Time to prerandomization seizure count design sufficiently assessed the safety and tolerability of perampanel for the treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Static assignment of participants in randomized clinical trials to placebo or ineffective treatment confers risk from continued seizures. An alternative trial design of time to exceed prerandomization monthly seizure count (T-PSC) has replicated the efficacy conclusions of traditionally designed trials, with shorter exposure to placebo and ineffective treatment. Trials aim to evaluate efficacy as well as safety and tolerability; therefore, we evaluated whether this T-PSC design also could replicate the trial's safety and tolerability conclusions. METHODS: We retrospectively applied the T-PSC design to analyze treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) from a blinded, placebo-controlled trial of perampanel for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (NCT01393743). The safety analysis set consisted of 81 and 82 participants randomized to perampanel and placebo arms, respectively. We evaluated the incidences of TEAEs, treatment-related TEAEs, serious TEAEs, and TEAEs of special interest that occurred before T-PSC relative to those observed during the full-length trial. RESULTS: Of the 67 and 59 participants who experienced TEAEs in the perampanel and placebo arms during full-length trial, 66 (99%) and 54 (92%) participants experienced TEAEs with onset occurring before T-PSC, respectively. When limited to treatment-related TEAEs, 55 of 56 (98%) and 32 of 37 (86%) participants reported treatment-related TEAEs that occurred before T-PSC in the perampanel and placebo arms, respectively. There were more TEAEs after T-PSC with placebo as compared to perampanel (Fisher exact odds ratio = 8.6, p = .035), which resulted in overestimation of the difference in TEAE rate. There was a numerical reduction in serious TEAEs (3/13 occurred after T-PSC, one in placebo and two in perampanel). SIGNIFICANCE: Almost all TEAEs occurred before T-PSC. More treatment-related TEAEs occurred after T-PSC for participants randomized to placebo than perampanel, which may be due to either a shorter T-PSC or delayed time to TEAE for placebo.

Lemborexant levels in breast milk after single doses in healthy, lactating women.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to determine the cumulative amount of lemborexant (a competitive dual orexin receptor antagonist approved to treat adults with insomnia) excreted in human breast milk and the relative infant dose (RID) as a proportion of daily maternal dose. METHODS: E2006-A001-010 was a single-centre, open-label study that enrolled lactating women (≥18 years) who breastfed for ≥5 weeks postpartum. After overnight fasting, subjects received a single 10-mg oral dose of lemborexant. Using a standardized electric pump, milk was sampled before and ≤240 h (10 days) after dosing; combined and total volume were recorded. The cumulative total amount of lemborexant excreted, fraction of dose excreted, daily infant dose and RID were calculated. Lemborexant concentration in human milk was assessed by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Eight subjects completed the study. The mean cumulative total amount of lemborexant reached 0.0174 mg (coefficient of variation [CV] 54.5%; 0.174% of lemborexant 10 mg administered) in breast milk at 240 h (10 days); ~70% of excreted lemborexant accumulated in the first 24 h. For an infant weighing 6 kg, the daily infant dose was 0.00290 mg kg-1 (CV 54.5%) and the RID was 1.96% (CV 63.1%) of daily maternal dose. Mild treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 4 subjects; these all resolved by end of study. CONCLUSION: Trace quantities of lemborexant were found in human breast milk. Lemborexant was well tolerated by healthy lactating women.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of respiratory safety of lemborexant in moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the respiratory safety of lemborexant among adults and older adults with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). METHODS: E2006-A001-113 (Study 113; NCT04647383) was a double-blind, two-period crossover, placebo-controlled study in adults (ages ≥ 45 to ≤ 90 years, n = 33) with moderate (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] score ≥ 15 to < 30 events/h, n = 13) or severe (AHI ≥ 30 events/h, n = 20) OSA. Participants were randomized to lemborexant 10 mg (LEM10) or placebo (PBO) for two treatment periods of 8 nights with a ≥ 14-day washout period. AHI and peripheral oxygen saturation were evaluated after treatment on Day 1 (after a single dose) and Day 8 (after multiple doses). RESULTS: No significant differences in AHI were observed after single and multiple doses of LEM10 compared with PBO in participants with moderate to severe OSA (least-squares mean: single-dose LEM10, 41.7; PBO, 44.8; multiple-dose LEM10, 44.9; PBO, 45.7). In addition, there were no significant differences between treatments in peripheral oxygen saturation (least-squares mean: single-dose LEM10, 93.0; PBO, 93.1; multiple-dose LEM10, 93.1; PBO, 93.4). Further, there were no significant differences between treatments in percentage of total sleep time with peripheral oxygen saturation < 90%, < 85%, or < 80%. No significant differences were observed between treatments when AHI and peripheral oxygen saturation outcomes were analyzed by OSA severity. Altogether, 6/33 (18.2%) participants receiving LEM10, vs 3/33 (9.1%) PBO, reported treatment-emergent adverse events, mostly mild in severity. CONCLUSIONS: LEM10 demonstrated respiratory safety and was well tolerated with single-dose and multiple-dose administration in participants with moderate to severe OSA. This suggests that LEM may be a treatment option for patients with OSA and comorbid insomnia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: A Study to Evaluate the Respiratory Safety of Lemborexant in Adult and Elderly Participants With Moderate to Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea and in Adult and Elderly Participants With Moderate to Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04647383; Identifier: NCT04647383. CITATION: Cheng JY, Lorch D, Lowe AD, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of respiratory safety of lemborexant in moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(1):57-65.

