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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of lemborexant for treating insomnia in Japan: a model-based projection, incorporating the risk of falls, motor vehicle collisions, and workplace accidents.

BACKGROUND: Lemborexant has demonstrated statistically significant improvements in sleep onset and sleep maintenance compared with placebo and zolpidem tartrate extended release, measured both objectively using polysomnography and subjectively using sleep diaries, in the phase 3 clinical trial SUNRISE 1. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of lemborexant compared with suvorexant, zolpidem immediate release (IR), and untreated insomnia. METHODS: A decision-tree model was developed for falls, motor vehicle collisions, and workplace accidents associated with insomnia and insomnia treatments from a Japanese healthcare perspective and with a 6-month time horizon. The model extracted subjective sleep onset latency treatment responses and disutility values for non-responders from SUNRISE 1. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the impact of parameter uncertainty on the results. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the mean estimated QALYs for lemborexant, suvorexant, zolpidem-IR, and untreated insomnia were 0.4220, 0.4204, 0.4113, and 0.4163, and expected medical costs were JPY 34 034, JPY 38 371, JPY 38 139, and JPY 15 383, respectively. Lemborexant saved JPY 4337 and JPY 4105 compared with suvorexant or zolpidem-IR, respectively, while conferring QALY benefits. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of lemborexant compared with that of untreated insomnia was JPY 3 220 975 /QALY. Lemborexant was dominant over suvorexant and zolpidem-IR and was cost-effective when compared with untreated insomnia. Sensitivity analyses supported the results' robustness. CONCLUSIONS: In a Japanese clinical practice setting, lemborexant may represent a better investment for treating insomnia in the healthcare system in Japan.

Acute Cognitive Effects of the Dual Orexin Receptor Antagonist Lemborexant Compared With Suvorexant and Zolpidem in Recreational Sedative Users.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: As part of a human abuse potential (HAP) study of lemborexant (LEM), the effects of therapeutic (LEM 10 mg), and supratherapeutic doses of LEM 20 mg and LEM 30 mg on cognition and psychomotor performance were compared with placebo (PBO) and supratherapeutic doses of zolpidem (ZOL) 30 mg and suvorexant (SUV) 40 mg. Subjects (n = 32) were healthy, nondependent, recreational sedative users able to discriminate the effects of both SUV and ZOL from PBO on subjective drug measures. METHODS/PROCEDURES: The human abuse potential study was a single-dose, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled, 6-way crossover study. Eligible subjects admitted to the treatment phase completed the choice reaction test (CRT) and divided attention test. The CRT included measurements of recognition reaction time (RRT) and motor reaction time. FINDINGS/RESULTS: Recognition reaction time and mean maximum change from baseline (CFB max ) scores were significantly increased (slower performance) versus PBO for all LEM doses (all P < 0.001), ZOL ( P < 0.001), and SUV ( P = 0.004), and LEM (all doses) was not statistically different from ZOL or SUV. Motor reaction time and mean CFB max versus PBO were significantly increased for all LEM doses (all P < 0.001), and ZOL ( P < 0.001) and SUV ( P < 0.001). All LEM doses showed significantly decreased (better performance) mean CFB max versus ZOL (all P < 0.001), but not SUV. Notably, all cognitive effects in the CRT and divided attention test were limited to the main treatment phase (up to 8 hours postdose). IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: All active doses of LEM, ZOL, and SUV generally increased reaction time and reduced divided attention capabilities versus PBO. However, at therapeutic/supratherapeutic doses, LEM led to significantly less cognitive impairment than supratherapeutic doses of ZOL in some measures.

Abuse Potential of Lemborexant, a Dual Orexin Receptor Antagonist, Compared With Zolpidem and Suvorexant in Recreational Sedative Users.

