A novel forehead temperature-regulating device for insomnia: a randomized clinical trial.

Study Objectives: Insomnia is one of the most common disorders in the general population. Hypnotic medications are efficacious, but their use is limited by adverse events (AEs). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a novel forehead temperature-regulating device that delivers frontal cerebral thermal therapy (maintained at 14-16°C, equivalent to 57-61°F) for the treatment of insomnia. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial involving two nights of therapy in 106 adults diagnosed with insomnia. The main outcome measures included latency to persistent sleep and sleep efficiency derived from polysomnographic (PSG) recordings and frequency and severity of AEs. Results: The safety profile was comparable to sham treatment. Statistically significant differences were not found in the two a priori co-primary endpoint measures absolute latency to persistent sleep (p = 0.092) or absolute sleep efficiency. Frontal cerebral thermal therapy produced improvements over sham in other convergent measures of sleep latency including relative changes from baseline in latency to persistent sleep (p = 0.013), the latency to stage 1 NREM sleep (p = 0.006), the latency to stage 2 NREM sleep (p = 0.002), a trend for the latency to stage 3 NREM sleep (p = 0.055), and an increase in the minutes of sleep during the first hour of the night (p = 0.024). Conclusions: Two-night frontal cerebral thermal therapy produced improvements in PSG measures of insomnia patients' ability to fall asleep and had a benign safety profile. Further studies are warranted to determine the role of this therapy in the longer-term management of insomnia. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01966211.

Identifying clinically important difference on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale: results from a narcolepsy clinical trial of JZP-110.

BACKGROUND: While scores ≤10 on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) are within the normal range, the reduction in elevated ESS score that is clinically meaningful in patients with narcolepsy has not been established. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of a clinical trial of patients with narcolepsy evaluated correlations between Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) and ESS. Data of adult patients with narcolepsy from a double-blind, 12-week placebo-controlled study of JZP-110, a wake-promoting agent, were used in this analysis. Descriptive statistics and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis compared PGI-C (anchor measure) to percent change from baseline in ESS to establish the responder criterion from patients taking either placebo or JZP-110 (treatments). RESULTS: At week 12, patients (n = 10) who reported being "very much improved" on the PGI-C had a mean 76.7% reduction in ESS score, and patients (n = 33) who reported being "much improved" on the PGI-C had a mean 49.1% reduction in ESS score. ROC analysis showed that patients who improved were almost exclusively from JZP-110 treatment group, with an area-under-the-curve of 0.9, and revealed that a 25% reduction in ESS (sensitivity, 81.4%; specificity, 80.9%) may be an appropriate threshold for defining a meaningful patient response to JZP-110 and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: A ≥25% reduction in patients' subjective ESS score may be useful as a threshold to identify patients with narcolepsy who respond to JZP-110 treatment.

Evaluation of the effect of JZP-110 in patients with narcolepsy assessed using the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test censored to 20 minutes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of JZP-110 on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) with data censored to include only the first 20 min of a 40-min MWT. METHODS: In a 4-week, placebo-controlled crossover design (Study 201; N = 33) and a 12-week parallel-group design (Study 202; N = 93), JZP-110 was evaluated in narcolepsy patients using changes from baseline in the 40-min MWT as the primary endpoint. Effect sizes based on the change from baseline in mean MWT sleep latency were calculated using 20-min censored MWT data and compared to 40-min MWT data. RESULTS: In Study 201, mean (standard deviation) changes in MWT sleep latency were 12.7 (10.6) min with JZP-110 versus 0.9 (6.0) min with placebo (P = 0.0002) for 40-min data, and 8.9 (6.3) versus 0.4 (4.6) min for 20-min censored data (P < 0.0001). In Study 202, mean changes in MWT sleep latency were 12.8 (10.3) min with JZP-110 versus 2.1 (7.9) min with placebo (P < 0.0001) for 40-min data, and 8.9 (5.5) versus 1.1 (5.6) min for 20-min censored data (P < 0.0001). In Studies 201 and 202, respectively, Cohen's d effect sizes were large and numerically greater for 20-min censored data (1.54 and 1.41) versus 40-min data (1.37 and 1.17). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with narcolepsy, JZP-110 significantly improved the ability to stay awake compared with placebo, with large effect sizes using both the 40-min and 20-min censored MWT data.

