-
Diabetes Aug 2023
Topics: Mice; Male; Animals; Modafinil; Orexins; Hypoglycemia; Glucose; Neurons
PubMed: 37471600
DOI: 10.2337/dbi22-0038 -
Drugs in Context 2020To assess the non-inferiority of pitolisant, a new compound for the relief of excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and cataplexy in narcolepsy, compared with modafinil.
AIM
To assess the non-inferiority of pitolisant, a new compound for the relief of excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and cataplexy in narcolepsy, compared with modafinil.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in narcolepsy were searched systematically. Network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy and safety of pitolisant and modafinil. The main endpoints are Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT), the number of cataplexies, and overall safety.
RESULTS
Of 312 articles after removing duplicates, 10 RCTs were eligible for NMA. For ESS, a non-significant superior beneficial decrease (-0.69, [-2.18, 0.79]) showed non-inferiority of pitolisant (non-inferiority margin [NIM]=1, =0.015). An MWT beneficial increase (2.12 minutes [-0.95, 5.19]; =0.18) showed non-inferiority of pitolisant (NIM=-1). For cataplexy, the mean beneficial effect of pitolisant was significant, providing evidence of pitolisant superiority in addition to non-inferiority. The risk ratio (RR) of treatment-suspected adverse events for pitolisant/modafinil was 0.86 [0.44, 1.24] favoring pitolisant, confirming non-inferiority considering a safety margin of RR=1.25 (tolerance of 25%).
CONCLUSIONS
Pitolisant is non-inferior to modafinil in relieving EDS, but superior to modafinil in reducing cataplexy, outranking modafinil in narcolepsy type-1 patients. Despite a slight superiority of pitolisant in EDS relief, both drugs perform equally in narcolepsy type-2 patients.
PubMed: 32699548
DOI: 10.7573/dic.2020-6-2 -
Journal of the National Cancer Institute Aug 2014Survivors of childhood cancer frequently experience cancer-related cognitive dysfunction, commonly months to years after treatment for pediatric brain tumors, acute... (Review)
Review
Survivors of childhood cancer frequently experience cancer-related cognitive dysfunction, commonly months to years after treatment for pediatric brain tumors, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), or tumors involving the head and neck. Risk factors for cancer-related cognitive dysfunction include young age at diagnosis, treatment with cranial irradiation, use of parenteral or intrathecal methotrexate, female sex, and pre-existing comorbidities. Limiting use and reducing doses and volume of cranial irradiation while intensifying chemotherapy have improved survival and reduced the severity of cognitive dysfunction, especially in leukemia. Nonetheless, problems in core functional domains of attention, processing speed, working memory and visual-motor integration continue to compromise quality of life and performance. We review the epidemiology, pathophysiology and assessment of cancer-related cognitive dysfunction, the impact of treatment changes for prevention, and the broad strategies for educational and pharmacological interventions to remediate established cognitive dysfunction following childhood cancer. The increased years of life saved after childhood cancer warrants continued study toward the prevention and remediation of cancer-related cognitive dysfunction, using uniform assessments anchored in functional outcomes.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Age Factors; Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Attention; Benzhydryl Compounds; Brain Neoplasms; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Child; Child, Preschool; Cognitive Dysfunction; Comorbidity; Cranial Irradiation; Donepezil; Early Intervention, Educational; Education, Special; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Human Growth Hormone; Humans; Indans; Infant; Injections, Spinal; Memory, Short-Term; Methotrexate; Methylphenidate; Modafinil; Neoplasms; Neurosurgical Procedures; Nootropic Agents; Patient Education as Topic; Piperidines; Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma; Psychomotor Performance; Quality of Life; Radiotherapy Dosage; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Sex Factors; Survivors; Thinking; Wakefulness-Promoting Agents; Young Adult
PubMed: 25080574
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju186 -
Sleep Dec 2018Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the safety and efficacy of medical treatments for narcolepsy were analyzed using network meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY OBJECTIVES
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the safety and efficacy of medical treatments for narcolepsy were analyzed using network meta-analysis.
METHODS
The RCTs in narcolepsy were searched. Network meta-analysis compared efficacy and safety of multiple treatments, multi-arm studies, and multi-criteria treatment decisions, based on a random model that assumed heterogeneity between studies, with corrections for multi-arm studies.