BACKGROUND: Lemborexant (LEM) is a dual orexin receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of insomnia in adults in multiple countries including the the United States, Japan, Canada, Australia and several Asian countries. PROCEDURES: This was a randomized, single-dose, single-center, double-blind, active-control, 6-way crossover study to evaluate LEM abuse potential. The study assessed oral doses of LEM 10 mg (LEM10), 20 mg (LEM20), and 30 mg (LEM30) compared with placebo (PBO), zolpidem (ZOL) immediate release 30 mg, and suvorexant (SUV) 40 mg. Subjects were healthy, nondependent, recreational sedative users able to discriminate/like the effects of both SUV and ZOL from PBO during a qualification phase. RESULTS: Abuse potential endpoints were analyzed in qualified subjects who received and completed all treatments (n = 32). On the "at this moment" drug-liking visual analog scale (VAS), mean maximum (peak) effect (primary endpoint) values were 78.4, 80.5, and 83.6 for LEM10, LEM20, and LEM30, respectively, which were all significantly greater than PBO (57.8; all P > 0.05) but not different from SUV (76.1) or ZOL (78.3). Similarly, for secondary endpoints overall drug-liking VAS and take-drug-again VAS, mean maximum (peak) effect values for all LEM doses were significantly greater than PBO ( P > 0.05) but not different compared with ZOL or SUV. CONCLUSIONS: For all doses, LEM demonstrated abuse potential versus PBO and appeared to have a similar abuse potential profile to ZOL and SUV in this study population. Lemborexant was well tolerated. Lemborexant has been placed in Schedule IV, the same drug schedule as ZOL and SUV.

Nonclinical evaluation of abuse liability of the dual orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant.

Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) approved in multiple countries including the United States, Japan, Canada and Australia for the treatment of adults with insomnia. As required for marketing approval of new compounds with central nervous system activity with sedating effects, the abuse potential of lemborexant was assessed in accordance with regulatory guidelines, which included three nonclinical studies. These assessments comprised physical dependence and drug discrimination studies in rats and a self-administration study in rhesus monkeys. There was no evidence of withdrawal signs following abrupt drug discontinuation, indicating that lemborexant does not induce physical dependence. In the drug discrimination study, lemborexant at doses up to 1000 mg/kg administered orally did not cross-generalize to the zolpidem training stimulus, although another DORA included in the same experiment, suvorexant, showed partial generalization with zolpidem. In rhesus monkeys, lemborexant treatment did not induce any gross behavioral changes, and there was no increase in self-administration rates compared with control, indicative of a lack of reinforcing effects of lemborexant. Collectively, these nonclinical studies support the position that lemborexant, which has been placed in Schedule IV by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration, has a low risk of abuse in humans.

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.

Gender influences on efficacy and safety of sublingual zolpidem tartrate for middle-of-the-night awakening in insomnia.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate potential gender effects on efficacy and safety of a buffered zolpidem sublingual tablet (ZST) formulation. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the pivotal sleep laboratory and outpatient studies, per gender. RESULTS: In the sleep laboratory study, polysomnography-derived latency to persistent sleep after middle-of-the-night was significantly improved for both genders at both 1.75 mg and 3.5 mg ZST (females: 15.7 and 8.6 min, respectively, vs. 27.7 min [placebo]; males: 19.0 and 12.7 min vs. 29.0 min [placebo]) with no significant gender differences. In the outpatient study, subjective sleep onset latency after middle-of-the-night was significantly shorter for both genders treated with ZST 3.5 mg versus placebo over the 4-week average (females: 37.3 vs. 59.4 min, p < 0.0001; males: 38.6 vs. 55.1 min, p ≤ 0.01). There were no gender differences in subjective sleep onset latency after middle-of-the-night awakening. In the outpatient study, weekly usage of ZST and placebo by both genders declined throughout the study. Morning alertness following dosing nights improved in both genders, although significant only in females. In both studies, there were no gender differences in adverse events. CONCLUSION(S): Time to return to sleep after middle-of-the-night dosing with ZST improved in both genders, with no gender differences in efficacy and safety.

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.

