A phase 1 double-blind, placebo-controlled study of zuranolone (SAGE-217) in a phase advance model of insomnia in healthy adults.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To evaluate single zuranolone (SAGE-217) 30 or 45 mg doses in a 5-h phase advance insomnia model.Methods
In this double-blind, three-way crossover study, healthy adults received placebo (n = 41), zuranolone 30 mg (n = 44), and zuranolone 45 mg (n = 42) across three treatment periods. Sleep was assessed by polysomnography and a postsleep questionnaire. Next-day residual effects and safety/tolerability were evaluated.Results
Compared with placebo, zuranolone resulted in significant improvements in median sleep efficiency (30 mg, 84.6%; 45 mg, 87.6%; placebo, 72.9%; p < 0.001 for both doses), wake after sleep onset (WASO; 30 mg, 55.0 min; 45 mg, 42.5 min; placebo, 113.0 min; p < 0.001 for both doses), duration of awakenings (30 mg, 4.2 min, p < 0.001; 45 mg, 3.7 min, p = 0.001; placebo, 7.4 min), and total sleep time (TST; 30 mg, 406.3 min; 45 mg, 420.3 min; placebo, 350.0 min; p < 0.001 for both doses). Subjective endpoints (WASO, TST, sleep latency, sleep quality) also improved relative to placebo. Zuranolone was generally well tolerated, and the most common adverse events (≥2 participants, any period) were headache and fatigue.Conclusion
Zuranolone improved sleep measures versus placebo in a phase advance model of insomnia in healthy adults, supporting future studies in patients with insomnia disorder.
SUBMITTER: Bullock A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9286466 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Study objectivesTo evaluate the effects of single doses of gabapentin 250 and 500 mg on polysomnographic (PSG) and participant-reported sleep measures in a 5-h phase advance insomnia model.MethodsAdults reporting occasional disturbed sleep received gabapentin 500 mg (n = 125), 250 mg (n = 125), or placebo (n = 127) 30 min prior to bedtime and were in bed from 17:00 to 01:00, ∼5 h before their habitual bedtime. Sleep was assessed by PSG, post-sleep questionnaire, and the Karolinska Sleep Diary (KSD). Next-day residual effects (Digit Symbol Substitution Test [DSST] and Stanford Sleepiness Scale [SSS]) and tolerability were assessed.ResultsDemographics were comparable among groups. Among PSG endpoints, wake after sleep onset (primary endpoint) (135.7 [placebo], 100.7 [250 mg], and 73.2 [500 mg] min) was significantly lower and total sleep time (TST) (311.4, 356.5, and 378.7 min) significantly greater in both gabapentin groups versus placebo. Latency to persistent sleep was not significantly different among groups. Percent slow wave sleep (12.6%, 15.4%, and 17.0%, respectively) was significantly greater and percent stage 1 (15.1%, 11.8%, and 10.8%, respectively) significantly lower relative to placebo. Gabapentin was associated with significantly higher values of KSD Sleep Quality Index and reported TST versus placebo; no other reported outcomes were significant. Neither gabapentin dose produced evidence of next-day residual effects as measured by DSST and SSS. Adverse events were infrequent (< 5%).ConclusionParticipants with occasional disturbed sleep treated with gabapentin showed significantly longer sleep duration and greater depth (versus placebo) in response to a phase advance manipulation known to disrupt sleep maintenance.
| S-EPMC4173087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectiveTo evaluate multiple doses of gabapentin 250 mg on polysomnography (PSG) and participant-reported sleep assessments in a 5-h phase advance insomnia model.MethodsAdults reporting occasional disturbed sleep received gabapentin 250 mg (n = 128) or placebo (n = 128). On Days 1 and 28, participants received medication 30 min before bedtime and were in bed from 17:00 to 01:00, ∼5 h before their habitual bedtime. Sleep was assessed by PSG, a post sleep questionnaire, and the Karolinska Sleep Diary. Next-day residual effects and tolerability were evaluated. On Days 2-27, participants took medication at home 30 min before their habitual bedtime.ResultsTreatment-group demographics were comparable. Gabapentin resulted in significantly less PSG wake after sleep onset (WASO) compared with placebo on Day 1 (primary endpoint, mean: 107.0 versus 149.1 min, p ≤ 0.001) and Day 28 (113.6 versus 152.3 min, p = 0.002), and significantly greater total sleep time (TST; Day 1: 347.6 versus 283.9 min; Day 28: 335.3 versus 289.1 min) (p ≤ 0.001). Participant-reported WASO and TST also showed significant treatment effects on both days. Gabapentin was associated with less %stage1 on Day 1, and greater %REM on Day 28, versus placebo. During home use, gabapentin resulted in significantly less participant-reported WASO and higher ratings of sleep quality. Gabapentin was well tolerated (most common adverse events: headache, somnolence) with no evidence of next-day impairment.ConclusionGabapentin 250 mg resulted in greater PSG and participant-reported sleep duration following a 5-h phase advance on Day 1 and Day 28 of use without evidence of next-day impairment, and greater sleep duration during at-home use.