Armodafinil for the treatment of excessive sleepiness associated with mild or moderate closed traumatic brain injury: a 12-week, randomized, double-blind study followed by a 12-month open-label extension.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of armodafinil in patients with excessive sleepiness following mild or moderate closed traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial followed by open-label extension. SETTING: 40 US centers. PATIENTS: Adults with closed TBI (N = 117), Glasgow Coma Scale score >8 at time of injury; baseline Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) ≥10; sleep latency <8 minutes on multiple sleep latency test (MSLT); and Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score ≥4 for excessive sleepiness. INTERVENTION: Patients received armodafinil (50, 150, or 250 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks followed by an optional 12-month open-label extension. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Outcomes included MSLT, ESS, Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C), TBI-Work Instability Scale (TBI-WIS), CGI-S, and tolerability. The study was terminated early due to low enrollment. Patients receiving 250 mg armodafinil showed significant improvement in sleep latency from baseline to final visit versus placebo (+7.2 minutes vs. +2.4 minutes; p = 0.0010). CGI-C ratings were much/ very much improved in approximately 50% of patients receiving 150 and 250 mg armodafinil, compared to 38% on placebo. ESS and TBI-WIS scores were not significantly different between groups. In the open-label extension (N = 49), patients demonstrated gradual improvement in ESS, TBI-WIS, and CGI-S scores up to 48 weeks post-baseline. Armodafinil was generally well tolerated, with headache the most common adverse event in both double-blind and open-label portions. CONCLUSIONS: Armodafinil 250 mg significantly improved sleep latency in patients with excessive sleepiness associated with mild or moderate TBI. Efficacy and tolerability of armodafinil were sustained throughout the open-label extension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00893789, NCT00983437.