Efficacy of Lemborexant in Adults ≥ 65 Years of Age with Insomnia Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic treatments are available to treat insomnia, a common and burdensome sleep disorder, but may be contraindicated in older adults who are prone to side effects from sleep-promoting drugs. These analyses of sleep diary data from Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303) investigated the benefits of lemborexant 5 mg (LEM5) and 10 mg (LEM10) in the subgroup age ≥ 65 years with insomnia. METHOD: Study 303, a 12-month, double-blind study of LEM5 and LEM10 in adults (age ≥ 18 years) with insomnia disorder (sleep onset and/or maintenance difficulties) assessed subject-reported (subjective) sleep-onset latency (sSOL), sleep efficiency (sSE), wake after sleep onset (sWASO), and total sleep time (sTST). Morning sleepiness/alertness, insomnia severity (Insomnia Severity Index [ISI]), fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale [FSS]), perceptions of sleep-related medication effects (Patient Global Impression-Insomnia [PGI-I] questionnaire), and safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: In this subgroup of older adults (≥ 65 years; n = 262), there were significantly larger changes from baseline for sSOL, sSE, sTST, and sWASO with LEM5 and LEM10 versus placebo through month 6 (except sWASO month 1), indicating improvement; these improvements were sustained through month 12. Subject-reported increases in morning alertness were significantly greater with one or both LEM doses versus placebo through month 6 and sustained through month 12. There were significantly larger ISI total and daytime functioning score decreases (improvement) from baseline with LEM versus placebo at months 1, 3, and 6 (total score: both doses; daytime functioning: LEM5 month 1 and both doses months 3 and 6) and decreases from baseline FSS at months 1 and 3 (LEM5) and month 6 (both doses), sustained to month 12. Compared with placebo, more subjects reported that LEM (both doses) positively impacted ability to sleep, time to fall asleep, and TST through month 6, sustained to month 12, with no rebound after drug withdrawal. LEM was well tolerated to month 12; mild somnolence was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in subject-reported efficacy in LEM-treated adults age ≥ 65 years with insomnia were observed as early as the first week of treatment and sustained through end of month 12. LEM was well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02952820: E2006-G000-303; Study 303; SUNRISE-2 (First posted: October 2016); EudraCT 2015-001463-39 (First posted: November 2016).

Insomnia is a common sleep disorder associated with significant difficulties, particularly in older adults. Although there are many drug treatments available, some are associated with the important risk of side effects and may not adequately treat sleep maintenance (ability to stay asleep), which is a frequent sleep complaint in older people. Lemborexant has been approved in multiple countries for the treatment of adults with insomnia based on studies that show lemborexant improved adults' ability to fall asleep and stay asleep and is well tolerated. To examine the long-term benefit of lemborexant, we investigated subject-reported benefits and safety of lemborexant in older (≥ 65 years) adults who participated in a 1-year study. The results showed that within the first few days of taking lemborexant, and lasting through 12 months of treatment, nightly lemborexant improved nighttime sleep (that is, it reduced the time it took to fall asleep, reduced the time awake during the night, and increased total sleep time) more than placebo. Morning alertness improved more in older adults who took lemborexant compared with placebo. In addition, those who took lemborexant also reported that their insomnia symptoms were less severe and they had less fatigue compared with placebo. Lemborexant was well tolerated in older adults. These results suggest that lemborexant may be a good option for older adults with insomnia disorder.

Transitioning insomnia patients from zolpidem to lemborexant: A multicenter, open-label study evaluating a next-dose transition approach to insomnia pharmacotherapy.

Objective: Few clinical studies have assessed real-world abrupt transitioning between insomnia medications. This study assessed strategies for directly transitioning patients from zolpidem tartrate (ZOL) immediate/extended release to the dual orexin receptor antagonist, lemborexant (LEM). Methods: This randomized, open-label, multicenter study (Study 312; E2006-A001-312) enrolled 53 adults age ≥18 years with insomnia disorder and ≥1-month history of intermittent (3-4 nights/week) or frequent (≥5 nights/week) ZOL use. Subjects recorded their ZOL use in a 3-week Pretreatment Phase, followed by a 2-week Treatment Phase (TRT; Titration) during which ZOL was discontinued. Intermittent ZOL users transitioned to LEM 5 mg (LEM5), Cohort 1, and frequent ZOL users were randomized 1:1 to LEM5, Cohort 2A, or LEM 10 mg (LEM10), Cohort 2B. One dose adjustment was permitted during the TRT. Subjects completing the TRT could continue LEM in the 12-week Extension Phase (EXT). The primary outcome was proportion of subjects who successfully transitioned and remained on LEM at the end of the TRT. Results: Most subjects (43 [81.1 %]) successfully transitioned to LEM (9 [90 %], 17 [81.0 %], and 17 [77.3 %] in Cohorts 1, 2A, and 2B, respectively). By the end of the EXT, 66.7 % in Cohort 1 and 60.0 % in Cohort 2A up-titrated to LEM10, whereas 41.2 % in Cohort 2B down-titrated to LEM5; 61.0 % were receiving LEM10 at study end. At the end of the TRT, more subjects taking LEM reported that it helped them return to sleep after waking, compared with those taking ZOL (71.7 % vs. 49.1 %). There were no important differences between treatments regarding how subjects reported feeling as they fell asleep. Most of the treatment-emergent adverse events with LEM were mild in severity. Conclusions: Most subjects transitioned successfully to LEM from ZOL (intermittent or frequent use). LEM was well tolerated.