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs, three drug treatments, and six doses were identified: sodium oxybate (6 and 9 g/d), modafinil (between 200 and 400 mg/d), and pitolisant (up to 20 and up to 40 mg/d). Significant heterogeneity (>50%) between studies was found in 12/14 studies for almost all endpoints, but between-design consistency was present. For ESS and MWT, sodium oxybate 9 g/d, modafinil, and pitolisant up to 40 mg/d had similar efficacy. Pitolisant 40 mg/d and sodium oxybate 9 g/d in two nightly doses had similar efficacy in reducing cataplexy. A good safety profile characterized by a TEAE incidence risk ratio (IRR) <1.5 was found for all the compared treatments, except for sodium oxybate 9 g/d. Although no significant difference was found, Pitolisant 40 mg was shown with the best P scores for the benefit/risk (BR) ratio.
CONCLUSIONS
Modafinil (200-400 mg/d), sodium oxybate 9 g/d, and pitolisant up to 40 mg/d had similar efficacy in reducing excessive day time sleepiness. Only sodium oxybate 9 g/d and pitolisant up to 40 mg/d were shown with a comparable beneficial effect on cataplexy. Overall, Pitolisant was found with the best P score on the BR ratio.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017054686. Efficacy, safety, and benefit-risk comparison of alternative treatments in narcolepsy: a network multiple comparisons of treatment meta-analysis. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017054686.
Topics: Adult; Cataplexy; Humans; Modafinil; Narcolepsy; Network Meta-Analysis; Odds Ratio; Piperidines; Risk Assessment; Sleepiness; Sodium Oxybate
PubMed: 30239930
DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsy185 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Mar 2013Over recent years there has been increasing research into both pharmaceutical and nutraceutical cognition enhancers. Here we aimed to calculate the effect sizes of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Over recent years there has been increasing research into both pharmaceutical and nutraceutical cognition enhancers. Here we aimed to calculate the effect sizes of positive cognitive effect of the pharmaceutical modafinil in order to benchmark the effect of two widely used nutraceuticals Ginseng and Bacopa (which have consistent acute and chronic cognitive effects, respectively). A search strategy was implemented to capture clinical studies into the neurocognitive effects of modafinil, Ginseng and Bacopa. Studies undertaken on healthy human subjects using a double-blind, placebo-controlled design were included. For each study where appropriate data were included, effect sizes (Cohen's d) were calculated for measures showing significant positive and negative effects of treatment over placebo. The highest effect sizes for cognitive outcomes were 0.77 for modafinil (visuospatial memory accuracy), 0.86 for Ginseng (simple reaction time) and 0.95 for Bacopa (delayed word recall). These data confirm that neurocognitive enhancement from well characterized nutraceuticals can produce cognition enhancing effects of similar magnitude to those from pharmaceutical interventions. Future research should compare these effects directly in clinical trials.
Topics: Bacopa; Benzhydryl Compounds; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cognition; Dietary Supplements; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Memory; Modafinil; Nootropic Agents; Panax; Psychomotor Performance
PubMed: 23043278
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12002 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Aug 2014Concurrent administration of dopamine and serotonin reuptake inhibitors reduces cocaine self-administration in monkeys. Consonant with this, clinical trials assessing... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Concurrent administration of dopamine and serotonin reuptake inhibitors reduces cocaine self-administration in monkeys. Consonant with this, clinical trials assessing modafinil and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors alone show some efficacy as potential pharmacotherapies for cocaine dependence. We hypothesized that combining modafinil with escitalopram would attenuate the euphoric effects of cocaine to a greater degree than modafinil alone.
METHODS
In a randomized, double blind, parallel groups design participants received either placebo (0mg/day; n=16), modafinil (200mg/day; n=16), escitalopram (20mg/day; n=17), or modafinil+escitalopram (200+20mg/day; n=15) for 5 days. On day 5, during separate sessions participants received an intravenous sample of cocaine (0 or 20mg; randomized) and five $1 bills. Participants rated the subjective effects of the infusions and subsequently made choices to either return $1 and receive another infusion or keep $1 and receive no infusion.
RESULTS
Compared to saline, cocaine (20mg) significantly (p≤0.008) increased most ratings, including "good effects", "stimulated", and "high". Relative to placebo, modafinil significantly (p≤0.007) attenuated subject-rated increases of "any drug effect", "high", "good effects", and "stimulated" produced by cocaine. Compared to saline, participants chose cocaine infusions significantly more; however, no treatment significantly reduced choices for cocaine infusions. Escitalopram did not enhance the efficacy of modafinil to reduce any measure.
