A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a bupivacaine hydrochloride implant in patients undergoing abdominoplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) is a standard element of postoperative analgesia for soft tissue surgeries, but results in short-lived analgesia. A novel bupivacaine implant, XARACOLL (bupivacaine HCl), is Food and Drug Administration approved for treatment of acute postsurgical pain following adult inguinal herniorrhaphy. This study examined the efficacy and safety of the bupivacaine implant (300 mg) compared with placebo for postsurgical pain after abdominoplasty. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients undergoing abdominoplasty were randomized to three 100 mg bupivacaine implants or three placebo collagen implants, in a 1:1 ratio, implanted intraoperatively. No other analgesics were administered into the surgical site. Patients were allowed opioids and acetaminophen for postoperative pain. Patients were followed for up to 30 days after treatment. PRIMARY OUTCOME: the analgesic effect of the bupivacaine implants through 24 hours postsurgery, measured by the sum of time-weighted pain intensity (SPI24). Prespecified key secondary outcomes included SPI48 and SPI72, percentage of opioid-free patients through 24, 48, and 72 hours, and adverse events, which were tested sequentially to control for multiplicity (ie, if the first variable failed to reach significance, no subsequent variables were declared statistically significant). RESULTS: The bupivacaine implant patients (n=181) reported statistically significant lower SPI24 (mean (SD) SPI24=102 (43), 95% CI 95 to 109) compared with placebo patients (n=184; SPI24=117 (45), 95% CI 111 to 123, p=0.002). SPI48 was 190 (88, 95% CI 177 to 204) for INL-001 and 206 (96, 95% CI 192 to 219) for placebo, and not significantly different between groups. The subsequent secondary variables were therefore declared not statistically significant. SPI72 was 265 (131, 95% CI 244 to 285) for INL-001 and 281 (146, 95% CI 261 to 301) for placebo. The opioid-free percentage of patients at 24, 48, and 72 hours was 19%, 17%, and 17% for INL-001 and 6.5% for placebo patients (at all timepoints). The only adverse event occurring in ≥5% of patients and for which proportion INL-001 >placebo was back pain (7.7% vs 7.6%). CONCLUSION: The study design was limited by not containing an active comparator. Compared with placebo, INL-001 provides postoperative analgesia that is temporally aligned with the period of maximal postsurgical pain in abdominoplasty and offers a favorable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04785625.

Optimizing and Accelerating the Development of Precision Pain Treatments for Chronic Pain: IMMPACT Review and Recommendations.