Pregabalin versus pramipexole: effects on sleep disturbance in restless legs syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare pregabalin versus placebo and pramipexole for reducing restless legs syndrome (RLS)-related sleep disturbance. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial. SETTING: Twenty-three US sleep centers. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-five individuals with moderate to severe idiopathic RLS and associated sleep disturbance. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized across 6 treatment sequences comprising three 4-week periods on pregabalin 300 mg/day (n = 75), pramipexole 0.5 mg/day (n = 76), or placebo (n = 73). MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Polysomnography was conducted over 2 nights at the end of each period. Primary (wake after sleep onset [WASO], pregabalin vs placebo) and key secondary endpoints were analyzed for statistical significance, with descriptive statistics for other endpoints. Pregabalin improved sleep maintenance, demonstrated by reductions in WASO (-27.1 min vs placebo [P < 0.0001]; -26.9 vs pramipexole) and number of awakenings after sleep onset (-2.7 vs placebo; -7.9 vs pramipexole [P < 0.0001]) by polysomnography, and an increase in subjective total sleep time (30.8 min vs placebo [P < 0.0001]; 26.8 vs pramipexole). Pregabalin also increased slow wave sleep duration (20.9 min vs placebo; 32.1 vs pramipexole [P < 0.0001]). Reduction in periodic limb movement arousal index (PLMAI) with pregabalin was similar to pramipexole and greater than placebo (-3.7 PLMA/h [P < 0.0001]), although reduction in total PLM in sleep was less than for pramipexole. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated improvements in objective and subjective measures of sleep maintenance and sleep architecture with pregabalin compared with placebo and pramipexole. Effects of pregabalin on periodic limb movement arousal index were comparable to pramipexole. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00991276; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00991276.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 6 mg in a four-week outpatient trial of elderly adults with chronic primary insomnia.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of doxepin (DXP), a histamine H(1) receptor antagonist, was evaluated in elderly adults with sleep maintenance insomnia. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient trial. Elderly adults meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for primary insomnia were randomized to four weeks of nightly treatment with either DXP 6 mg (N=130) or placebo (PBO; N=124). Efficacy was assessed using patient self-report instruments and clinician ratings. Patient-reported endpoints included subjective total sleep time (sTST), subjective wake after sleep onset (sWASO), latency to sleep onset (LSO), sleep quality, and a Patient Global Impression scale (PGI). The primary endpoint was sTST at week 1. RESULTS: DXP 6 mg produced significantly more sTST and less sWASO at week 1 (both p-values <0.0001) than PBO. These significant improvements versus placebo were maintained at weeks 2-4 (all p-values <0.05). There were no significant differences in LSO for DXP 6 mg versus PBO. DXP 6 mg significantly improved sleep quality (weeks 1, 3, and 4, p<0.05) and several outcome-related parameters, including several items on the PGI, the severity and improvement items of the Clinician Global Impression scale (CGI; weeks 1 and 2) and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI; weeks 1-4), all versus PBO. There were no reports of anticholinergic effects (e.g., dry mouth) or memory impairment. The safety profile of DXP 6 mg was comparable to that of PBO. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly adults with insomnia, DXP 6 mg produced significant improvements in sleep maintenance, sleep duration, and sleep quality endpoints that were sustained throughout the trial. These data suggest that DXP 6 mg is effective for treating sleep maintenance insomnia and is well-tolerated in elderly adults with chronic primary insomnia.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 3 and 6 mg in a 35-day sleep laboratory trial in adults with chronic primary insomnia.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxepin (DXP) 3 mg and 6 mg in adults diagnosed with primary insomnia. DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Patients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for primary insomnia were randomized to 35 days of nightly treatment with DXP 3 mg (n=75), DXP 6 mg (n=73), or placebo (PBO; n=73), followed by 2 nights of single-blind PBO to evaluate discontinuation (DC) effects. Efficacy was assessed using polysomnography (PSG) and patient reports. Efficacy data were examined for Night (N) 1, N15, and N29. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study. RESULTS: Compared with PBO, DXP 3 and 6 mg significantly improved wake time after sleep onset (WASO) on N1 (3 mg and 6 mg; P<0.0001), N15 (3 mg P=0.0025; 6 mg P=0.0009), and N29 (3 mg P=0.0248; 6 mg P=0.0009), latency to persistent sleep (LPS) on N1 (3 mg P=0.0047; 6 mg P=0.0007), and total sleep time (TST) on N1 (3 mg and 6 mg P<0.0001), N15 (6 mg P=0.0035), and N29 (3 mg P=0.0261; 6 mg P<0.0001). In terms of early morning awakenings, DXP 3 and 6 mg demonstrated significant improvements in SE in the final quarter of the night on N1, N15, and N29, with the exception of 3 mg on N29 (P=0.0691). Rates of discontinuation were low, and the safety profiles were comparable across the 3 treatment groups. There were no significant next-day residual effects, and there were no spontaneous reports of memory impairment, complex sleep behaviors, anticholinergic effects, weight gain, or increased appetite. Additionally, there was no evidence of rebound insomnia after DXP discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Five weeks of nightly administration of DXP 3 mg and 6 mg to adults with chronic primary insomnia resulted in significant and sustained improvements in sleep maintenance and early morning awakenings (with the exception of SE in the final quarter of the night on N29 for 3 mg [P=0.0691]). These sleep improvements were not accompanied by next-day residual effects or followed by rebound insomnia or withdrawal effects upon discontinuation. These findings confirm the unique profile of sleep maintenance efficacy and safety of DXP observed in prior studies.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 6 mg in a model of transient insomnia.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of doxepin (DXP) 6mg tablets were evaluated in healthy adults in a model of transient insomnia. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study in healthy adults using a model of transient insomnia. A first-night effect combined with a 3-h phase advance was implemented to induce transient insomnia in healthy adults. Subjects received a single night time dose of placebo (PBO; N=282) or DXP 6mg (N=283) in a sleep laboratory. Efficacy was evaluated objectively (polysomnography; PSG) and subjectively (morning questionnaire). Consistent with the model utilized, the primary endpoint was latency to persistent sleep (LPS); secondary PSG endpoints included wake after sleep onset (WASO; key secondary endpoint), total sleep time (TST), wake time after sleep (WTAS) and sleep efficiency (SE; overall, by quarter of the night and hourly); secondary subjective endpoints included latency to sleep onset (LSO), subjective WASO (sWASO), subjective TST (sTST) and sleep quality. RESULTS: DXP 6mg demonstrated statistically significant improvements in LPS (13min decrease versus PBO; p<0.0001), WASO (39min less than PBO; p<0.0001), TST (51min more than PBO; p<0.0001), WTAS (p<0.0001), overall SE (p<0.0001), SE in each quarter of the night (p<0.0001) and SE in each of the 8h (p⩽0.0003), all versus PBO. Additionally, DXP 6mg significantly improved subjective variables including LSO (p<0.0001), sWASO (p=0.0063), sTST (p<0.0001), and sleep quality (p=0.0004), versus PBO. There was no consistent evidence of next-day residual sedation and also minor sleep stages alterations. The incidence of adverse events was comparable to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this model of transient insomnia, DXP 6mg demonstrated significant improvements in sleep onset, sleep maintenance, sleep duration and sleep quality, and also appeared to reduce early morning awakenings. These data suggest that DXP 6mg may be effective and well tolerated in adults experiencing transient insomnia.