CONCLUSIONS
Modafinil attenuated many positive subjective effects produced by cocaine; however, escitalopram combined with modafinil did not enhance the efficacy of modafinil to reduce cocaine effects.
Topics: Adult; Affect; Benzhydryl Compounds; Blood Pressure; Choice Behavior; Citalopram; Cocaine; Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors; Double-Blind Method; Drug Interactions; Female; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Modafinil; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 24928479
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.05.008 -
Clinical Psychopharmacology and... Nov 2016Apart from sleep wake disorders, nowadays, modafinil is being prescribed for several psychiatric disorders including depression. Despite being reported as to be having...
Apart from sleep wake disorders, nowadays, modafinil is being prescribed for several psychiatric disorders including depression. Despite being reported as to be having very low abuse potential, cases of modafinil dependence had come to the limelight. In this case report, we describe a 35 year old man with bipolar affective disorder while in remission who developed modafinil dependence and later on, had hypersexuality when he increased the dose of modafinil from 400 to 1,000 mg/day. Existing literature suggests that modafinil when taken above prescribed doses can cause many side effects ranging from nausea, vomiting to psychotic exacerbation and mania. However, hypersexuality as a side effect of modafinil overuse is not commonly seen. The exact pathophysiological mechanism of modafinil induced hypersexuality is not clear. Clinicians should be aware of possibility of modafinil leading to dependence and this rare significant side effect of modafinil.
PubMed: 27776397
DOI: 10.9758/cpn.2016.14.4.402 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Reports Mar 2022There are no approved medications for the treatment of cocaine use disorder (CUD). Modafinil, a cognitive-enhancer with weak stimulant-like effects, has shown promise in...
INTRODUCTION
There are no approved medications for the treatment of cocaine use disorder (CUD). Modafinil, a cognitive-enhancer with weak stimulant-like effects, has shown promise in initial studies as a treatment for CUD. Its potential efficacy has not been examined in individuals dually dependent on cocaine and opioids.
METHODS
This study examined the efficacy of modafinil, in combination with contingency management (CM), for reducing cocaine and opioid use and improving cognitive function in methadone-stabilized individuals with opioid and cocaine dependence. We conducted a 17-week, double-blind, randomized controlled trial in which participants were randomized to one of four conditions: 1) modafinil + CM; 2) modafinil + yoked-control (YC); 3) placebo +CM; or 4) placebo + YC. Additionally, all subjects received platform treatments of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and methadone. While the original planned sample size was N=160, a total of 91 participants were randomized. The two primary cocaine use outcomes were percentage of urine specimens positive for cocaine and percent of days of self-reported abstinence from cocaine during treatment. Cognitive function, opioid use, and secondary cocaine use outcomes were also considered.
RESULTS
Modafinil was well-tolerated with minimal reports of adverse effects. Modafinil was no more effective than placebo in reducing cocaine or opioid use or improving cognitive performance.
CONCLUSIONS
In the context of a trial with robust control conditions and platform treatments, findings did not provide support for the efficacy of modafinil treatment for the treatment of CUD in methadone-stabilized individuals with dual opioid and cocaine dependence.
PubMed: 36310662
DOI: 10.1016/j.dadr.2022.100032 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Feb 2015Treatment of stimulant-use disorders remains a formidable challenge, and the dopamine transporter (DAT) remains a potential target for antagonist or agonist-like... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Treatment of stimulant-use disorders remains a formidable challenge, and the dopamine transporter (DAT) remains a potential target for antagonist or agonist-like substitution therapies.
METHODS
This review focuses on DAT ligands, such as benztropine, GBR 12909, modafinil, and DAT substrates derived from phenethylamine or cathinone that have atypical DAT-inhibitor effects, either in vitro or in vivo. The compounds are described from a molecular mechanistic, behavioral, and medicinal-chemical perspective.
RESULTS
Possible mechanisms for atypicality at the molecular level can be deduced from the conformational cycle for substrate translocation. For each conformation, a crystal structure of a bacterial homolog is available, with a possible role of cholesterol, which is also present in the crystal of Drosophila DAT. Although there is a direct relationship between behavioral potencies of most DAT inhibitors and their DAT affinities, a number of compounds bind to the DAT and inhibit dopamine uptake but do not share cocaine-like effects. Such atypical behavior, depending on the compound, may be related to slow DAT association, combined sigma-receptor actions, or bias for cytosol-facing DAT. Some structures are sterically small enough to serve as DAT substrates but large enough to also inhibit transport. Such compounds may display partial DA releasing effects, and may be combined with release or uptake inhibition at other monoamine transporters.
