebo, Cohen's d effect size values were 0.61 (HARMONY 1) and 0.86 (HARMONY CTP) based on changes in ESS scores, and 0.86 (HARMONY CTP) based on changes in weekly rate of cataplexy. NNTs for pitolisant were 3-5 for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness and 3-4 for the treatment of cataplexy.ConclusionsThe results of this analysis demonstrate the robust efficacy of pitolisant for the reduction in both excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. These large effect sizes and low NNTs provide further evidence supporting the strength of the clinical response to pitolisant in the treatment of adults with narcolepsy.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01067222 (February 2010), NCT01800045 (February 2013).
| S-EPMC8732895 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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).
| S-EPMC7193861 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8726370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), which may go undiagnosed and can significantly impair a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQOL). This qualitative research examined timing and reasons patients sought medical care for their EDS and OSA symptoms, and the impact of EDS on HRQOL. METHODS:Focus groups were conducted in 3 US cities with 42 participants currently experiencing EDS with OSA. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using an adapted grounded theory approach common to qualitative research. RESULTS:Over three-fifths of study participants (n?=?26, 62%) were currently using a positive airway pressure (PAP) or dental device; one-third (n?=?14, 33%) had previously used a positive airway pressure (PAP) or dental device, and the remainder had either used another treatment (n?=?1, 2%) or were treatment naïve (n?=?1, 2%). Twenty-two participants (52%) reported experiencing OSA symptoms for ?1?year, with an average duration of 11.4 (median 8.0, range 1-37) years before seeking medical attention. Several (n?=?7, 32%) considered their symptoms to be "normal," rather than signaling a serious medical condition. Thirty participants (71%) discussed their reasons for ultimately seeking medical attention, which included: input from spouse/partner, another family member, or friend (n?=?20, 67%); their own concern about particular symptoms (n?=?7, 23%); and/or falling asleep while driving (n?=?5, 17%). For all 42 participants, HRQOL domains impacted by EDS included: physical health and functioning (n?=?40, 95%); work productivity (n?=?38, 90%); daily life functioning (n?=?39, 93%); cognition (n?=?38, 90%); social life/relationships (n?=?37, 88%); and emotions (n?=?30, 71%). CONCLUSIONS:Findings suggest that patients may be unaware that their symptoms could indicate OSA requiring evaluation and treatment. Even following diagnosis, EDS associated with OSA can continue to substantially affect HRQOL and daily functioning. Further research is needed to address diagnostic delays and unmet treatment needs for patients with EDS associated with OSA.
| S-EPMC7206792 | biostudies-literature