| S-EPMC4173088 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAttentional bias toward sleep-related information is believed to play a key role in insomnia. If attentional bias is indeed of importance, changing this bias should then in turn have effects on insomnia complaints. In this double-blind placebo controlled randomized trial we investigated the efficacy of attentional bias modification training in the treatment of insomnia.MethodWe administered baseline, post-test, and one-week follow-up measurements of insomnia severity, sleep-related worry, depression, and anxiety. Participants meeting DSM-5 criteria for insomnia were randomized into an attentional bias training group (n = 67) or a placebo training group (n = 70). Both groups received eight training sessions over the course of two weeks. All participants kept a sleep diary for four consecutive weeks (one week before until one week after the training sessions).ResultsThere was no additional benefit for the attentional bias training over the placebo training on sleep-related indices/outcome measures.ConclusionsThe absence of the effect may be explained by the fact that there was neither attentional bias at baseline nor any reduction in the bias after the training. Either way, this study gives no support for attentional bias modification training as a stand-alone intervention for ameliorating insomnia complaints.
| S-EPMC5396867 | biostudies-literature
Project description:See Thibault et al. (doi:10.1093/awx033) for a scientific commentary on this article.Neurofeedback training builds upon the simple concept of instrumental conditioning, i.e. behaviour that is rewarded is more likely to reoccur, an effect Thorndike referred to as the 'law of effect'. In the case of neurofeedback, information about specific electroencephalographic activity is fed back to the participant who is rewarded whenever the desired electroencephalography pattern is generated. If some kind of hyperarousal needs to be addressed, the neurofeedback community considers sensorimotor rhythm neurofeedback as the gold standard. Earlier treatment approaches using sensorimotor-rhythm neurofeedback indicated that training to increase 12-15 Hz sensorimotor rhythm over the sensorimotor cortex during wakefulness could reduce attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and epilepsy symptoms and even improve sleep quality by enhancing sleep spindle activity (lying in the same frequency range). In the present study we sought to critically test whether earlier findings on the positive effect of sensorimotor rhythm neurofeedback on sleep quality and memory could also be replicated in a double-blind placebo-controlled study on 25 patients with insomnia. Patients spent nine polysomnography nights and 12 sessions of neurofeedback and 12 sessions of placebo-feedback training (sham) in our laboratory. Crucially, we found both neurofeedback and placebo feedback to be equally effective as reflected in subjective measures of sleep complaints suggesting that the observed improvements were due to unspecific factors such as experiencing trust and receiving care and empathy from experimenters. In addition, these improvements were not reflected in objective electroencephalographic-derived measures of sleep quality. Furthermore, objective electroencephalographic measures that potentially reflected mechanisms underlying the efficacy of neurofeedback such as spectral electroencephalographic measures and sleep spindle parameters remained unchanged following 12 training sessions. A stratification into 'true' insomnia patients and 'insomnia misperceivers' (subjective, but no objective sleep problems) did not alter the results. Based on this comprehensive and well-controlled study, we conclude that for the treatment of primary insomnia, neurofeedback does not have a specific efficacy beyond unspecific placebo effects. Importantly, we do not find an advantage of neurofeedback over placebo feedback, therefore it cannot be recommended as an alternative to cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia, the current (non-pharmacological) standard-of-care treatment. In addition, our study may foster a critical discussion that generally questions the effectiveness of neurofeedback, and emphasizes the importance of demonstrating neurofeedback efficacy in other study samples and disorders using truly placebo and double-blind controlled trials.
