Efficacy and Safety of Daridorexant in Older and Younger Adults with Insomnia Disorder: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trial
Abstract
The dual orexin receptor antagonist daridorexant, studied in two phase III trials, dose-dependently improved objective and subjective sleep variables and daytime functioning in adults with insomnia. Because treatment of insomnia in older adults is challenging and has limited options, the purpose of the current analysis was to further analyse the phase III trial studying the higher doses of daridorexant, those that showed efficacy (daridorexant 50 mg, daridorexant 25 mg and placebo, nightly for 3 months), and compare the safety and efficacy of daridorexant in patients aged ≥ 65 (‘older adults’) to those aged < 65 years (‘younger adults’). Analyses by age (≥ 65 years, n = 364; < 65 years, n = 566) were performed on data from the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Trial 1 in adult patients with insomnia (NCT03545191). Efficacy endpoints included a change from baseline at month 1 and month 3 in polysomnography-measured wake after sleep onset (WASO) and latency to persistent sleep (LPS), self-reported total sleep time (sTST) and daytime functioning assessed using the validated Insomnia Daytime Symptoms and Impacts Questionnaire (IDSIQ). Safety endpoints included adverse events and the Visual Analog Scale for morning sleepiness. At baseline, mean [standard deviation] WASO was numerically greater (110 [39] vs 92 [38] min) in older than younger adults, while LPS was comparable (~ 65 min). Mean baseline IDSIQ total and all domain scores were numerically lower (i.e. better)…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 566 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.