Permanent standard time is the optimal choice for health and safety: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine position statement.

The period of the year from spring to fall, when clocks in most parts of the United States are set one hour ahead of standard time, is called daylight saving time, and its beginning and ending dates and times are set by federal law. The human biological clock is regulated by the timing of light and darkness, which then dictates sleep and wake rhythms. In daily life, the timing of exposure to light is generally linked to the social clock. When the solar clock is misaligned with the social clock, desynchronization occurs between the internal circadian rhythm and the social clock. The yearly change between standard time and daylight saving time introduces this misalignment, which has been associated with risks to physical and mental health and safety, as well as risks to public health. In 2020, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) published a position statement advocating for the elimination of seasonal time changes, suggesting that evidence best supports the adoption of year-round standard time. This updated statement cites new evidence and support for permanent standard time. It is the position of the AASM that the United States should eliminate seasonal time changes in favor of permanent standard time, which aligns best with human circadian biology. Evidence supports the distinct benefits of standard time for health and safety, while also underscoring the potential harms that result from seasonal time changes to and from daylight saving time. CITATION: Rishi MA, Cheng JY, Strang AR, et al. Permanent standard time is the optimal choice for health and safety: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine position statement. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(1):121-125.

Complete response with pembrolizumab in recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue: A case report.

Immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promising results in solid tumors associated with BRCA2, but there are no consistent predictors for who will respond to immunotherapy. More research is needed on the impact of this mutation in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, particularly for recurrent/metastatic tumors. We report a case of stage IV oral squamous cell carcinoma associated with BRCA2 mutation that achieved complete remission with pembrolizumab treatment for relapsed disease.

