Perception of Lemborexant Effectiveness as Assessed by the Patient Global Impression–Insomnia Questionnaire

Using data from a clinical study of lemborexant, evaluate responses to the Patient Global Impression-Insomnia (PGI-I) questionnaire, a simple 4-item questionnaire that assesses patients' perceptions of the effects of medication on sleep, which may help evaluate clinically meaningful changes fro...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inNature and science of sleep Vol. 17; pp. 557 - 570
Main Authors Drake, Christopher, Yardley, Jane, Pinner, Kate, Moline, Margaret, Malhotra, Manoj
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New Zealand Dove Medical Press Limited 30.04.2025
Dove
Dove Medical Press
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1179-1608
1179-1608
DOI10.2147/NSS.S499090

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Using data from a clinical study of lemborexant, evaluate responses to the Patient Global Impression-Insomnia (PGI-I) questionnaire, a simple 4-item questionnaire that assesses patients' perceptions of the effects of medication on sleep, which may help evaluate clinically meaningful changes from the patient's perspective. Study E2006-G001-303, a 12-month, placebo (PBO)-controlled (first 6 months) Phase 3 study in adults with insomnia disorder, randomized subjects (1:1:1) to lemborexant 5 mg (LEM5; n=316), 10 mg (LEM10; n=315), or PBO (n=318). The second 6 months are not presented here. PGI-I results were analyzed post hoc in relation to patient-reported (subjective) sleep-onset latency (sSOL) and total-sleep-time (sTST). At 6 months: 67.3% (LEM5) and 68.8% (LEM10) of subjects reported positive effects of medication helping them sleep versus 45.0% (both <0.0001) with PBO. Positive effects on "time to fall asleep" were reported by 72.8% (LEM5) and 73.1% (LEM10) versus 46.1% with PBO ( <0.0001), and 58.0% (LEM5) and 62.0% (LEM10) reported positive effects on sleep duration versus 39.9% with PBO ( <0.0001). Subjects reporting positive effects on "time to fall asleep" had greater change from baseline (CFB; improvement) at 6 months in median sSOL (in minutes; LEM5= -26.8; LEM10= -32.1; PBO= -17.5; <0.01) versus those reporting negative effects (LEM5= -9.1; LEM10= -10.4; PBO= -8.6; LEM5 vs PBO, =0.52; LEM10 vs PBO, =0.69). For sTST (in minutes) at 6 months, mean CFB tended to be greater for subjects reporting positive (LEM5=81.2, LEM10=93.2, PBO=74.8; LEM5 vs PBO, =0.28; LEM10 vs PBO, =0.18) versus negative (LEM5=46.4, LEM10=35.0, PBO=38.6; LEM5 vs PBO, =0.44; LEM10 vs PBO, =0.52) effects, although this was not statistically significant. Patient impressions of the effects of lemborexant were positive based on the PGI-I and reflected improvements in subjective sleep outcome measures, indicating that the brief PGI-I tool may be useful in clinical practice.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1179-1608
1179-1608
DOI:10.2147/NSS.S499090