Large variability in the individual response to even the most-efficacious pain treatments is observed clinically, which has led to calls for a more personalized, tailored approach to treating patients with pain (ie, "precision pain medicine"). Precision pain medicine, currently an aspirational goal, would consist of empirically based algorithms that determine the optimal treatments, or treatment combinations, for specific patients (ie, targeting the right treatment, in the right dose, to the right patient, at the right time). Answering this question of "what works for whom" will certainly improve the clinical care of patients with pain. It may also support the success of novel drug development in pain, making it easier to identify novel treatments that work for certain patients and more accurately identify the magnitude of the treatment effect for those subgroups. Significant preliminary work has been done in this area, and analgesic trials are beginning to utilize precision pain medicine approaches such as stratified allocation on the basis of prespecified patient phenotypes using assessment methodologies such as quantitative sensory testing. Current major challenges within the field include: 1) identifying optimal measurement approaches to assessing patient characteristics that are most robustly and consistently predictive of inter-patient variation in specific analgesic treatment outcomes, 2) designing clinical trials that can identify treatment-by-phenotype interactions, and 3) selecting the most promising therapeutics to be tested in this way. This review surveys the current state of precision pain medicine, with a focus on drug treatments (which have been most-studied in a precision pain medicine context). It further presents a set of evidence-based recommendations for accelerating the application of precision pain methods in chronic pain research. PERSPECTIVE: Given the considerable variability in treatment outcomes for chronic pain, progress in precision pain treatment is critical for the field. An array of phenotypes and mechanisms contribute to chronic pain; this review summarizes current knowledge regarding which treatments are most effective for patients with specific biopsychosocial characteristics.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of INL-001 (Bupivacaine HCl) Implants Compared with Bupivacaine HCl Infiltration After Open Unilateral Inguinal Hernioplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine HCl results in short-lived analgesia for postsurgical pain and carries the risk of systemic bupivacaine toxicity due to accidental intravascular injection. INL-001 is a bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implant that provides extended delivery of bupivacaine directly at the site and avoids the risk of accidental injection. Here, we examine the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profile of INL-001 placement during unilateral open inguinal hernioplasty. METHODS: This multicenter, single-blind study (NCT03234374) enrolled patients undergoing open inguinal hernioplasty to receive three INL-001 implants, each containing 100 mg bupivacaine HCl (n = 34) or local infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine HCl 175 mg (n = 16). Acetaminophen was provided in the postsurgical period and supplemented by opioids for breakthrough pain, as needed. PK blood samples were taken before surgery and up to 96 h after drug administration. RESULTS: INL-001 demonstrated a prolonged rate of absorption and clearance of bupivacaine compared with 0.25% bupivacaine HCl 175 mg, as demonstrated by a longer time to peak plasma concentration and terminal elimination half-life. Peak plasma concentration with INL-001 300 mg was comparable to bupivacaine HCl 175 mg and well below levels associated with systemic bupivacaine toxicity. The most common adverse events (AEs) in both groups were associated with general anesthesia and the postsurgical setting. No AE was related to the implant, including those associated with wound healing. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that INL-001 provides immediate and extended delivery of bupivacaine and is well tolerated in patients undergoing open inguinal hernioplasty with no adverse effect on wound healing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT03234374.

Improving Study Conduct and Data Quality in Clinical Trials of Chronic Pain Treatments: IMMPACT Recommendations.

The estimated probability of progressing from phase 3 analgesic clinical trials to regulatory approval is approximately 57%, suggesting that a considerable number of treatments with phase 2 trial results deemed sufficiently successful to progress to phase 3 do not yield positive phase 3 results. Deficiencies in the quality of clinical trial conduct could account for some of this failure. An Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials meeting was convened to identify potential areas for improvement in trial conduct in order to improve assay sensitivity (ie, ability of trials to detect a true treatment effect). We present recommendations based on presentations and discussions at the meeting, literature reviews, and iterative revisions of this article. The recommendations relate to the following areas: 1) study design (ie, to promote feasibility), 2) site selection and staff training, 3) participant selection and training, 4) treatment adherence, 5) data collection, and 6) data and study monitoring. Implementation of these recommendations may improve the quality of clinical trial data and thus the validity and assay sensitivity of clinical trials. Future research regarding the effects of these strategies will help identify the most efficient use of resources for conducting high quality clinical trials. PERSPECTIVE: Every effort should be made to optimize the quality of clinical trial data. This manuscript discusses considerations to improve conduct of pain clinical trials based on research in multiple medical fields and the expert consensus of pain researchers and stakeholders from academia, regulatory agencies, and industry.