Nonrestorative sleep as a distinct component of insomnia.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Explore characteristics of nonrestorative sleep (NRS) in prospectively defined subgroups of individuals with NRS symptoms, investigate whether NRS can occur independently of difficulties initiating and maintaining sleep (DIS/DMS), and determine its effect on waking function. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal population-based study comparing patterns of daytime symptoms, and their persistence, in cohorts of subjects with NRS symptoms grouped according to presence or absence of DIS and DMS. SETTING: 28 sleep centers in the US. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects reporting awakening unrestored or unrefreshed at least 3 times weekly over the previous 3 months were classified, based on self-reported sleep problems, to DIS (n = 138), DMS (n = 44), DIS+DMS (n = 125), and NRS-only (no DIS or DMS; n = 192) cohorts. Eighty healthy volunteers formed a control group. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Polysomnography confirmed DIS and/or DMS in 56/138 (41%), 18/44 (41%), and 37/125 (30%) subjects in DIS, DMS, and DIS+DMS cohorts, respectively; and absence of DIS or DMS in 115/192 (60%) NRS-only subjects and 52/80 (65%) healthy volunteers. Multiple subject-reported endpoints including the Endicott Work Productivity Scale, Pittsburgh Insomnia Rating Scale, Restorative Sleep Questionnaire, and SF-36, showed that NRS-only subjects had significantly impaired daytime function relative to healthy volunteers, comparable to impairment affecting subjects with DIS and/or DMS. Symptoms persisted over 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that NRS can occur independently of other components of insomnia. Daytime symptoms were as severe in individuals with NRS-only as those whose NRS symptoms were combined with DIS or DMS.

Sublingual zolpidem tartrate lozenge for the treatment of insomnia.

