Relation between ambulatory actigraphy and laboratory polysomnography in insomnia practice and research.

Actigraphy is increasingly used in practice and research studies because of its relative low cost and decreased subject burden. How multiple nights of at-home actigraphy compare to one independent night of in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) has not been examined in people with insomnia. Using event markers (MARK) to set time in bed (TIB) compared to automatic program analysis (AUTO) has not been systematically evaluated. Subjects (n = 30) meeting DSM-5 criteria for insomnia and in-laboratory PSG sleep efficiency (SE) of <85% were studied. Subjects were free of psychiatric, sleep or circadian disorders, other chronic conditions and medications that effect sleep. Subjects had an in-laboratory PSG, then were sent home for 7 nights with Philips Actiwatch Spectrum Plus. Data were analysed using Philips Actiware version 6. Using the mean of seven nights, TIB, total sleep time (TST), SE, sleep-onset latency (SOL) and wake after sleep onset (WASO) were examined. Compared to PSG, AUTO showed longer TIB and TST and less WASO. MARK only differed from PSG with decreased WASO. Differences between the PSG night and the following night at home were found, with better sleep on the first night home. Actigraphy in people with insomnia over seven nights is a valid indicator of sleep compared to an independent in-laboratory PSG. Event markers increased the validity of actigraphy, showing no difference in TIB, TST, SE and SOL. AUTO was representative of SE and SOL. Increased SE and TST without increased TIB suggests possible compensatory sleep the first at night home after in-laboratory PSG.

Sleep and pain in humans with fibromyalgia and comorbid insomnia: double-blind, crossover study of suvorexant 20 mg versus placebo.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The chronic pain disorder, fibromyalgia, is associated with sleep disturbance, typically sleep maintenance. No studies have evaluated the effect of sleep medication on pain sensitivity in this population. Suvorexant, an orexin antagonist approved for treatment of insomnia, was evaluated for effects on both sleep and the pain of fibromyalgia. METHODS: Women age 21 to 65 years with fibromyalgia and comorbid insomnia (n = 10) were treated, double-blind, for 9 nights each with suvorexant, 20 mg and placebo in counterbalanced order. All were in good psychiatric and stable physical health and met American College of Rheumatology 2010 criteria for fibromyalgia and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria for insomnia. Screening 8-hour polysomnography (PSG) was used to rule out other sleep disorders. On nights 8 and 9 of each treatment 8-hour PSG were collected and on days 1 and 8 pain sensitivity was assessed at 1100 and 1500 hours by measuring finger withdrawal latency (FWL) to a radiant heat stimulus at 5 randomly presented intensity levels. RESULTS: Suvorexant versus placebo increased total sleep time (7.2 versus 6.7 hours, P < .05) and reduced wake after sleep onset (37 versus 67 minutes, P < .04) with no night effects or interaction. Latency to persistent sleep and sleep stage measures were not altered. FWL on both am and pm tests varied as a function of intensity (P < .001). Average FWL (over 5 intensities and both days) was increased relative to placebo on both the am (13.9 versus 13.1 seconds) and pm tests (15.8 versus 14.1 seconds, P < .03) following suvorexant the previous night. CONCLUSIONS: Suvorexant 20 mg in patients with fibromyalgia, improved sleep time and reduced next-day pain sensitivity on assessments of FWL to a radiant heat stimulus. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: A double-blind cross-over, study to compare the hypnotic, daytime sleepiness/fatigue, and pain effects of nighttime administration of suvorexant 20 mg versus placebo in patients with fibromyalgia and comorbid insomnia; Identifier: NCT02684136; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02684136.

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.

Tolerance to daytime sedative effects of H1 antihistamines.

Sedation is the principal side effect of first generation H1 antihistamines, and recent studies have suggested that this side effect should limit the clinical application of these drugs. The sedative effect also underlies the use of these first-generation drugs as nonprescriptive remedies for insomnia. In both cases, the potential for tolerance to the sedative effect of these drugs is an important issue for which there are few objective data. In the study reported here, 15 healthy men age 18 to 50 years received either diphenhydramine 50 mg or placebo twice a day for 4 days in a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial design. Dependent measures included objective and subjective assessments of sleepiness and computer-based tests of psychomotor performance. Both objective and subjective measures of sleepiness showed significantly higher levels on day 1 for diphenhydramine compared to placebo. By day 4, however, levels of sleepiness on diphenhydramine were indistinguishable from placebo. Similarly, diphenhydramine produced significant impairment of performance that was completely reversed by day 4. These data provide the first objective confirmation that tolerance develops to the sedative effect of a prototypical first-generation H1 antihistamine, diphenhydramine. On this dosing regimen, tolerance was complete by the end of 3 days of administration. While other antihistamines and dosing regimens may differ, these results suggest that tolerance to the sedation produced by these drugs develops with remarkable rapidity.