Safety and Efficacy of Bupivacaine HCl Collagen-Matrix Implant (INL-001) in Open Inguinal Hernia Repair: Results from Two Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infiltration with bupivacaine results in short-lived analgesia. The MATRIX-1 and MATRIX-2 studies examined the efficacy and safety of the bioresorbable bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implant (INL-001) for postsurgical pain after open inguinal hernia repair. INL-001, designed to provide early and extended delivery of bupivacaine, provides prolonged duration of perioperative analgesia. METHODS: In two phase 3 double-blind studies [MATRIX-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02523599) and MATRIX-2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02525133)], patients undergoing open tension-free mesh inguinal hernia repair were randomized to receive 300-mg bupivacaine (three INL-001 100-mg bupivacaine HCl collagen-matrix implants) (MATRIX-1 n = 204; MATRIX-2 n = 213) or three placebo collagen-matrix implants (MATRIX-1 n = 101; MATRIX-2 n = 106) during surgery. Postsurgical medication included scheduled acetaminophen and as-needed opioids. RESULTS: Patients who received INL-001 in both studies reported statistically significantly lower pain intensity (P ≤ 0.004; primary end point) and opioid analgesic use (P < 0.0001) through 24-h post-surgery versus those who received a placebo collagen-matrix. Patients who received INL-001 reported lower pain intensity through 72 h (P = 0.0441) for the two pooled studies. In both studies, more of the patients (28-42%) who received INL-001 used no opioid medication 0-24, 0-48, and 0-72 h post-surgery versus those who received a placebo collagen-matrix (12-22%). Among patients who needed opioid medication, patients receiving INL-001 used fewer opioids than those who received a placebo collagen-matrix through 24 h in both studies (P < 0.0001) and through 48 h in MATRIX-2 (P = 0.0003). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, without evidence of bupivacaine toxicity or deleterious effects on wound healing. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that INL-001 results in post-inguinal hernia repair analgesia that is temporally aligned with the period of maximal postsurgical pain and may reduce the need for opioids while offering a favorable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT02523599; NCT02525133. FUNDING: Innocoll Pharmaceuticals. Plain language summary available for this article.

The natural history of prescription opioid abuse: A pilot study exploring change in routes of administration and motivation for changes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this retrospective, observational pilot study was to explore change in route of administration (RoA) and motivation for changing RoA during the course of opioid abuse. DESIGN: This retrospective pilot study involved collecting and analyzing semistructured interview data. SETTING: Interviews were conducted with patients undergoing outpatient substance abuse treatment at a buprenorphine clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adult patients (50 percent male) participated in the interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Interview data were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed to evaluate trends and motivations for changing RoA. RESULTS: In this sample, RoA varied over time. Most patients (75.0 percent) began abusing prescription opioids by swallowing intact pills, and 53.3 percent of patients eventually progressed to chewing. All patients who initiated abuse through chewing or insufflation (ie, intranasal use) progressed to injection. However, several patients (20.0 percent) did not exhibit a linear progression from RoAs with lesser to greater risk for serious adverse events. Of the eight motivations for changing RoA identified in the current study, the most frequently cited (38.2 percent) motivation was to achieve a desired effect (eg, euphoria). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study is one of the first to investigate natural history of RoA in prescription opioid abuse and motivations for changing RoA. Results suggest that a defined pathway of RoA progression may not exist, and that achieving a desired effect is a common motivation for changing RoA. Although these findings need to be replicated in a larger sample, this research may help support the development of opioid risk mitigation strategies.

Clinical relevance of the pharmacokinetic characteristics of an abuse-deterrent, extended-release, injection-molded morphine tablet.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) and in vitro alcohol dissolution characteristics of extended-release (ER), injection-molded (IM) morphine tablets with abuse-deterrent (AD) features (morphine-ADER-IMT). DESIGN: In vivo, in vitro, and in silico studies were conducted. A randomized, two-cohort study evaluated the bioequivalence of morphine-ADER-IMT (60 mg) to morphine ER (60 mg; MS Contin®; Purdue Pharma LP, Stamford, CT) and characterized the effect of food on the PK profile of morphine-ADER-IMT. A three-treatment, three-period crossover study assessed the bioequivalence of morphine-ADER-IMT (30 and 2 ȕ 15 mg) to morphine ER (30 mg). Bioequivalence studies were performed in healthy male and female subjects (18-55 y of age) in the presence of naltrexone blockade. PK modeling was performed to assess steady-state bioequivalence for morphine-ADER-IMT 60 mg compared with morphine ER 60 mg. In vitro alcohol dissolution studies were performed with morphine-ADER-IMT (15 and 60 mg). RESULTS: Fifty-nine and 56 subjects completed the 60-mg bioequivalence/food effect study and 30-mg bioequivalence study, respectively. Bioequivalence of morphine-ADER-IMT 60, 30, and 2 ȕ 15 mg and morphine ER was demonstrated to comparable doses of morphine ER. No clinically significant food effect was observed with morphine-ADER-IMT. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar among all treatment groups. Steady-state modeling indicated bioequivalence between morphine-ADER-IMT 60 mg and morphine ER 60 mg when administered every 8 or 12 hours. No evidence of alcohol dose-dumping was observed with morphine-ADER-IMT. CONCLUSIONS: Morphine-ADER-IMT, an ER morphine formulation with robust AD features, has a clinical PK profile that is well suited for patients with chronic pain.

