阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停患者白天过度嗜睡:对坚持/不坚持主要 OSA 治疗的患者使用促醒剂进行间接治疗比较。

IF 11.2 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Sleep Medicine Reviews Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101997
Yuxin Wang , Weijia Zhang , Hui Ye , Yi Xiao
{"title":"阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停患者白天过度嗜睡:对坚持/不坚持主要 OSA 治疗的患者使用促醒剂进行间接治疗比较。","authors":"Yuxin Wang ,&nbsp;Weijia Zhang ,&nbsp;Hui Ye ,&nbsp;Yi Xiao","doi":"10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There remains an unmet need for a targeted treatment to address residual excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) after primary treatment. This network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of wake-promoting agents (WPAs), namely solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil, and armodafinil, for treating residual EDS in patients with OSA. We conducted a comprehensive search which ultimately included 18 studies in the final analysis. All 4 WPAs demonstrated significant therapeutic benefits for the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) and maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT). Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) score, solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil and armodafinil were ranked from highest to lowest for the ESS. A similar ranking was observed for MWT, where pitolisant was not included in the analysis. The subgroup analysis also evaluated the efficacy of WPAs in the primary treatment adherent and nonadherent subgroups. Regarding adverse reactions, solriamfetol demonstrated the lowest risk of all-cause discontinuation, whereas pitolisant exhibited minimal risks of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and treatment-emergent adverse events. Our analysis comprehensively compared the effects and adverse reactions of different WPAs in treating residual EDS in treated patients with OSA. This has significant implications for the practical clinical use of WPAs and future research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49513,"journal":{"name":"Sleep Medicine Reviews","volume":"78 ","pages":"Article 101997"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1087079224001011/pdfft?md5=c2c3949eb2b2fe151d80045ab0b5c1a3&pid=1-s2.0-S1087079224001011-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Excessive daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea: Indirect treatment comparison of wake-promoting agents in patients adherent/nonadherent to primary OSA therapy\",\"authors\":\"Yuxin Wang ,&nbsp;Weijia Zhang ,&nbsp;Hui Ye ,&nbsp;Yi Xiao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There remains an unmet need for a targeted treatment to address residual excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) after primary treatment. This network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of wake-promoting agents (WPAs), namely solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil, and armodafinil, for treating residual EDS in patients with OSA. We conducted a comprehensive search which ultimately included 18 studies in the final analysis. All 4 WPAs demonstrated significant therapeutic benefits for the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) and maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT). Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) score, solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil and armodafinil were ranked from highest to lowest for the ESS. A similar ranking was observed for MWT, where pitolisant was not included in the analysis. The subgroup analysis also evaluated the efficacy of WPAs in the primary treatment adherent and nonadherent subgroups. Regarding adverse reactions, solriamfetol demonstrated the lowest risk of all-cause discontinuation, whereas pitolisant exhibited minimal risks of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and treatment-emergent adverse events. Our analysis comprehensively compared the effects and adverse reactions of different WPAs in treating residual EDS in treated patients with OSA. This has significant implications for the practical clinical use of WPAs and future research.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sleep Medicine Reviews\",\"volume\":\"78 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101997\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1087079224001011/pdfft?md5=c2c3949eb2b2fe151d80045ab0b5c1a3&pid=1-s2.0-S1087079224001011-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sleep Medicine Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1087079224001011\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sleep Medicine Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1087079224001011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)患者在接受初级治疗后,仍需要有针对性的治疗方法来解决残留的白天过度嗜睡(EDS)问题。这项网络荟萃分析评估了促进唤醒药物(WPA),即索拉非托、匹托利桑、莫达非尼和阿莫达非尼治疗 OSA 患者残余 EDS 的有效性和安全性。我们进行了全面搜索,最终将 18 项研究纳入最终分析。所有 4 种 WPA 在埃普沃思嗜睡量表(ESS)和保持清醒测试(MWT)方面均显示出显著的治疗效果。根据累积排名曲线下表面(SUCRA)得分,索利安非托、匹托利桑、莫达非尼和奥莫达非尼在ESS方面的排名从高到低依次为:索利安非托、匹托利桑、莫达非尼和奥莫达非尼。在 MWT 中也观察到了类似的排名,其中 pitolisant 未被纳入分析。亚组分析还评估了WPAs在坚持主要治疗和不坚持主要治疗亚组中的疗效。在不良反应方面,索利安非妥的全因停药风险最低,而匹多莫德的导致停药的不良反应和治疗引发的不良反应风险最小。我们的分析全面比较了不同 WPA 治疗 OSA 患者残余 EDS 的效果和不良反应。这对 WPAs 的实际临床应用和未来研究具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Excessive daytime sleepiness in obstructive sleep apnea: Indirect treatment comparison of wake-promoting agents in patients adherent/nonadherent to primary OSA therapy

There remains an unmet need for a targeted treatment to address residual excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) after primary treatment. This network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of wake-promoting agents (WPAs), namely solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil, and armodafinil, for treating residual EDS in patients with OSA. We conducted a comprehensive search which ultimately included 18 studies in the final analysis. All 4 WPAs demonstrated significant therapeutic benefits for the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) and maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT). Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) score, solriamfetol, pitolisant, modafinil and armodafinil were ranked from highest to lowest for the ESS. A similar ranking was observed for MWT, where pitolisant was not included in the analysis. The subgroup analysis also evaluated the efficacy of WPAs in the primary treatment adherent and nonadherent subgroups. Regarding adverse reactions, solriamfetol demonstrated the lowest risk of all-cause discontinuation, whereas pitolisant exhibited minimal risks of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and treatment-emergent adverse events. Our analysis comprehensively compared the effects and adverse reactions of different WPAs in treating residual EDS in treated patients with OSA. This has significant implications for the practical clinical use of WPAs and future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Sleep Medicine Reviews 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
20.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Sleep Medicine Reviews offers global coverage of sleep disorders, exploring their origins, diagnosis, treatment, and implications for related conditions at both individual and public health levels. Articles comprehensively review clinical information from peer-reviewed journals across various disciplines in sleep medicine, encompassing pulmonology, psychiatry, psychology, physiology, otolaryngology, pediatrics, geriatrics, cardiology, dentistry, nursing, neurology, and general medicine. The journal features narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and editorials addressing areas of controversy, debate, and future research within the field.
期刊最新文献
A scoping review of self-help cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia. Weighing the evidence for excess weight and weight loss in the management of obstructive sleep apnea.‘Fat’ or fiction? Broken clocks: The effects of delayed school start time on adolescent sleep in solar vs. standard time Novel applications of sleep pharmacology as delirium therapeutics Iatrogenic infection associated with positive airway pressure therapy: A review of precedent, epidemiology, bioaerosols and risk mitigation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1