Comparative efficacy, safety and benefit/risk of alerting agents for excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: a network meta-analysis.
Jean-Louis Pépin, Philippe Lehert, Raoua Ben Messaoud, Marie Joyeux-Faure, Christian Caussé, Jerryll Asin, Ferran Barbé, Maria R Bonsignore, Winfried Randerath, Johan Verbraecken, Sonya Craig, Yves Dauvilliers
{"title":"Comparative efficacy, safety and benefit/risk of alerting agents for excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: a network meta-analysis.","authors":"Jean-Louis Pépin, Philippe Lehert, Raoua Ben Messaoud, Marie Joyeux-Faure, Christian Caussé, Jerryll Asin, Ferran Barbé, Maria R Bonsignore, Winfried Randerath, Johan Verbraecken, Sonya Craig, Yves Dauvilliers","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a common chronic respiratory disease associated with a high burden of disabilities related to sleepiness and reduced quality of life. Despite first-line treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, many patients experience residual excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). The aim of this study is to compare the relative efficacy and safety of medications authorised for this indication in Europe and/or the United States (modafinil/armodafinil, solriamfetol, and pitolisant) for OSA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety of authorised medications for adult patients with OSA were identified by literature searches of PubMed, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (up to 12 June 2024). The primary efficacy endpoint was combined Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Oxford Sleep Resistance (OSLER)/Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) Z-scores. Quality of life (QoL), overall and specific cardiovascular safety, and benefit-risk ratios were calculated. The study was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42023434640.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Of 4017 studies identified, a total of 20 RCTs involving 4015 patients were included. Analysis of combined subjective (ESS) and objective (OSLER/MWT) efficacy outcome Z-scores showed that solriamfetol (150 mg; effect size [ES] = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.36, 0.96]), pitolisant (20 mg; ES = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.44, 0.88]), and modafinil (200 mg; ES = 0.54: [95% CI: 0.33, 0.74]); 400 mg; ES = 0.54 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.65]) had a clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy. P-scores ranked placebo, then pitolisant, modafinil 200 mg, modafinil 400 mg and solriamfetol for overall safety; and pitolisant, then solriamfetol, modafinil 400 mg and modafinil 200 mg for benefit-risk ratio.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Pitolisant, solriamfetol and modafinil had comparable efficacy for maintaining wakefulness in patients with OSA. Pitolisant had a better safety profile and benefit-risk ratio compared with solriamfetol and modafinil. The overall and cardiovascular safety risk ratios suggest that pitolisant might be the best candidate for patients with OSA with multiple cardiovascular comorbidities.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Bioprojet.</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11437752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102843","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a common chronic respiratory disease associated with a high burden of disabilities related to sleepiness and reduced quality of life. Despite first-line treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, many patients experience residual excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). The aim of this study is to compare the relative efficacy and safety of medications authorised for this indication in Europe and/or the United States (modafinil/armodafinil, solriamfetol, and pitolisant) for OSA.
Methods: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety of authorised medications for adult patients with OSA were identified by literature searches of PubMed, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (up to 12 June 2024). The primary efficacy endpoint was combined Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Oxford Sleep Resistance (OSLER)/Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) Z-scores. Quality of life (QoL), overall and specific cardiovascular safety, and benefit-risk ratios were calculated. The study was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42023434640.
Findings: Of 4017 studies identified, a total of 20 RCTs involving 4015 patients were included. Analysis of combined subjective (ESS) and objective (OSLER/MWT) efficacy outcome Z-scores showed that solriamfetol (150 mg; effect size [ES] = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.36, 0.96]), pitolisant (20 mg; ES = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.44, 0.88]), and modafinil (200 mg; ES = 0.54: [95% CI: 0.33, 0.74]); 400 mg; ES = 0.54 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.65]) had a clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy. P-scores ranked placebo, then pitolisant, modafinil 200 mg, modafinil 400 mg and solriamfetol for overall safety; and pitolisant, then solriamfetol, modafinil 400 mg and modafinil 200 mg for benefit-risk ratio.
Interpretation: Pitolisant, solriamfetol and modafinil had comparable efficacy for maintaining wakefulness in patients with OSA. Pitolisant had a better safety profile and benefit-risk ratio compared with solriamfetol and modafinil. The overall and cardiovascular safety risk ratios suggest that pitolisant might be the best candidate for patients with OSA with multiple cardiovascular comorbidities.
期刊介绍：
eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