E2730, an uncompetitive γ-aminobutyric acid transporter-1 inhibitor, suppresses epileptic seizures in a rat model of chronic mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: More than one third of mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE) patients are resistant to current antiseizure medications (ASMs), and half experience mild-to-moderate adverse effects of ASMs. There is therefore a strong need to develop and test novel ASMs. The objective of this work is to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and neurological toxicity of E2730, a novel uncompetitive inhibitor of γ-aminobutyric acid transporter-1, and to test its seizure suppression effects in a rat model of chronic MTLE. METHODS: We first examined plasma levels and adverse neurological effects of E2730 in healthy Wistar rats. Adult male rats were implanted with osmotic pumps delivering either 10, 20, or 100 mg/kg/day of E2730 subcutaneously for 1 week. Blood sampling and behavioral assessments were performed at several timepoints. We next examined whether E2730 suppressed seizures in rats with chronic MTLE. These rats were exposed to kainic acid-induced status epilepticus, and 9 weeks later, when chronic epilepsy was established, were assigned to receive one of the three doses of E2730 or vehicle for 1 week in a randomized crossover design. Continuous video-electroencephalographic monitoring was acquired during the treatment period to evaluate epileptic seizures. RESULTS: Plasma levels following continuous infusion of E2730 showed a clear dose-related increase in concentration. The drug was well tolerated at all doses, and any sedation or neuromotor impairment was mild and transient, resolving within 48 h of treatment initiation. Remarkably, E2730 treatment in chronically epileptic rats led to seizure suppression in a dose-dependent manner, with 65% of rats becoming seizure-free at the highest dose tested. Mean seizure class did not differ between the treatment groups. SIGNIFICANCE: This study shows that continuous subcutaneous infusion of E2730 over 7 days results in a marked, dose-dependent suppression of spontaneous recurrent seizures, with minimal adverse neurological effects, in a rat model of chronic MTLE. E2730 shows strong promise as an effective new ASM to be translated into clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of lemborexant in midlife women with insomnia disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Insomnia is common in midlife women. The efficacy and safety of lemborexant (LEM), a competitive dual orexin receptor antagonist, was assessed for 12 months in a subgroup of midlife women (age, 40-58 y) from Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303; SUNRISE-2). METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled (first 6 mo) study of adults with insomnia disorder ( N = 949). During treatment period 1 (TP1), participants received PBO or LEM 5 mg (LEM5) or 10 mg (LEM10). During TP2 (second 6 mo), LEM participants continued their assigned dose; PBO participants were rerandomized to LEM5 or LEM10. Assessments included patient-reported sleep- and fatigue-related measures and treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: The midlife female subgroup comprised 280 of 949 participants (TP1: PBO, n = 90 of 318 [28.3%]; LEM5, n = 82 of 316 [25.9%]; LEM10, n = 108 of 315 [34.3%]). At 6 months, median changes from baseline in subjective sleep-onset latency (in minutes) were -17.9, -20.7, and - 30.4 for PBO, LEM5, and LEM10 (vs PBO: LEM5, P = not significant; LEM10, P = 0.0310). At 6 months, mean changes from baseline in subjective wake after sleep onset (in minutes) were -37.0 (59.6), -50.1 (74.5), and -54.5 (65.4) for PBO, LEM5, and LEM10 (vs PBO: LEM5 and LEM10, P = not significant), with benefits sustained through 12 months. Greater decreases from baseline (improvement) in Insomnia Severity Index total score and Fatigue Severity Scale total score were seen with LEM versus PBO at 6 months; benefits continued through 12 months. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the total population, subjective sleep parameters improved, and improvement was sustained over time in midlife women. LEM was well tolerated, suggesting that LEM may be a potential treatment option for midlife women with insomnia.

EEG parameters as endpoints in epilepsy clinical trials - An expert panel opinion paper.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of ideal measurement of treatment efficacy is a well acknowledged problem in the epilepsy community, both in clinical care and clinical trials. Whilst still the current gold-standard, self-reported seizure frequency significantly underestimates the true number of seizures and does not account for any other at least equally important outcome parameters, such as neurodevelopment and cognition. With the rise of disease modifying treatments, the need for more reliable endpoints in practice and clinical trials becomes more pressing. In this paper we assembled an expert panel to discuss the nature of these needs, current limitations, and obstacles based on a survey amongst these experts who were queried about the most important issues regarding the use of electroencephalography (EEG) parameters as endpoints in clinical drug and device development. METHODS: A structured survey was sent to a group of experts in the design and conduct of epilepsy trials in adults and children. This was followed by a virtual in-person meeting discussing the results of the trial and identifying a list of most important issues. RESULTS: Six clinical trialists and 5 individuals from pharmaceutical companies returned the survey containing 14 questions, and 8 clinical trialists and 10 pharma-representatives attended the meeting. Three main issues were identified (1) lack of accuracy of seizure diaries due to nocturnal seizures, subtle motor seizures, impairment of consciousness and lack of awareness of the seizure by the patient (2) inter-rater variability of EEG assessment (3) lack of standardization regarding definition(s) of seizures (clinical and electrographic), EEG recording methods and EEG data management. Recommended solutions included (1) validation of EEG parameters as biomarkers and use of wearables (2) development of a manual that describes EEG rating criteria, protocol for validation by > 1 central reader and use of a resolution of disagreements reporting template (3) standardization of EEG recording, data management and reporting. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Current developments in research and technology seem promising to advance the use of EEG parameters as potential endpoints and offer partial solutions to the current needs. However, continuous, focused and collaborative efforts of all stakeholders (academia, industry and regulatory agencies) are needed to formulate guidelines, validate emerging technologies and approve them for use in trials. It is the intent of this opinion "position paper" to stimulate those efforts.