Sublingual zolpidem tartrate (SZT) is a sublingual lozenge containing a low dose of the nonbenzodiazepine hypnotic zolpidem tartrate. Pharmacokinetic evaluations suggest that this formulation produces higher drug plasma levels within the first 15-20 min after dosing than the standard oral tablet using only approximately 30% of the standard dose. Published data suggest that SZT is generally safe and effective at rapidly inducing sedation without residual next-day effects, as long as the patient has at least 4 h remaining in bed at the time of administration. SZT is currently being reviewed by the US FDA for potential approval for insomnia characterized by middle-of-the-night awakenings with difficulty returning to sleep.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg in elderly patients with primary insomnia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate efficacy and safety of the histamine-H1 antagonist doxepin at doses of 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg in elderly adults with primary insomnia. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design was used in this population of elderly adults with primary insomnia (DSM-IV). Each treatment period consisted of 2 polysomnographic (PSG) assessment nights with a 5- or 12-day drug-free interval between periods. The study was conducted from September 2004 to January 2005. SETTING: Sleep laboratories in 11 sleep centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Elderly adults with primary insomnia. INTERVENTION: Doxepin 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg. MEASUREMENTS: Efficacy was assessed using PSG and patient-reported measures. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were randomly assigned. All 3 doxepin doses produced dose-related significant improvements in PSG-determined wake time during sleep (p < .0001), wake time after sleep onset (p < .0001), total sleep time (p < .0001), and overall sleep efficiency (p < .0001) versus placebo. At the 3-mg and 6-mg doses, sleep efficiency was significantly improved during all thirds of the night (p < .05). There was a dose-related decrease in patient-reported sleep latency, with the 6-mg dose achieving statistical significance in latency to sleep onset (p = .0181). The pattern of the remaining subjective efficacy results was consistent with PSG. All 3 doxepin doses had side effect profiles comparable to placebo, with no spontaneously reported anticholinergic effects, no memory impairment, and no significant next-day residual effects. CONCLUSIONS: In this 2-night study of elderly adults with primary insomnia, doxepin doses of 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg were well tolerated and produced significant improvement in objective and subjective sleep maintenance and duration endpoints that persisted into the final hour of the night. Positive effects on patient-reported sleep onset were observed at the highest dose. All 3 doxepin doses had a safety profile comparable to placebo. These data demonstrate that doxepin was efficacious in improving sleep in elderly adults.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg in adults with primary insomnia.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxepin 1, 3, and 6 mg in insomnia patients. DESIGN: Adults (18-64 y) with chronic primary insomnia (DSM-IV) were randomly assigned to one of four sequences of 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg of doxepin, and placebo in a crossover study. Treatment periods consisted of 2 polysomnographic assessment nights with a 5-day or 12-day drug-free interval between periods. Efficacy was assessed using polysomnography (PSG) and patient-reported measures. Safety analyses included measures of residual sedation and adverse events. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were randomized. Wake time during sleep, the a priori defined primary endpoint, was statistically significantly improved at the doxepin 3 mg and 6 mg doses versus placebo. All three doses had statistically significant improvements versus placebo for PSG-defined wake after sleep onset, total sleep time, and overall sleep efficiency (SE). SE in the final third-of-the-night also demonstrated statistically significant improvement at all doses. The doxepin 6 mg dose significantly reduced subjective latency to sleep onset. All three doxepin doses had a safety profile comparable to placebo. There were no statistically significant differences in next-day residual sedation, and sleep architecture was generally clinically preserved. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with primary insomnia, doxepin 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg was well-tolerated and produced improvement in objective and subjective sleep maintenance and duration endpoints that persisted into the final hour of the night. The side-effect profile was comparable to placebo, with no reported anticholinergic effects, no memory impairment, and no significant hangover/next-day residual effects. These data demonstrate that doxepin 1 mg, 3 mg, and 6 mg is efficacious in improving the sleep of patients with chronic primary insomnia.

Indiplon in the treatment of sleep disorders.

