Kendyl Schaefer

Eszopiclone Coadministered With Escitalopram in Patients With Insomnia and Comorbid Generalized Anxiety Disorder

CONTEXT Insomnia and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are prevalent disorders that may coexist. OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy of eszopiclone combined with escitalopram oxalate in treating insomnia comorbid with GAD. DESIGN Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, add-on therapy 10-week study. SETTING Multicenter outpatient study from July 2005 to April 2006. PATIENTS Adults aged 18 to 64 years meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for GAD and insomnia. INTERVENTIONS Patients received 10 mg of escitalopram oxolate for 10 weeks and were randomized to also receive either 3 mg of eszopiclone (n = 294) or placebo (n = 301) nightly for 8 weeks. For the last 2 weeks, eszopiclone was replaced with a single-blind placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Sleep, daytime functioning, psychiatric measures, and adverse events. RESULTS Compared with treatment with placebo and escitalopram, treatment with eszopiclone and escitalopram resulted in significantly improved sleep and daytime functioning (P < .05), with no evidence of tolerance. Patients taking eszopiclone and escitalopram had greater improvements in total Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) scores at each week (P < .05) and at weeks 4 through 10 with the insomnia item removed. Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) of Improvement scores were improved with eszopiclone and escitalopram at every point (P < .02), while CGI of Severity of Illness scores were not significantly different after week 1. The HAM-A response (63% vs 49%, respectively, P = .001) and remission (42% vs 36%, respectively, P = .09) rates at week 8 were higher in patients treated with eszopiclone and escitalopram than those treated with placebo and escitalopram, and median time to onset of anxiolytic response was significantly reduced (P < or = .05). After eszopiclone discontinuation, there was no evidence of rebound insomnia, and while treatment differences in anxiety measures were maintained, differences in sleep outcomes were not. Overall adverse event rates were 77.6% with cotherapy and 67.9% with monotherapy. The most common adverse events with cotherapy were unpleasant taste, headache, dry mouth, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS Coadministration of eszopiclone and escitalopram was well tolerated and associated with significantly improved sleep, daytime functioning, anxiety, and mood in patients with insomnia and GAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00235508.

Interpreting score differences in the Insomnia Severity Index: using health-related outcomes to define the minimally important difference

Abstract Objective: To estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) by examining the association of score differences of the ISI with health-related outcomes including health-related quality of life, productivity, and fatigue. Methods: Data came from a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating the long-term efficacy of eszopiclone for primary insomnia (N = 828). Logistic regression models were used to characterize the relationship between ISI change scores (from baseline to 6 months post-treatment) and outcomes/anchors from the SF-36 Health Survey, Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ), and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Odds ratios were derived from the regression coefficients to calculate the probability of a given outcome being associated with different ISI change scores. Convergence between anchor- and distribution-based estimates was assessed. Results: Higher ISI scores (indicating more severe insomnia) were significantly associated with higher probabilities of negative outcome in all models. Individuals with a 6-point score reduction in ISI scores (which corresponded to 1½ standard deviations) were 48% less likely to report ‘feeling worn out’ (SF-36) at 6 months, 46% less likely to be ‘unable to think clearly’ (WLQ), and 52% less likely to report ‘feeling fatigued’ (FSS). Similar results were found across a broad spectrum of all selected anchors. Conclusions: Based on results of the study, a 6-point reduction is recommended to represent a clinically meaningful improvement in individuals with primary insomnia. Research on generalizability of the recommended MID in this study to other patient populations and other type of treatment interventions is needed.

Effects of arformoterol twice daily, tiotropium once daily, and their combination in patients with COPD

PURPOSE Current guidelines support using in combination more than one class of long-acting bronchodilator for COPD patients whose symptoms are not controlled by mono-therapy. This 2-week, multi-center (34 sites), randomized, modified-blind, parallel group study evaluated the efficacy and safety of concomitant treatment with nebulized arformoterol (the formoterol(R,R)-isomer) BID and tiotropium DPI QD. METHODS COPD patients (mean FEV(1) 1.37L, 45.4% predicted) were randomized to receive mono-therapy (either arformoterol 15microg BID [n=76] or tiotropium 18microg QD [n=80]), or combined therapy (sequential dosing of arformoterol 15microg BID and tiotropium 18microg QD [n=78]). Changes in pulmonary function, dyspnea, and rescue levalbuterol use were evaluated, as were safety outcomes. RESULTS Mean FEV(1)AUC(0-24) (the primary endpoint) improved similarly from baseline for arformoterol (0.10L) and tiotropium (0.08L) treatment groups and greater for the combined therapy group (0.22L; all p-values <0.005). Peak FEV(1), peak FVC, 24-h trough FEV(1), and inspiratory capacity also improved similarly for the mono-therapies and greatest for the combined therapy. Dyspnea (mean transition dyspnea index) improved similarly for arformoterol (+2.3) and tiotropium (+1.8) and greatest with combined therapy (+3.1; p-values <0.05). Levalbuterol use decreased for all treatment groups (range -1.8 to -2.5 actuations/day). All treatments had similar frequency of adverse events. CONCLUSION In this study, the combination of nebulized arformoterol 15microg BID plus tiotropium 18microg DPI QD was the most effective in improving pulmonary function and disease symptoms. Mono-therapy improvement with arformoterol or tiotropium was similar. All three treatments were well tolerated.

Cost effectiveness of long-term treatment with eszopiclone for primary insomnia in adults: a decision analytical model.

AbstractObjective: Although the clinical benefits of pharmacological treatments for insomnia have been studied, no systematic assessment of their economic value has been reported. This analysis assessed, from a broad payer and societal perspective, the cost effectiveness of long-term treatment with eszopiclone (LUNESTA™, Sepracor Inc., [Marlborough, MA, USA]) for chronic primary insomnia in adults in the US. Methods: A decision analytical model was developed based on the reanalysis of a 6-month placebo-controlled trial, which demonstrated that eszopiclone 3mg significantly improved sleep and daytime function measures versus placebo in adults with primary insomnia. Patients were classified as either having remitted or not remitted from insomnia based upon a composite index of eight sleep and daytime function measures collected during the trial. These data were supplemented with quality-of-life and healthcare and lost productivity cost data from the published literature and medical and absenteeism claims databases. Results: Compared with non-remitted patients, patients classified as remitted had lower monthly healthcare and productivity costs (in 2006 dollars) [a reduction of

A Post Hoc Analysis of the Effect of Nightly Administration of Eszopiclone and a Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor in Patients With Insomnia and Anxious Depression

US242 and

Comparison of Levalbuterol and Racemic Albuterol in Hospitalized Patients with Acute Asthma or COPD : A 2-Week, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study

US182, respectively] and higher quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weight (a net gain of 0.0810 on a scale ranging from 0 to 1). During the study, eszopiclone-treated patients were about 2.5 times more likely to have remitted than placebo-treated patients. Six months of eszopiclone treatment reduced direct (healthcare) and indirect (productivity) costs by an estimated

An evaluation of levalbuterol HFA in the prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm.

US245.13 and

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Levalbuterol in Subjects with COPD

US184.19 per patient, respectively. Eszopiclone use was associated with a cost of

Nightly Treatment of Primary Insomnia With Eszopiclone for Six Months: Effect on Sleep, Quality of Life, and Work Limitations

US497.15 per patient over 6 months (including drug cost, dispensing fee, physician visit and time loss to receive care). Thus, after considering the above savings and the costs associated with eszopiclone treatment over 6 months, cost increased by

A comparison of levalbuterol with racemic albuterol in the treatment of acute severe asthma exacerbations in adults

US252.02 (excluding productivity gains) and