| S-EPMC5382955 | biostudies-literature
Project description:H7N9 avian influenza viruses characterised by high virulence and presence of mammalian adaptation markers have pandemic potential. Specific influenza vaccines remain the main defence. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of an H7N9 live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) candidate in healthy adult volunteers.We did a phase 1, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18-49 years. The participants were randomised 3:1 to receive live vaccine or placebo, according to a computer-generated randomisation scheme. Two doses of vaccine or placebo were administered intranasally 28 days apart, each followed by 7 day stays in hospital. Immune responses were assessed in nasal swabs, saliva, and serum specimens collected before and 28 days after each vaccine dose. The primary outcome was the safety profile. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02480101.Between Oct 21, 2014, and Oct 31, 2014, 40 adults were randomised, of whom 39 (98%) were included in the per-protocol analysis (29 in the vaccine group and ten in the placebo group). The frequency of adverse events did not differ between the vaccine and placebo groups. Seroconversion of neutralising antibodies was seen in 14 participants after the first vaccine dose (48%, 95% CI 29·4-67·5) and 21 after the second vaccine dose (72%, 52·8-87·3). Immune responses were seen in 27 of 29 recipients (93%, 95% CI 77·2-99·2). Adverse effects were seen in 19 (63%) vaccine recipients and nine (90%) placebo recipients after the first dose and in nine (31%) and four (40%), respectively, after the second dose. These effects were mainly local and all were mild.The H7N9 LAIV was well tolerated and safe and showed good immunogenicity.WHO.
| S-EPMC5521248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionInsomnia and depression are highly prevalent disorders and commonly occur together. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, CBT-I, has been shown to be effective in treating insomnia and also comorbid depression. However, it is unclear whether effects of CBT-I on depression are specific or nonspecific. Also, depressive symptoms often remain too high after CBT-I, indicating a need for improved treatments. The objective was to determine whether combining CBT-I with CBT for depression, without increasing treatment length, reduces both insomnia and depression more than CBT for depression with a placebo insomnia intervention.MethodsA 12-week double-blind randomized controlled trial with a 6-month follow-up in a psychiatric setting using therapist-guided internet-delivered treatments was conducted. Patients (N = 126) were diagnosed with insomnia disorder and major depression by physicians. Primary outcome measures were as follows: self-rating scales Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS-S).ResultsThe combined treatment showed specific effects on insomnia severity over the control treatment (p = 0.007) but was not more effective in reducing depression severity. Within-group effects (Cohen's d) at post and at 6 months were as follows: ISI 1.40 and 1.42 (combined treatment), 0.95 and 1.00 (control); MADRS-S 0.97 and 1.12 (combined), 0.88 and 0.89 (control).ConclusionsCBT-I shows large specific effects on insomnia severity and is superior to control in this regard. Both treatments had similar effects on depression severity, i.e., combining CBT-I with CBT for depression did not enhance outcomes on depression compared to control. We suggest CBT-I should always be offered to patients with insomnia and depression comorbidity, possibly as the first-hand choice. Combining it with a psychological treatment for depression could be too burdening and may not be beneficial.
| S-EPMC10997274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeInsomnia is frequent in patients with advanced cancer, and a variety of pharmacological agents is used to treat this condition. Still, few clinical trials have investigated the effectiveness of pharmacological sleep therapies in this patient group. We aimed to study the short-term effectiveness of zopiclone on sleep quality in patients with advanced cancer who report insomnia.MethodsA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, phase IV clinical trial in adult patients with metastatic malignant disease and insomnia. Patients were treated with zopiclone or placebo for six subsequent nights. Primary end point was patient-reported sleep quality during the final study night (NRS 0-10). Secondary end points were patient-reported sleep onset latency (SOL) and total sleep time (TST).ResultsForty-one patients were randomized, with 18 being analyzed in the zopiclone group and 21 in the placebo group. Median age was 66, median Karnofsky performance score was 80, and 56% were male. Mean sleep quality at end of study was 2.9 (CI 2.3 to 3.8) in the zopiclone group and 4.5 (CI 3.6 to 5.4) in the placebo group (p = 0.021). At end of study, SOL was significantly different between the treatment groups: zopiclone 29 min (CI 13 to 51) and placebo 62 min (CI 40 to 87) (p = 0.045). TST was not significantly different across groups: zopiclone 449 min (403 to 496) and placebo 411 min (CI 380 to 440) (p = 0.167).ConclusionZopiclone improved short-term patient-reported sleep quality in this cohort of patients with advanced cancer.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02807922.