CONCLUSIONS
Mechanisms of atypical DAT inhibitors may serve as targets for the development of treatments for stimulant abuse. These mechanisms are novel and their further exploration may produce compounds with unique therapeutic potential as treatments for stimulant abuse.
Topics: Animals; Benzhydryl Compounds; Benztropine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cocaine; Dopamine Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins; Drug Delivery Systems; Humans; Ligands; Modafinil; Protein Binding; Protein Structure, Secondary; Protein Structure, Tertiary
PubMed: 25548026
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.12.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015This review updates the original review, 'Pharmacological treatments for fatigue associated with palliative care' and also incorporates the review 'Drug therapy for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review updates the original review, 'Pharmacological treatments for fatigue associated with palliative care' and also incorporates the review 'Drug therapy for the management of cancer-related fatigue'.In healthy individuals, fatigue is a protective response to physical or mental stress, often relieved by rest. By contrast, in palliative care patients' fatigue can be severely debilitating and is often not counteracted with rest, thereby impacting daily activity and quality of life. Fatigue frequently occurs in patients with advanced disease (e.g. cancer-related fatigue) and modalities used to treat cancer can often contribute. Further complicating issues are the multidimensionality, subjective nature and lack of a consensus definition of fatigue. The pathophysiology is not fully understood and evidence-based treatment approaches are needed.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for fatigue in palliative care, with a focus on patients at an advanced stage of disease, including patients with cancer and other chronic diseases.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE, and a selection of cancer journals up to 28 April 2014. We searched the references of identified articles and contacted authors to obtain unreported data. To validate the search strategy we selected sentinel references.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) concerning adult palliative care with a focus on pharmacological treatment of fatigue compared to placebo, application of two drugs, usual care or a non-pharmacological intervention. The primary outcome had to be non-specific fatigue (or related terms such as asthenia). We did not include studies on fatigue related to antineoplastic treatment (e.g. chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgical intervention). We also included secondary outcomes that were assessed in fatigue-related studies (e.g. exhaustion, tiredness).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (MM and MC) independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We screened the search results and included studies if they met the selection criteria. If we identified two or more studies that investigated a specific drug with the same dose in a population with the same disease and using the same assessment instrument or scale, we conducted meta-analysis. In addition, we compared the type of drug investigated in specific populations, as well as the frequent adverse effects of fatigue treatment, by creating overview tables.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we screened 1645 publications of which 45 met the inclusion criteria (20 additional studies to the previous reviews). In total, we analysed data from 18 drugs and 4696 participants. There was a very high degree of statistical and clinical heterogeneity in the trials and we discuss the reasons for this in the review. There were some sources of potential bias in the included studies, including a lack of description of the methods of blinding and allocation concealment, and the small size of the study populations. We included studies investigating pemoline and modafinil in participants with multiple sclerosis (MS)-associated fatigue and methylphenidate in patients suffering from advanced cancer and fatigue in meta-analysis. Treatment results pointed to weak and inconclusive evidence for the efficacy of amantadine, pemoline and modafinil in multiple sclerosis and for carnitine and donepezil in cancer-related fatigue. Methylphenidate and pemoline seem to be effective in patients with HIV, but this is based only on one study per intervention, with only a moderate number of participants in each study. Meta-analysis shows an estimated superior effect for methylphenidate in cancer-related fatigue (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.83). Therapeutic effects could not be described for dexamphetamine, paroxetine or testosterone. There were a variety of results for the secondary outcomes in some studies. Most studies had low participant numbers and were heterogeneous. In general, adverse reactions were mild and had little or no impact.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on limited evidence, we cannot recommend a specific drug for the treatment of fatigue in palliative care patients. Fatigue research in palliative care seems to focus on modafinil and methylphenidate, which may be beneficial for the treatment of fatigue associated with palliative care although further research about their efficacy is needed. Dexamethasone, methylprednisolone, acetylsalicylic acid, armodafinil, amantadine and L-carnitine should be further examined. Consensus is needed regarding fatigue outcome parameters for clinical trials.
Topics: Adult; Amantadine; Benzhydryl Compounds; Carnitine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Chronic Disease; Fatigue; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Methylphenidate; Modafinil; Multiple Sclerosis; Neoplasms; Palliative Care; Pemoline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26026155
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006788.pub3