MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4379279865 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2023.151

P.047 Effect of lemborexant on sleep architecture in subjects with comorbid insomnia and mild obstructive sleep apnea from a phase 3 trial

2023· article· en· W4379279865 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Clete A. Kushida, GK Zammit, JY Cheng, Dinesh Kumar, Margaret Moline

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsNutrasource
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaObstructive sleep apneaMedicineAnesthesiaPolysomnographyZolpidemNon-rapid eye movement sleepPlaceboPopulationSleep apneaApneaPsychiatryElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Lemborexant (LEM), a dual-orexin-receptor-antagonist approved to treat adults with insomnia, increases total sleep time (TST) and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep. Patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) or co-morbid insomnia and OSA (COMISA) report sleeping difficulties and reduced REM, therefore sleep architecture was analyzed during LEM treatment. Methods: Study E2006-G000-304 (NCT02783729) was a 1-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)- and active-comparator zolpidem-ER 6.25mg (ZOL)-controlled study in adults ≥55y with insomnia disorder. Subjects received PBO, LEM 5mg (LEM5), 10mg (LEM10), or ZOL. Least-square-mean duration of each sleep stage (minutes) was compared from pooled data on Nights (NT)1/2 and NT29/30 for mild OSA subjects (apnea hypopnea index ≥5 to <15 events/h). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded. Results: Of 409 subjects with mild OSA (LEM5=114/LEM10=105/ZOL=112/PBO=78) change from baseline (CFB) in TST and REM sleep was significantly larger with both LEM doses versus ZOL/PBO on both nights. CFB for total nonREM sleep was significantly higher (P<0.0001) with both LEM doses versus PBO on both nights. LEM5 showed significantly higher (P<0.05) nonREM sleep versus ZOL at NT29/30. Most TEAEs were mild/moderate. Conclusions: LEM significantly increased TST, REM, and nonREM sleep versus PBO in subjects with insomnia and mild OSA. Data support LEM treatment in the COMISA population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicSleep and Wakefulness Research→French-language works237,207→