Current and future development of extended-release, abuse-deterrent opioid formulations in the United States.

Prescription opioid misuse and abuse in the United States (US) is epidemic and is a major burden on health-care resources and costs to society. The need to significantly reduce the risks of prescription opioid misuse and abuse must be balanced with the important needs of patients with chronic pain who may benefit from treatment with opioids. The use of abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs) of prescription opioids is one approach that could reduce the risk of prescription opioid abuse and misuse while maintaining access to opioids. ADF opioids have properties that make their abuse more difficult, less attractive, or less rewarding. In 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration issued final guidance to industry for the development of ADF opioids that recommended specific studies be conducted to demonstrate the abuse-deterrent properties of new opioid formulations. The technologies and the preclinical and clinical development of ADF opioids are rapidly evolving. This review provides an overview of the required testing for product labeling that includes language about the abuse-deterrent features of an ADF opioid. The objective of this review is to inform and help health-care providers understand the unique development of extended-release ADF opioids and their place in the treatment of patients with pain.

Effect size comparison of ketorolac nasal spray and commonly prescribed oral combination opioids for pain relief after third molar extraction surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Opioids are frequently used for treatment of moderate to severe short-term pain, but concerns exist about this treatment approach. Ketorolac tromethamine nasal spray, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory, is indicated for the short-term management of moderate to moderately severe pain requiring analgesia at the opioid level. However, there are no direct comparison studies between ketorolac nasal spray and opioids. The objective of this study was to use an effect size analysis to compare the effectiveness of ketorolac nasal spray with oral combination opioid formulations in treating moderate to severe short-term pain. METHODS: An effect size analysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of third molar extraction surgery compared pain relief with ketorolac nasal spray and commonly prescribed combination opioids including hydrocodone/acetaminophen (APAP), oxycodone/APAP, oxycodone/ibuprofen and tramadol HCl/APAP. Effect size comparisons were made using total pain relief scores (TOTPAR6 or TOTPAR8; the weighted sum of pain relief scores through 6 or 8 h). Pain relief was measured using a five-point categorical rating scale (0 = none; 4 = complete). The effect size equivalent correlation, r, was determined using an online effect size calculator. The treatment effect size r compared with placebo was classified using established criteria (small = 0.20-0.49, moderate = 0.50-0.79 and large = ≥ 0.80). RESULTS: TOTPAR6 data indicated a moderate effect size for ketorolac nasal spray 31.5 mg (0.51) and oxycodone/ibuprofen 5/400 mg (0.64) and a small effect size for hydrocodone/APAP 7.5/500 mg (0.24) and oxycodone/APAP 5/325 mg (0.32). TOTPAR8 data indicated small effect sizes for ketorolac nasal spray (0.48), hydrocodone/APAP 10/650 mg (0.43), tramadol HCl/APAP 75/650 mg (0.35) and tramadol HCl/APAP 37.5/325 mg (0.17). CONCLUSION: The treatment effect sizes of ketorolac nasal spray were similar to or higher than the opioid comparators after third molar surgery, a well-accepted pain model. These results support ketorolac nasal spray as an effective treatment for moderate to moderately severe short-term pain.