Re-examining the factor structure of the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and defining the meaningful within-individual change (MWIC) for subjects with insomnia disorder in two phase III clinical trials of the efficacy of lemborexant.

BACKGROUND: The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) is a widely used measure of insomnia severity. Various ISI research findings suggest different factor solutions and meaningful within-individual change (MWIC) to detect treatment response in patients with insomnia. This study examined an ISI factor solution and psychometric indices to define MWIC in a robust patient sample from clinical trial settings. METHODS: We endeavored to improve upon previous validation of ISI by examining structural components of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models using two large, placebo-controlled clinical trials of lemborexant for insomnia. Using the best-fitting two-factor solution, we evaluated anchor-based, distribution-based and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve methods to derive an estimate of the MWIC. RESULTS: The model structure for the 7-item scale proposed in other research did not fit the observed data from our two lemborexant clinical trials (N = 1956) as well as a two-factor solution based on 6 items did. Using triangulation of anchor-based, distribution-based, and ROC methods, we determined that a 5-point reduction using 6 items best represented a clinically meaningful improvement in individuals with insomnia in our patient sample. CONCLUSIONS: A 6-item two-factor scale had better psychometric properties than the 7-item scale in this patient sample. On the 6-item scale, a reduction of 5 points in the ISI total score represented the MWIC. Generalizability of the proposed MWIC may be limited to patient populations with similar demographic and clinical characteristics.

Exposure-Response Analyses of Polysomnography and Subjective Sleep Efficacy End Points From the Phase 3 Trials of Lemborexant, a Dual Orexin Receptor Antagonist for the Treatment of Insomnia.

This report describes polysomnography and sleep diary exposure-response analyses from Study E2006-G000-304 (Study 304), a 1-month trial of 5- or 10-mg lemborexant, zolpidem, or placebo; and Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303), a 6-month trial of 5- or 10-mg lemborexant or placebo. Studies 304 and 303 included 1006 (86%) and 956 (68%) (female) participants, respectively; >40% were ≥65 years, with individual lemborexant exposures derived from a previously described pharmacokinetic model. Linear mixed-effects analyses of polysomnography: latency to persistent sleep (LPS), sleep efficiency (SE), and wake after sleep onset (WASO) quantified the change from baseline given lemborexant exposure, time, and covariates, guided by consensus recommendations regarding clinical significance. A small impact of sex, body weight, and race was predicted for LPS and SE, irrespective of treatment. Effect of age on LPS was small; baseline SE was estimated to be 8% higher for a 50-year-old versus an 80-year-old, decreasing to 6% by 1 month. Baseline WASO was 13 minutes longer for Black versus White subjects, corresponding to a 5-minute lower change from baseline at the end of the study. For subjective end points, the statistically significant covariate effects for age, sex, and race were not deemed therapeutically relevant, likely reflecting physiologic sleep pattern changes across age and study subgroups. Both polysomnography and subjective analyses indicated clinically meaningful differences from baseline for both lemborexant treatments, with effects being greater for 10-mg versus 5-mg lemborexant, while indicating that covariate-specific lemborexant dose adjustments are not warranted.

Effect of discontinuation of lemborexant following long-term treatment of insomnia disorder: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

Discontinuing long-term pharmacotherapy for insomnia can result in rebound insomnia or withdrawal symptoms and suboptimal treatment. Post hoc analyses evaluated rebound insomnia and withdrawal symptoms among the subset of subjects from a phase III, 12-month, global, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study who completed 12 or 6 months of active treatment and follow-up period. Study E2006-G000-303 (Study 303) included adults (N = 655) with subjective sleep-onset latency ≥30 min and/or subjective wake-after-sleep onset ≥60 min at least three times weekly during the 4 weeks before enrollment. Subjects were randomized 1:1:1 to lemborexant 5 mg (LEM5) or 10 mg (LEM10) or placebo for 6 months. Thereafter, for an additional 6 months, LEM5- and LEM10-treated subjects continued lemborexant and the placebo group was rerandomized 1:1 to LEM5 or LEM10. Month 12 was followed by abrupt discontinuation and a 2-week end-of-study follow-up. Using daily electronic sleep diaries, patients reported (subjective) sleep end points (sleep-onset latency, wake-after-sleep onset, sleep efficiency, and total sleep time). Withdrawal symptoms were assessed using the Tyrer Benzodiazepine Withdrawal Symptoms Questionnaire (T-BWSQ). Sleep outcome improvements with lemborexant at month 12 were generally maintained throughout the 2-week off-treatment period wherein <20% of subjects experienced significant worsening of insomnia symptoms versus screening. There was no evidence of withdrawal symptoms by T-BWSQ following lemborexant discontinuation. This analysis demonstrates rebound insomnia is unlikely to occur with lemborexant, and its effectiveness is maintained after abrupt discontinuation without placebo replacement following 6-12 months of treatment.