| S-EPMC9763131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of Dimdazenil, a novel partial positive allosteric modulator for GABAA receptor in adults with insomnia disorder.MethodsThis was a 2-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III study of Dimdazenil. The primary efficacy outcome was total sleep time (TST) analyzed by polysomnography (PSG) on day 13/14. Latency to persistent sleep (LPS), sleep efficiency (SE), and wake after sleep onset (WASO) were analyzed in the same way by polysomnography (PSG). The other secondary outcomes including the average subjective sleep latency (sSL), subjective TST (sTST), subjective SE (sSE), subjective WASO (sWASO), and subjective number of awakenings (sNAW) were analyzed from sleep diary data, and the insomnia severity index (ISI) was also assessed. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were monitored throughout the study.ResultsA total of 546 participants with insomnia (age ≥18 years) were randomized (2:1), received treatment with an oral dose of Dimdazenil (2.5 mg) or placebo, and analyzed. Compared to baseline and placebo, Dimdazenil demonstrated significant improvements in PSG measures, increased TST (71.09, 31.68 minutes, respectively; both p < 0.001), increased SE (13.26%, 5.55%, respectively; both < 0.001), reduced WASO (49.67, 20.16 minutes, respectively; both p < 0.001), and reduced LPS (21.65 minutes, p < 0.001; 6.46 minutes, p = 0.023). Compared to placebo, Dimdazenil also improved key self-reported measures of sTST (18.33 minutes, p < 0.001), sWASO (14.60 minutes, p < 0.001), sSL (4.23 minutes, p < 0.001), sSE (2.97%, p < 0.001), and sNAW (0.29, p < 0.001). Participants treated with Dimdazenil reported a significant improvement in ISI. Dimdazenil was well tolerated. The majority of TEAEs were mild or moderate. There were no clinically relevant treatment-related serious AEs and no deaths.ConclusionsDimdazenil of 2.5 mg provided significant benefit on sleep maintenance and sleep onset in individuals with insomnia disorder versus placebo, with a favorable safety profile and was well tolerated.Clinical trial informationA multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase III clinical study evaluating the efficacy and safety of EVT201 capsules compared to placebo in patients with insomnia disorders (http://www.chinadrugtrials.org), with the number of CTR20201068.
| S-EPMC10851846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ibrexafungerp (code name in China: HS-10366) is a first-in-class and orally active triterpenoid antifungal agent with broad antifungal activity against Candida spp., Aspergillus spp., and other fungal pathogens. It was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis. The study aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of oral ibrexafungerp in healthy Chinese adults. A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled single ascending dose (SAD, n = 42), and multiple ascending dose (MAD, n = 28) study was conducted in healthy Chinese subjects from March to October 2022. There were three cohorts in the SAD stage (300, 600, and 1,500 mg) and two cohorts in the MAD stage [450 mg once daily (QD) for 7 days; a loading dose of 750 mg twice daily (BID) for the first 2 days followed by a maintenance dose of 750 mg QD for consecutive 5 days]. Eligible participants in each cohort were randomly assigned in a 6:1 ratio to receive either ibrexafungerp or placebo orally. The primary objectives were to evaluate the safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was to evaluate PK parameters, including Cmax, AUC, and t1/2. A total of 70 healthy Chinese subjects were enrolled in the study. The mean (SD) age was 29.0 (6.32), and 55.7% were male. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mild or moderate. There were no serious adverse events, and no subjects were discontinued from the study due to TEAEs. All TEAEs were recovered or resolved. The most common TEAEs were diarrhea, abdominal pain, and nausea. In the SAD stage, Cmax, and AUC increased in an approximately dose-proportional manner in the dose range of 300-1,500 mg. The mean t1/2 was within 18.29-21.30 hours. In the MAD stage, an accumulation of exposure (Cmax and AUC) was observed following multiple doses. This phase 1 study demonstrates a favorable safety, tolerability, and PK profile of ibrexafungerp in healthy Chinese subjects.
| S-EPMC10720486 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aims to assess the tolerability and safety of DQTM tablet, which contains a complex mixture of Salvia miltiorrhiza salvianolic acids and Panax notoginseng saponins. METHODS:A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I dose escalation study was conducted in 84 healthy volunteers. In a single ascending dose study, active ingredients were administered in various doses (90, 270, 540, 1080, 1800, 2880, 4320 or 5760 mg) to 60 subjects in cohorts 1-8. In a multiple ascending dose study, active ingredients were administered at doses of 360, 720 or 2160 mg twice daily to 24 subjects in cohorts 9-11 for 14 consecutive days. Safety was evaluated based on clinical symptoms, vital signs, physical examinations, electrocardiography, laboratory tests and adverse events. RESULTS:No serious adverse events or clinically significant changes in vital signs or electrocardiography were observed. One subject experienced mildly elevated levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate transaminase but recovered spontaneously. Five subjects experienced a small increase in the number of daily stools. CONCLUSIONS:DQTM tablet was well tolerated at single doses of up to 5760 mg and twice-daily doses of up to 2160 mg for 14 consecutive days. The most frequent adverse event was an increase in the number of daily stools.
| S-EPMC6882005 | biostudies-literature