ADHD burden of illness in older adults: a life course perspective.

PURPOSE: To explore the burden of illness and impact on patients' quality of life (QoL) experiences in older ADHD adults. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with older adult participants diagnosed with ADHD later in life. Transcripts were analyzed following a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Mean age of participants (N = 24) was 66 years, and mean age at diagnosis was 57 years; 68% were men and 63% reported other comorbid mental health conditions. ADHD symptoms reported were inattention (71%), impulsivity (58%), hyperactivity (54%), and disorganization (54%). The majority of participants (63%) experienced an accumulated lifetime burden of illness and reported being financially less-well-off, had lower educational achievement, job performance, and greater social isolation due to their ADHD. Older adults reported significantly greater impairments in productivity (P ≤ 0.02) and a better life outlook (P ≤ 0.05) than younger ADHD adults. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults' QoL suffers from the accumulative negative impact of ADHD symptoms/impairments on their professional, economic, social, and emotional well-being.

Short-term effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on cardiovascular parameters in a 4-week clinical trial in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term impact of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on cardiovascular parameters in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: Medically healthy adults (18-55 years of age) with DSM-IV-TR-defined ADHD were randomly assigned to placebo or 30, 50, or 70 mg/d of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate for 4 weeks between May and November 2006. Electrocardiograms, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and pulse were assessed pretreatment and weekly thereafter. RESULTS: There were no significant differences for mean systolic or diastolic blood pressure in any lisdexamfetamine dimesylate dose group versus placebo. Changes in pulse from baseline to endpoint were 0.0, 2.8, 4.2, and 5.2 bpm in the placebo and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate 30, 50, and 70 mg/d groups, respectively (P < .05, all lisdexamfetamine dimesylate groups vs placebo). Post hoc pulse outliers (pulse > or = 100 bpm; any 1 event) ranged from 3.3% to 8.5% of subjects in the lisdexamfetamine dimesylate groups, and no subjects in the placebo group were pulse outliers (P < .05 for lisdexamfetamine dimesylate 50 mg vs placebo only). There were no clinically meaningful electrocardiogram abnormalities. Overall, 8.3% (35/420; safety population) of subjects had treatment-emergent cardiovascular adverse events, and 1.7% (7/420) withdrew from the study because of cardiovascular complaints. Cardiovascular adverse events with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in these medically healthy adults were generally mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate had limited short-term effects on heart rate, blood pressure, and electrocardiogram parameters that were of minimal clinical concern. These findings support the relative safety of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. However, considering the potential of outliers, it is advisable to monitor cardiovascular parameters in stimulant-treated patients. Interpretation of these findings is limited to patients with no preexisting cardiac conditions who are taking their medication as prescribed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00334880.