Indiplon is a novel sedative-hypnotic recently approved for the treatment of insomnia. Like other non-benzodiazepine hypnotics, its mechanism of action is to modulate subunits, especially the alpha-1 subunit, of the GABA receptor complex in order to induce sedation. Indiplon was developed in two different formulations to address two different types of insomnia complaint: indiplon-IR (immediate release) was designed for sleep onset difficulties, while indiplon-MR (modified release) was developed for sleep maintenance insomnia. While there are currently few peer reviewed articles about indiplon clinical trial results, the early information that is available seems to indicate that both formulations have been well tolerated and have proven effective at improving both patient reported and objectively measured sleep parameters in both adult and elderly insomnia patients. In May 2006, the FDA indicated that indiplon-IR was approvable and plans are to resubmit the application in 2007. Indiplon-MR was unapprovable and may require further evaluation.

The efficacy and safety of the melatonin agonist beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin in primary insomnia: a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: While melatonin agonists are known to regulate circadian sleep rhythms, it is not clear whether melatonin agonists have a direct soporific effect. It has been suggested that melatonin's soporific effect is secondary to its ability to induce hypothermia. beta-Methyl-6-chloromelatonin is a high-affinity melatonin receptor agonist that is not associated with hypothermia. The purpose of the present study was to determine if the melatonin agonist beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin has a direct soporific effect in subjects with primary insomnia. METHOD: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover safety and efficacy study of 20 mg, 50 mg, and 100 mg of beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin and placebo was conducted in subjects with DSM-IV-TR primary insomnia. Of 84 subjects screened, 40 progressed to randomly receive each of 3 beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin doses or placebo on each of 2 consecutive nights with 5-day washout periods between treatments. The effect of treatment on both polysomnographic and subjectively measured sleep parameters, next-morning psychomotor performance, and safety measures was determined. The primary outcome measure was latency to persistent sleep measured by polysomnography. RESULTS: A significant effect of beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin on the primary efficacy variable, latency to persistent sleep, was observed (p = .0003). The 20-mg dose resulted in a significant 31% improvement in sleep latency compared with placebo, while significant 32% and 41% improvements were observed at the 50-mg and 100-mg doses, respectively (20 mg, p = .0082; 50 mg, p = .0062; 100 mg, p < .0001). Similarly, a significant effect of beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin on subjective measures of time to fall asleep occurred (p = .0050), with significant improvement observed at both the 50-mg and 100-mg doses (p = .0350 and .0198, respectively) and a trend toward improvement observed at the 20-mg dose (p = .0582). Adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and did not differ in frequency between beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin and placebo treatments. CONCLUSION: beta-Methyl-6-chloromelatonin significantly decreases both objective and subjective measures of sleep latency in subjects with primary insomnia. Thus, these data suggest that mel-atonin agonists may exert a direct soporific effect, as previous research indicates that beta-methyl-6-chloromelatonin is not associated with changes in body temperature, heart rate, or blood pressure.

Comparison between automatic and fixed positive airway pressure therapy in the home.

We tested the hypothesis that continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) use and outcomes can be improved by an autotitrating CPAP device in patients with obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) who require higher CPAP (10 cm H2O or more). In this multisite randomized single-blind cross-over study, 44 patients (mean age, 49 +/- 10 years) were randomized to 6 weeks at laboratory-determined fixed pressure and 6 weeks on autotitrating CPAP. Average nightly use was greater in automatic mode (306 versus 271 minutes, p = 0.005); median and 95th centile pressures in automatic mode were lower (p < 0.002). Automatic CPAP resulted in better SF-36 Vitality scores (65 +/- 20 versus 58 +/- 23, p < 0.05) and mental health scores (80 +/- 14 versus 75 +/- 18, p < 0.05), but no significant difference in Epworth score (p = 0.065). During automatic therapy, patients reported more restful sleep, better quality sleep, less discomfort from pressure, and less trouble getting to sleep for both the first week of therapy and for the averaged scores for Weeks 2-6 (all p values < 0.006). Patients who require higher fixed CPAP use autotitrating CPAP more and report greater benefit from this therapy.