Time to exceed pre-randomization monthly seizure count for perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures: A potential clinical end point.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the exploratory time to exceed pre-randomization seizure count (T-PSC) in the determination of efficacy of adjunctive perampanel in participants with primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in generalized-onset epilepsy. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01393743), participants ≥12 years of age with treatment-resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy were randomized to receive placebo or adjunctive perampanel (≤8 mg/day) across a 17-week double-blind treatment phase (4-week titration; 13-week maintenance). We evaluated the pre-planned exploratory end point of the T-PSC using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. We also re-evaluated the correspondence of the primary end points of median percent seizure frequency change (MPC) and 50% responder rate (50RR) calculated at T-PSC and at the end of the trial. RESULTS: The exploratory end point of median T-PSC on placebo was 43 days and >120 days on perampanel (log-rank p < .001). The primary end points calculated at T-PSC did not differ significantly from the end points at the end of the trial (MPC -31% vs -42% at T-PSC; 50RR 32% vs 51% at T-PSC). After T-PSC was reached, participants had a median (interquartile range) of 5 (3-13) additional seizures on placebo and 5 (2-10) on perampanel. SIGNIFICANCE: The exploratory end point of T-PSC demonstrated the effectiveness of perampanel despite a shorter duration of monitoring. The seizures that occurred after T-PSC did not influence the conclusions of the trial; therefore, T-PSC may be a viable alternative to traditional trial end points that reduces the risk to participants.

Risk of sudden unexpected death in people with epilepsy and obstructive sleep apnea.

This study aimed to determine whether severity of newly diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in people with epilepsy is associated with elevated sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk as calculated by the revised SUDEP-7 Inventory (rSUDEP-7). To this aim, a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at a single academic center. Adults ≥18 years of age with epilepsy and newly diagnosed OSA were retrospectively identified via electronic health records. Analysis was performed for subjects with confirmed epilepsy, OSA, and complete diagnostic PSG and rSUDEP-7 data. OSA severity was categorized as mild, moderate or severe. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between OSA severity and rSUDEP-7 scores, adjusting for significantly different baseline characteristics. Of 86 subjects, OSA severity was classified as mild 38(44.2 %), moderate 25(29.1 %), and severe 23(26.7 %). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that severe OSA was significantly associated with rSUDEP-7 ≥ 5 after adjusting for congestive heart failure and diabetes (OR:4.08,p = 0.046,CI:1.04-16.28), but was attenuated when male gender was added to the model (OR:3.91,p = 0.067,CI:0.91-16.77). In conclusion, severe OSA is associated with elevated SUDEP risk. As a treatable disorder, OSA may thus represent a modifiable SUDEP risk factor. However, future confirmatory studies involving the prospective, longitudinal evaluation of SUDEP from broader populations are required.

Respiratory Safety of Lemborexant in Healthy Subjects: A Single-Dose, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist recently approved in the USA, Japan, and Canada for the treatment of adults with insomnia. Because some pharmacotherapy for insomnia causes respiratory depression, this study assessed the effects of lemborexant treatment on respiratory safety parameters. METHODS: This single-dose, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-period crossover study enrolled healthy adult and elderly subjects (n = 17). Subjects were randomized to one of three treatment sequences, each consisting of three treatment periods in which they received a single dose of placebo, lemborexant 10 mg, or lemborexant 25 mg. Each treatment period was separated by a washout period of at least 14 days. Assessments included pharmacodynamic respiratory parameters (peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI)) and safety. RESULTS: There were no significant differences for either dose of lemborexant versus placebo in mean peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2; least squares mean (LSM) difference (95% confidence interval (CI)): lemborexant 10 mg, -0.36 (-0.78 to 0.07); lemborexant 25 mg, - 0.29 (- 0.72 to 0.14)) or AHI (LSM difference (95% CI): lemborexant 10 mg, 0.52 (- 1.72 to 2.76); lemborexant 25 mg, - 1.16 (- 3.40 to 1.08)) during sleep. Additionally, significant differences were not observed for the percentage of total sleep during which SpO2 was < 85% (LSM difference (95% CI): lemborexant 10 mg, 0.004 (- 0.058 to 0.067); lemborexant 25 mg, 0.044 (- 0.018 to 0.107)) or < 80% (LSM difference (95% CI): lemborexant 10 mg, 0.001 (- 0.002 to 0.005); lemborexant 25 mg, 0.002 (-0.001 to 0.006)) for either lemborexant dose versus placebo. There was also no significant difference for lemborexant 10 mg versus placebo, for which SpO2 was < 90% during total sleep time (LSM difference (95% CI): 0.185 (- 0.034 to 0.405)). CONCLUSION: Overall, lemborexant at recommended doses did not have a negative effect on mean SpO2 or AHI and was well tolerated in this cohort of healthy subjects.