Effects of armodafinil in the treatment of residual excessive sleepiness associated with obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome: a 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in nCPAP-adherent adults.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome (OSA/HS) experience excessive sleepiness (ES) that might not resolve with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of armodafinil 150 or 250 mg QD when used as adjunctive treatment for residual ES associated with OSA/HS in patients who are adherent to nCPAP therapy. METHODS: This 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted at 37 centers in the United States and Canada. Male and female patients aged 18 to 65 years with residual ES associated with OSA/HS were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive armodafinil 150 or 250 mg or placebo PO QD for 12 weeks. Assessments were conducted at baseline and study weeks 4, 8, and 12 and included the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) to determine wakefulness, the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) to determine improvement in clinical condition, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) to determine patient-estimated wakefulness, the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) to determine global fatigue, and the Cognitive Drug Research computerized assessment battery. To distinguish between earlier and later effects, sleep latencies, assessed using the MWT, were averaged across the first 4 (9 and 11 AM, and 1 and 3 PM) and last 3 (3, 5, and 7 PM) tests. Tolerability assessments included monitoring of adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory tests, vital sign measurements, and electrocardiography. RESULTS: A total of 395 patients were enrolled in the study (armodafinil 150 mg/d, 133; armodafinil 250 mg/d, 131; placebo, 131); 392 received >or=1 dose of study drug (armodafinil 150 mg/d, 131; armodafinil 250 mg/d, 131; placebo, 130). The armodafinil and placebo groups were well matched with regard to age (mean [SD], 49.2 [8.9] vs 50.1 [9.4] years), sex (71 vs 69% men), race (84% vs 87% white), and body weight (mean [SD], 110.3 [24.9] vs 111.9 [24.0] kg). At the final visit, the mean (SD) change from baseline in MWT sleep latency across the morning and afternoon was significantly greater in the armodafinil combined group compared with the placebo group (+1.9 [7.3] vs 1.7 [8.6] minutes; P < 0.001). Also at the final visit, the proportions of patients who showed at least minimal improvement on the CGI-C, and the mean (SD) changes from baseline in ESS and BFI scores, were significantly greater in the armodafinil group compared with those in the placebo group (72% vs 37%, -5.5 [5.0] vs -3.3 [4.7], and -1.2 [2.2] vs -0.6 [2.0], respectively; P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P < 0.01, respectively). No significant effects on nighttime sleep, as assessed using polysomnography, were found with armodafinil. AEs reported in the armodafinil combined and placebo groups were headache, nausea, insomnia, anxiety, and dizziness. Serious AEs (ulcerative colitis, migraine, worsening of Axis II and mood disorder, and duodenal ulcer) were reported in 4 (1.5%) patients receiving armodafinil and were considered by the investigator not or unlikely to be drug related. CONCLUSIONS: In this selected population of patients with OSA/HS and residual ES despite effective treatment with nCPAP, armodafinil QD used as an adjunct to nCPAP treatment was associated with improved wakefulness and overall clinical condition. Clinical benefit was shown at the first assessment and maintained for the 12-week duration of the study. Armodafinil was also associated with significantly reduced interference of ES with daily activities and global fatigue. Armodafinil was well tolerated, with no adverse effect on nighttime sleep or nCPAP use.

The efficacy and safety of armodafinil as treatment for adults with excessive sleepiness associated with narcolepsy.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of armodafinil, the longer half-life enantiomer of modafinil, for the treatment of excessive sleepiness in patients with narcolepsy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter double-blind study with 196 patients (aged 18-65 years) randomized to receive armodafinil 150 mg (n = 65), armodafinil 250 mg (n = 67), or placebo (n = 64) once daily for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy was assessed using the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) (six 20-min subtests across the day), the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), subjective measures of sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale), patient diaries, and evaluations of cognitive performance (Cognitive Drug Research) and fatigue (Brief Fatigue Inventory). RESULTS: Armodafinil significantly increased MWT mean sleep latency (at 0900-1500) compared with placebo. The mean change from baseline at final visit for armodafinil was an increase of 1.3, 2.6, and 1.9 min in the 150-mg, 250-mg, and combined groups, respectively, compared with a decrease of 1.9 min for placebo (p < 0.01 for all three comparisons). Mean late-day MWT latency (1500-1900) was also significantly improved (difference of armodafinil combined group relative to placebo at final visit: 2.8 min, p = 0.0358). The proportions of patients who showed at least minimal improvement in the CGIC rating from baseline to final visit in the armodafinil 150-mg, 250-mg, and combined groups were 69%, 73%, and 71%, respectively, compared with 33% for placebo (p < 0.0001). Both doses were associated with statistically significant improvements in memory, attention, and fatigue (p < 0.05). The most common adverse events in patients receiving armodafinil were headache, nausea, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: Armodafinil significantly improved ability to sustain wakefulness throughout the day in patients with narcolepsy. Armodafinil also significantly improved overall clinical condition, memory, attention, and fatigue when compared with placebo.