The abuse potential of lemborexant, a dual orexin receptor antagonist, according to the 8 factors of the Controlled Substances Act.

RATIONALE: Lemborexant (LEM) is a dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) approved in multiple countries including the USA, Japan, Canada, Australia, and several Asian countries for the treatment of insomnia in adults. As a compound with central nervous system activity, it is important to understand the abuse potential of LEM with respect to public health. OBJECTIVES: This review discusses data for LEM relevant to each of the 8 factors of the United States Controlled Substances Act. RESULTS: LEM did not demonstrate abuse potential in nonclinical testing and was associated with a low incidence of abuse-related adverse events in clinical study participants with insomnia disorder. Similar to other DORAs that have been evaluated (eg., almorexant, suvorexant (SUV), and daridorexant), LEM and the positive controls (zolpidem and SUV) also showed drug liking in a phase 1 abuse potential study that enrolled subjects who used sedatives recreationally. However, internet surveillance of SUV and the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System suggests that drugs in the DORA class display very low abuse-related risks in the community. Additionally, as described in FDA-approved labeling, it does not carry physical dependence and withdrawal risks. CONCLUSIONS: LEM, similar to most other prescription insomnia medications, was placed into Schedule IV. However, LEM and other drugs in the DORA class may have a lower potential for abuse as suggested by real-world postmarketing data from federal surveys and internet surveillance, and thus may have lower risks to public health than Schedule IV benzodiazepines and nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics that potentiate GABA signaling.

Comparison of the treatment effectiveness between lemborexant and zolpidem tartrate extended-release for insomnia disorder subtypes defined based on polysomnographic findings.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Patients with chronic insomnia may respond differently to therapeutic modalities. This study examined differences in response of individuals with 2 insomnia phenotypes-short sleep duration (I-SSD; < 6 hours) and normal sleep duration (I-NSD; ≥ 6 hours) determined by polysomnography-to treatment with lemborexant and zolpidem tartrate extended-release 6.25 mg (zolpidem ER), compared with placebo. METHODS: Study E2006-G000-304 (Study 304; SUNRISE-1; NCT02783729) was a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo, and active comparator-controlled, parallel-group study comparing lemborexant 5 and 10 mg in individuals aged ≥ 55 years with insomnia disorder. In this analysis, changes in subjective (self-reported) variables based on sleep diaries and objective variables based on polysomnographs were assessed after 1-month administration of study drugs. Data from participants with I-SSD and I-NSD were compared. RESULTS: In the I-SSD subgroup, both lemborexant doses provided significant benefit for sleep-onset latency (SOL), total sleep time (TST), and wake after sleep onset (WASO) vs placebo; zolpidem ER also provided significant benefit for TST and WASO, but not SOL, on both measures vs placebo. In the I-NSD subgroup, lemborexant and zolpidem ER provided significant benefit for TST and WASO vs placebo objectively but not subjectively; both doses of lemborexant provided significant benefit for SOL vs placebo subjectively, but not objectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both drugs, but lemborexant more consistently, showed subjective and objective benefits compared with placebo in participants with insomnia with objective short sleep duration. However, neither lemborexant nor zolpidem provided consistent benefits for participants with normal sleep duration on sleep-onset and sleep maintenance variables. 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/record/NCT02783729; Identifier: NCT02783729. CITATION: Inoue Y, Nishida M, Kubota N, et al. Comparison of the treatment effectiveness between lemborexant and zolpidem tartrate extended-release for insomnia disorder subtypes defined based on polysomnographic findings. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(3):519-528.