Insomnia is a sleep disorder in which people have trouble falling asleep or staying asleep, or both. People can take prescription medicines to help improve sleep, but these drugs can have side effects including making breathing more difficult during sleep. We looked at a new medicine for insomnia, lemborexant, and with the aim of finding out how it affects breathing during sleep and if there were any side effects. A group of 17 healthy adult and elderly people took a normal or high dose of lemborexant or a placebo that did not contain active medicine. Researchers measured people's breathing while they slept. We found that lemborexant did not change the amount of oxygen in people's blood during sleep, and that lemborexant did not cause people to have shallow breathing or to have brief pauses in their breathing. People who took lemborexant reported few side effects and these were all mild. In this study, lemborexant was well tolerated in healthy adults and elderly people and did not make breathing more difficult during sleep.

Comparison of the effect of lemborexant with placebo and zolpidem tartrate extended release on sleep architecture in older adults with insomnia disorder.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Changes to sleep architecture that occur as a result of the normal aging process may also exacerbate insomnia in older individuals. Therefore, this study assessed the impact of lemborexant compared with placebo and zolpidem tartrate extended release on objective sleep architecture parameters, as measured by polysomnography, in older adults (ages ≥ 55 years) with insomnia disorder from a phase 3 study. METHODS: Study E2006-G000-304 (SUNRISE 1; NCT02783729) was a global, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active comparator (zolpidem)-controlled, parallel-group study comparing 2 dose levels of lemborexant (5 mg and 10 mg). Sleep architecture was measured using polysomnography. Assessments were collected at baseline during a single-blind placebo run-in and during the first 2 nights and last 2 nights of treatment. Mean values for each sleep stage were based on the 2 consecutive polysomnograms. RESULTS: Treatment with lemborexant resulted in significantly greater increases from baseline in total sleep time compared with both placebo and zolpidem. Significant increases from baseline in rapid eye movement sleep and significant decreases from baseline in latency to rapid eye movement sleep were also observed with lemborexant compared with placebo and zolpidem. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that treatment with lemborexant may address some of the alterations in sleep architecture normally observed in older individuals with insomnia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lemborexant in Subjects 55 Years and Older With Insomnia Disorder (SUNRISE 1); URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02783729; Identifier: NCT02783729.

Lack of residual morning effects of lemborexant treatment for insomnia: summary of findings across 9 clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: Residual next-day effects of sleep-promoting drugs are common and an important safety issue. Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist approved in the United States and Japan for treatment of insomnia in adults. We evaluated the potential of lemborexant for residual morning and next-day effects, including somnolence, based on lemborexant clinical study findings. METHODS: This paper reports findings from 9 lemborexant clinical studies that incorporated next-day assessments of residual drug effects, based on published findings and data on file. Results are reported for healthy subjects or subjects with insomnia disorder treated with lemborexant 5 mg/day or 10 mg/day, placebo, or active comparator before bedtime. Outcomes assessed included next-morning postural stability (body sway measured by ataxiameter), cognitive performance (Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery), impact on driving (standard deviation of lateral position during highway driving test), subjective sleepiness (sleep diary entries), and adverse events of somnolence. RESULTS: Change from baseline in postural stability the morning after lemborexant administration did not differ from placebo. Among 4 Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery measures, only power of attention declined significantly more with lemborexant treatment compared with placebo in 1 of 2 studies, whereas zolpidem differed from placebo on multiple measures. On the highway-driving test, lemborexant did not significantly impair driving performance versus placebo, however, zopiclone did differ. In large phase 3 trials, next-morning sleep diary ratings showed significantly greater alertness with lemborexant compared with placebo after up to 6 months of treatment. As expected, somnolence was the most common adverse event reported with lemborexant treatment. Somnolence was typically mild to moderate in severity and rarely caused discontinuation of study drug. CONCLUSION: Across 9 clinical studies, lemborexant did not substantially impair next-day functioning among healthy subjects and subjects with insomnia.

Respiratory safety of lemborexant in healthy adult and elderly subjects with mild obstructive sleep apnea: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.

Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist indicated for the treatment of adult and elderly individuals with insomnia. Some current pharmacologic treatments for insomnia cause respiratory depression, a serious safety concern, particularly for individuals with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). This phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period crossover study examined respiratory safety parameters in individuals with mild OSA following treatment with lemborexant. Participants (n = 39) were randomized to one of two treatment sequences, including placebo and lemborexant 10 mg. Each treatment period lasted 8 days and was separated by a washout of at least 14 days. Following single or multiple doses, there were no significant differences in mean apnea-hypopnea index for lemborexant 10 mg versus placebo (least squares mean [LSM] difference [95% confidence interval {CI}]: day 1, -0.03 [-2.22, 2.17]; day 8, -0.06 [-1.95, 1.83]) or peripheral capillary oxygen saturation during sleep (LSM difference [95% CI]: day 1, 0.07 [-0.31, 0.46]; day 8, 0.25 [-0.11, 0.61]). There were no significant differences versus placebo for the percentage of total sleep time during which peripheral capillary oxygen saturation was <80% (LSM difference [95% CI]: day 1, 0.002 [-0.019, 0.023]; day 8, 0.006 [-0.015, 0.026]), <85% (LSM difference [95% CI]: day 1, 0.067 [-0.124, 0.258]; day 8, 0.056 [-0.117, 0.228]) or <90% (LSM difference [95% CI]: day 1, 0.312 [-0.558, 1.181]; day 8, 0.088 [-0.431, 0.607]). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was low and similar for lemborexant and placebo. Lemborexant demonstrated respiratory safety in this study population and was well tolerated.

Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Associations in People with and without Epilepsy.

PURPOSE: Positive airway pressure remains the gold-standard treatment for OSA, but many are intolerant. The neurotransmitter serotonin is involved in respiratory control. Evidence exists for SRIs in reducing OSA severity in the general population and ictal hypoxemia and seizure-induced respiratory arrest in people with epilepsy (PWE). However, the association between SRIs and OSA severity has not been studied in populations consisting of both groups. This study aims to determine if SRIs are associated with OSA severity in both PWE and people without epilepsy (PWO) and whether differences exist between the two groups. METHODS: A retrospective study of adults with OSA was conducted. Subjects were categorized as PWE or PWO and for the use (+SRI) or absence (-SRI) of an SRI. The primary outcome was OSA severity relative to SRI status. OSA severity as a function of SRI status was also compared between PWE and PWO and within the PWE and PWO cohorts. Oxygen saturation nadir was a secondary outcome measure. Statistical adjustment of pertinent characteristics was performed. RESULTS: There were 125 subjects (57 PWE, 68 PWO, 80 -SRI, and 45 +SRI). +SRI was associated with reduced odds of severe compared to moderate OSA, in unadjusted and adjusted analysis. Compared to PWO, PWE demonstrated a more robust association between OSA severity and +SRI. When analyzed as separate cohorts, only PWE demonstrated reduced OSA severity, with adjustment for age (OR:0.140, CI:0.021-1.116, and p=0.042). Oxygen saturation nadir was not significant in any model. CONCLUSIONS: SRIs represent a potential treatment option for OSA and may demonstrate a more robust association with reduced OSA severity in PWE compared to PWO.

Intelligent use of antiepileptic drugs is beneficial to patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe the most important issues a clinician must consider whenever selecting and administering antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). There is no available algorithm that identifies how to individualize selection of AEDs. Proper selection and administration can make an enormous difference in both effectiveness and tolerability. RECENT FINDINGS: Many principles of AED selection remain unchanged. Selection of AEDs must be based on understanding of epilepsy syndrome and seizure type, comorbidities, risk of adverse events, as well as on patient characteristics such as age and sex. Recently personalized medicine through genetics has become a reality for a subset of patients, to select optimal drugs, and avoid side effects. Selection of AEDs for women can be performed to avoid teratogenic agents, as safer AEDs have been identified. There is evidence supporting use of controlled release AED formulations, whenever available. Whenever selecting an optimal dose, physicians should attend to the principle of 'start low, go slow.' 'Intelligent use' includes not only appropriate drug selection, but also optimal and individualized dose adjustment. Drug optimization involves appropriate titration, dose schedule, individualization of therapeutic range and rescue planning SUMMARY: Intelligent drug use, individualized to patient characteristics, can guide management for optimal seizure control.