Pharmacodynamic effects on alertness of single doses of armodafinil in healthy subjects during a nocturnal period of acute sleep loss.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the pharmacodynamics of armodafinil compared with modafinil and placebo on measures of alertness in healthy volunteers undergoing sleep loss. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, 107 healthy male volunteers (aged 18-40 years) were randomized to receive a single oral dose of armodafinil (100, 150, 200, or 300 mg), modafinil (200 mg), or placebo administered at 19:25 h. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT), administered every 2 hours from 22:00-08:00 h. Secondary outcomes included the Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) and the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected hourly. Adverse events were evaluated throughout the 2-day laboratory stay and by telephone on day 9. RESULTS: All four doses of armodafinil, and the dose of 200 mg modafinil, improved wakefulness as measured by increased MWT latencies (treatment effect, p < 0.0001) and reduced PVT lapses of attention (treatment effect, p < 0.0001). The magnitude and duration of these effects at the later time points appeared to be dose and concentration dependent. Armodafinil at 200 mg resulted in comparable C(max), a later t(max), and higher plasma concentrations 6-14 hours post-drug administration than with 200 mg modafinil. Following armodafinil, longer MWT latencies and fewer PVT lapses 6 to approximately 14 hours post-drug administration were observed compared with modafinil. Armodafinil doses were well tolerated, with the most common adverse events including abdominal pain, nausea, and headache. There were reports of tachycardia/palpitations. Decreased mean sleep efficiency and increased mean blood pressure were also observed. CONCLUSION: Armodafinil improved alertness at all doses studied. Relative to modafinil 200 mg, armodafinil 200 mg showed a comparable peak plasma concentration with higher concentrations 6-14 hours post-drug, and improved wakefulness and sustained attention for a longer time post-dose. Both drugs were well tolerated; however, further research on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of armodafinil in patients with disorders of excessive sleepiness (ES) is required.

Modafinil for excessive sleepiness associated with shift-work sleep disorder.

BACKGROUND: Patients with shift-work sleep disorder chronically have excessive sleepiness during night work and insomnia when attempting to sleep during the day. We evaluated the use of modafinil for treating sleepiness in patients with this disorder. METHODS: In a three-month, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 209 patients with shift-work sleep disorder to receive either 200 mg of modafinil or placebo before the start of each shift. Assessments were performed with the use of the nighttime Multiple Sleep Latency Test, the Clinical Global Impression of Change, the Psychomotor Vigilance Test, diaries of patients, and daytime polysomnography. After randomization, we conducted monthly assessments. RESULTS: Treatment with modafinil, as compared with placebo, resulted in a modest improvement from baseline in mean (+/-SEM) nighttime sleep latency (the interval between the time a person attempts to fall asleep and the onset of sleep) (1.7+/-0.4 vs. 0.3+/-0.3 minutes, respectively; P=0.002), and more patients had improvement in their clinical symptoms (74 percent vs. 36 percent, respectively; P<0.001). Patients who were receiving modafinil also had a reduction in the frequency and duration of lapses of attention during nighttime testing of their performance on the Psychomotor Vigilance Test (change from baseline, a reduction in lapse frequency of 2.6 vs. an increase of 3.8, respectively; P<0.001), and proportionally fewer patients reported having had accidents or near accidents while commuting home (29 percent vs. 54 percent, respectively; P<0.001). Despite these benefits, patients treated with modafinil continued to have excessive sleepiness and impaired performance at night. Modafinil did not adversely affect daytime sleep as compared with placebo. Headache was the most common adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with 200 mg of modafinil reduced the extreme sleepiness that we observed in patients with shift-work sleep disorder and resulted in a small but significant improvement in performance as compared with placebo. However, the residual sleepiness that was observed in the treated patients underscores the need for the development of interventions that are even more effective.