Efficacy and safety of lemborexant in subjects previously treated with placebo for 6 months in a randomized phase 3 study.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: To examine the effects of lemborexant (LEM) 5 mg (LEM5) or LEM 10 mg (LEM10) following extended placebo treatment. This post-hoc analysis used subject-reported sleep outcomes data from a phase 3 trial. PATIENTS/METHODS: The subjects in these post-hoc analyses were randomized to placebo for 6 months (Time Period [TP]1) in Study E2006-G000-303 (SUNRISE-2; NCT02952820). Following placebo exposure, subjects were re-randomized to LEM5 or LEM10 for another 6 months (TP2). Subject-reported sleep outcomes derived from sleep diaries included sleep onset latency (sSOL), wake after sleep onset (sWASO), sleep efficiency (sSE), and total sleep time (sTST). Magnitude and change rate in parameters were assessed for 7 days before/after initial randomization to placebo and 7 days before/after re-randomization to LEM (6 months later). Month 6 placebo non-responders were assessed for LEM response in TP2 using predetermined responder definitions. Safety was monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Overall, 321 subjects received placebo; 258 re-randomized subjects received LEM5 (n = 133) and LEM10 (n = 125). Subjective sleep outcomes improved during TP1 with approximately 62 subjects (∼20%) exhibiting a sustained placebo response. Upon re-randomization to LEM, all measures showed an additional incremental benefit, most prominently in sSOL and sTST. Among Month 6 placebo non-responders, 11%-15% subsequently responded to LEM as assessed at Month 12. The safety profile was similar between treatment periods and treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that even when insomnia symptoms have improved over time with placebo treatment, additional and sustained clinical gains in sleep outcomes are possible with active treatment using lemborexant.

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.

Donepezil in Parkinson's disease dementia: a randomized, double-blind efficacy and safety study.

Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) is associated with cholinergic deficits. This report presents an efficacy and safety study of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor donepezil hydrochloride in PDD. PDD patients (n = 550) were randomized to donepezil (5 or 10 mg) or placebo for 24 weeks. Coprimary end points were the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus caregiver input (CIBIC+; global function). Secondary end points measured executive function, attention, activities of daily living (ADLs), and behavioral symptoms. Safety and tolerability were assessed. ADAS-cog mean changes from baseline to week 24 (end point) were not significant for donepezil in the intent-to-treat population by the predefined statistical model (difference from placebo: -1.45, P = .050, for 5 mg; -1.45, P = .076, for 10 mg). Alternative ADAS-cog analysis, removing the treatment-by-country interaction term from the model, revealed significant, dose-dependent benefit with donepezil (difference from placebo: -2.08, P = .002, for 5 mg; -3.31, P < .001, for 10 mg). The 10-mg group, but not the 5-mg group, had significantly better CIBIC+ scores compared with placebo (3.7 vs 3.9, P = .113, for 5 mg; 3.6 vs 3.9, P = .040, for 10 mg). Secondary end points-Mini-Mental State Exam; Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; Brief Test of Attention, representing cognitive functions particularly relevant to PDD-showed significant benefit for both donepezil doses (P ≤ .007). There were no significant differences in ADLs or behavior. Adverse events were more common with donepezil but mostly mild/moderate in severity. Although the study did not achieve its predefined primary end points, it presents evidence suggesting that donepezil can improve cognition, executive function, and global status in PDD. Tolerability was consistent with the known safety profile of donepezil. © 2012 Movement Disorder Society.

Efficacy and safety of donepezil 23 mg versus donepezil 10 mg for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease: a subgroup analysis in patients already taking or not taking concomitant memantine.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A large multicenter trial of donepezil 23 mg/day versus donepezil 10 mg/day for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease allowed patients taking concomitant memantine. We evaluated the efficacy/safety of donepezil 23 and 10 mg/day in this trial, with respect to concomitant memantine use. METHODS: Prespecified analysis of data from a 24-week, randomized, double-blind trial. Patients were randomized to donepezil doses (23 vs. 10 mg/day) and stratified by concomitant memantine use (yes or no). Efficacy and safety were assessed for each donepezil dose in subgroups taking or not taking concomitant memantine. RESULTS: At week 24, donepezil 23 mg/day provided significant cognitive benefits over 10 mg/day (p < 0.01) on the Severe Impairment Battery, with or without concomitant memantine (ANCOVA adjusted for baseline score, country and treatment). The higher dose showed no benefit on the global function, Mini-Mental State Examination or activities of daily living measures in either memantine subgroup. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were higher for donepezil 23 mg/day with memantine (80.7%) than 23 mg/day without memantine (69.7%) or 10 mg/day with/without memantine (66.7/62.0%); across all treatment groups, most events were mild/moderate in severity. Individual rates of serious AEs were low (<1.0%), regardless of concomitant memantine use. CONCLUSION: In this population, concomitant memantine use did not alter the response profile of donepezil 23 vs. 10 mg/day. Donepezil 23 mg was generally safe and well tolerated among patients receiving donepezil alone and among patients receiving a combination of donepezil and memantine therapy.