Effects of Lemborexant on the Pharmacokinetics of Oral Contraceptives: Results From a Phase 1 Drug‐Drug Interaction Study in Healthy Females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist approved in multiple countries including the United States, Canada, and Japan for the treatment of insomnia in adults. As women of childbearing potential may be prescribed insomnia drugs, a drug-drug interaction study was conducted. This single-center, open-label, fixed-sequence study examined potential drug-drug interactions between lemborexant and an oral contraceptive (OC) in healthy females (18-44 years, n = 20). The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of lemborexant 10 mg (at steady state) on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of OC (0.03 mg ethinyl estradiol and 1.5 mg norethindrone acetate), assess the effect of a single dose of OC on lemborexant pharmacokinetics, and evaluate safety and tolerability of lemborexant and OC coadministration. Ethinyl estradiol maximum plasma drug concentration was not altered by lemborexant coadministration; area under the curve from zero time to the last quantifiable concentration was slightly increased, by 13%. No clinically relevant effects on norethindrone acetate pharmacokinetics were observed. Coadministration of OC with lemborexant had no clinically relevant effect on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of lemborexant. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile. These results support the conclusion that lemborexant and OC can be coadministered without dose adjustment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".