Lauflumide (NLS-4) Is a New Potent Wake-Promoting Compound.

Psychostimulants are used for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness in a wide range of sleep disorders as well as in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or cognitive impairment in neuropsychiatric disorders. Here, we tested in mice the wake-promoting properties of NLS-4 and its effects on the following sleep as compared with those of modafinil and vehicle. C57BL/6J mice were intraperitoneally injected with vehicle, NLS-4 (64 mg/kg), or modafinil (150 mg/kg) at light onset. EEG and EMG were recorded continuously for 24 h after injections and vigilance states as well as EEG power densities were analyzed. NLS-4 at 64 mg/kg induced significantly longer wakefulness duration than modafinil at 150 mg/kg. Although no significant sleep rebound was observed after sleep onset for both treatments as compared with their vehicles, modafinil-treated mice showed significantly more NREM sleep when compared to NLS-4. Spectral analysis of the NREM EEG after NLS-4 treatment indicated an increased power density in delta activity (0.75-3.5 Hz) and a decreased power in theta frequency range (6.25-7.25 Hz), while there was no differences after modafinil treatment. Also, time course analysis of the delta activity showed a significant increase only during the first 2 time intervals of sleep after NLS-4 treatment, while delta power was increased during the first 9 time intervals after modafinil. Our results indicate that NLS-4 is a highly potent wake-promoting drug with no sign of hypersomnia rebound. As opposed to modafinil, recovery sleep after NLS-4 treatment is characterized by less NREM amount and delta activity, suggesting a lower need for recovery despite longer drug-induced wakefulness

Efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate throughout the day in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder:results from a randomized, controlled trial

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a long-acting, prodrug stimulant therapy for patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This randomized placebo-controlled trial of an optimized daily dose of LDX (30, 50 or 70 mg) was conducted in children and adolescents (aged 6–17 years) with ADHD. To evaluate the efficacy of LDX throughout the day, symptoms and behaviors of ADHD were evaluated using an abbreviated version of the Conners’ Parent Rating Scale-Revised (CPRS-R) at 1000, 1400 and 1800 hours following early morning dosing (0700 hours). Osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) was included as a reference treatment, but the study was not designed to support a statistical comparison between LDX and OROS-MPH. The full analysis set comprised 317 patients (LDX, n = 104; placebo, n = 106; OROS-MPH, n = 107). At baseline, CPRS-R total scores were similar across treatment groups. At endpoint, differences (active treatment − placebo) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline CPRS-R total scores were statistically significant (P < 0.001) throughout the day for LDX (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.42; 1400 hours, 1.41; 1800 hours, 1.30) and OROS-MPH (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.04; 1400 hours, 0.98; 1800 hours, 0.92). Differences in LS mean change from baseline to endpoint were statistically significant (P < 0.001) for both active treatments in all four subscales of the CPRS-R (ADHD index, oppositional, hyperactivity and cognitive). In conclusion, improvements relative to placebo in ADHD-related symptoms and behaviors in children and adolescents receiving a single morning dose of LDX or OROS-MPH were maintained throughout the day and were ongoing at the last measurement in the evening (1800 hours)

Safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children aged 6 years or older with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundNarcolepsy is a life-long disorder characterised by excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy, often arising in childhood or adolescence. Pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist, has been approved in Europe and USA for adults with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy, with a favourable safety profile. This phase 3 study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy.MethodsFor this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multisite study, we recruited patients aged 6–17 years with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy in 11 sleep centres in five countries (Italy, France, Netherlands, Russia, and Finland). Participants were required to have a Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale score of 15 or greater and to have not received psychostimulants for at least 14 days before enrolment; participants who needed anticataplectics (including sodium oxybate) were required to have been on a stable dose for at least 1 month. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with pitolisant or placebo in a 2:1 ratio at the end of screening. Randomisation was stratified by study centre and treatment was allocated using an interactive web response system. After a 4-week screening period including a 2-week baseline period, patients entered in a 4-week individual up-titration scheme from 5 mg a day to a maximum of 40 mg a day of pitolisant or placebo; treatment was administered at a stable dose for 4 weeks, followed by a 1-week placebo period. For the primary analysis, we assessed pitolisant versus placebo using change in the Ullanlinna Narcolepsy Scale (UNS) total score from baseline to the end of double-blind period in the full analysis set, defined as all randomly allocated patients who received at least one dose of treatment and who had at least one baseline UNS value. A decrease in the UNS total score reflects a reduction in both excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. All adverse events were assessed in the safety population, defined as all participants who took at least one dose of study medication. An open-label follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02611687.FindingsBetween June 6, 2016, and April 3, 2021, we screened 115 participants and 110 were randomly assigned (mean age 12·9 [SD 3·0] years, 61 [55%] male, and 90 [82%] with cataplexy; 72 assigned to pitolisant and 38 to placebo); 107 (70 receiving pitolisant and 37 receiving placebo) completed the double-blind period. The mean adjusted difference in UNS total score from baseline to the end of the double-blind period was –6·3 (SE 1·1) in the pitolisant group and –2·6 (1·4) in the placebo group (least squares mean difference –3·7; 95% CI –6·4 to –1·0, p=0·007). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 22 (31%) of 72 patients in the pitolisant group and 13 (34%) of 38 patients in the placebo group. The most frequently reported adverse events (affecting ≥5% of patients) in either group were headache (14 [19%] in the pitolisant group and three [8%] in the placebo group) and insomnia (five [7%] in the pitolisant group and one [3%] in the placebo group).InterpretationPitolisant treatment resulted in an improvement in narcolepsy symptoms in children, although the UNS was not validated for use in children with narcolepsy when our study began. The safety profile was similar to that reported in adults but further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety.Paroxysmal Cerebral Disorder

Pharmacological management of narcolepsy in children and adolescents

Paroxysmal Cerebral Disorder

Parental rating of sleep in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Objective: Sleep problems have often been associated with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Parents of those with ADHD and children with ADHD report sleep difficulties more frequently than healthy children and their parents. The primary objective of this paper is to describe sleep patterns and problems of 5 to 11-year-old children suffering from ADHD as described by parental reports and sleep questionnaires. Method: The study included 321 children aged 5–11 years (average age 8.4 years); 45 were diagnosed with ADHD, 64 had other psychiatric diagnoses, and 212 were healthy. One hundred and ninety-six of the test subjects were boys and 125 were girls. A semi-structured interview (Kiddie-SADS-PL) was used to DSM-IV diagnose ADHD and comorbidity in the clinical group. Sleep difficulties were rated using a structured sleep questionnaire (Children Sleep Behaviour Scale). Results: Children diagnosed with ADHD had a significantly increased occurrence of sleep problems. Difficulties relating to bedtime and unsettled sleep were significantly more frequent in the ADHD group than in the other groups. Children with ADHD showed prolonged sleep onset latency, but no difference was shown regarding numbers of awakenings per night and total sleep time per night. Comorbid oppositional defiant disorder appeared not to have an added effect on problematic behaviour around bedtime. Conclusion: Parents of children with ADHD report that their children do not sleep properly more often than other parents. The ADHD group report problems with bedtime resistance, problems with sleep onset latency, unsettled sleep and nightmares more often than the control groups. It may therefore be relevant for clinicians to initiate a closer examination of those cases reporting sleep difficulties

Narcolepsy risk loci outline role of T cell autoimmunity and infectious triggers in narcolepsy

Narcolepsy has genetic and environmental risk factors, but the specific genetic risk loci and interaction with environmental triggers are not well understood. Here, the authors identify genetic loci for narcolepsy, suggesting infection as a trigger and dendritic and helper T cell involvement. Narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) is caused by a loss of hypocretin/orexin transmission. Risk factors include pandemic 2009 H1N1 influenza A infection and immunization with Pandemrix (R). Here, we dissect disease mechanisms and interactions with environmental triggers in a multi-ethnic sample of 6,073 cases and 84,856 controls. We fine-mapped GWAS signals within HLA (DQ0602, DQB1*03:01 and DPB1*04:02) and discovered seven novel associations (CD207, NAB1, IKZF4-ERBB3, CTSC, DENND1B, SIRPG, PRF1). Significant signals at TRA and DQB1*06:02 loci were found in 245 vaccination-related cases, who also shared polygenic risk. T cell receptor associations in NT1 modulated TRAJ*24, TRAJ*28 and TRBV*4-2 chain-usage. Partitioned heritability and immune cell enrichment analyses found genetic signals to be driven by dendritic and helper T cells. Lastly comorbidity analysis using data from FinnGen, suggests shared effects between NT1 and other autoimmune diseases. NT1 genetic variants shape autoimmunity and response to environmental triggers, including influenza A infection and immunization with Pandemrix (R)