MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417483200 · doi:10.1016/j.sleep.2025.108722

A phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of lemborexant in adults with insomnia disorder

2025· article· en· W4417483200 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Weifeng Mi, Dan Wen, Lijun Xu, Jiyang Pan, Ping Gu, Changhong Wang, Jiyou Tang, Li Zhang, Chunfeng Liu, Chengmei Yuan, Hanqiao Wang, Naoto Yamakawa, Takao Takase, Margaret Moline, Lin Lü

Bibliographic record

VenueSleep Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEisai IncorporatedEisai Canada
KeywordsClinical trialInsomniaProtocol (science)Phase (matter)Statistical analysisPhases of clinical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lemborexant (LEM), a dual orexin-receptor antagonist, in participants with insomnia disorder in China. METHODS: E2006-J086-311 (Study 311; NCT04549168), a 1-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, parallel-group study, enrolled adults (≥18 years) with insomnia disorder in China. Pairs of polysomnograms were conducted during a 7-day PBO run-in period (baseline), after the first 2 doses of LEM 10 mg (LEM10) or PBO, and after the last 2 doses at the end of 1 month of treatment. Objective sleep parameter assessments included latency to persistent sleep (LPS; primary endpoint) and secondary endpoints of sleep efficiency, wake after sleep onset (WASO), and total sleep time (TST; exploratory endpoint). Safety data were collected. RESULTS: Among 194 participants randomized (PBO, n = 100; LEM10, n = 94), the median age was approximately 42 years; most participants were female (PBO: 74.0 %; LEM10: 61.3 %). Following 1 month of treatment, mean (standard deviation [SD]) decreases from baseline in LPS were larger (improved) for the LEM10 treatment group (-39.47 min [46.147 min]) versus PBO (-21.71 min [42.809 min]; post hoc Box-Cox transformation, p = 0.0096). LEM10 demonstrated larger and statistically significant increases from baseline (improvements) in sleep efficiency (p < 0.0001) and TST (p < 0.0001) and significant decreases from baseline (improvement) in WASO (p = 0.0002) versus PBO and was well-tolerated. No new safety signals with LEM were observed in the current study compared with the known safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: LEM may be an important potential treatment option for patients with insomnia in China. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (first submitted on 09-09-2020): NCT04549168; Study protocol and statistical analysis plan may be accessed at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04549168.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSleep MedicineSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207