"Dec. 1, 2012 -- Not getting enough sleep? Some extra Zzzs each night may improve more than just your daytime alertness. New research shows more sleep may also improve your ability to withstand pain.
In fact, sleepy volunteers who got "...
Mechanism Of Action
The mechanism(s) through which armodafinil promotes wakefulness is unknown. Armodafinil (R-modafinil) has pharmacological properties similar to those of modafinil (a mixture of R- and S-modafinil), to the extent tested in animal and in vitro studies. The R- and S-enantiomers have similar pharmacological actions in animals.
Armodafinil and modafinil have wake-promoting actions similar to sympathomimetic agents including amphetamine and methylphenidate, although their pharmacologic profile is not identical to that of the sympathomimetic amines.
Modafinil-induced wakefulness can be attenuated by the α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist, prazosin; however, modafinil is inactive in other in vitro assay systems known to be responsive to α-adrenergic agonists such as the rat vas deferens preparation.
Armodafinil is an indirect dopamine receptor agonist; both armodafinil and modafinil bind in vitro to the dopamine transporter and inhibit dopamine reuptake. For modafinil, this activity has been associated in vivo with increased extracellular dopamine levels in some brain regions of animals. In genetically engineered mice lacking the dopamine transporter (DAT), modafinil lacked wake-promoting activity, suggesting that this activity was DAT-dependent. However, the wake-promoting effects of modafinil, unlike those of amphetamine, were not antagonized by the dopamine receptor antagonist haloperidol in rats. In addition, alpha-methyl-p-tyrosine, a dopamine synthesis inhibitor, blocks the action of amphetamine, but does not block locomotor activity induced by modafinil.
In addition to its wake-promoting effects and ability to increase locomotor activity in animals, modafinil produces psychoactive and euphoric effects, alterations in mood, perception, thinking, and feelings typical of other CNS stimulants in humans. Modafinil has reinforcing properties, as evidenced by its self-administration in monkeys previously trained to self-administer cocaine; modafinil was also partially discriminated as stimulant-like.
Based on nonclinical studies, two major metabolites, acid and sulfone, of modafinil or armodafinil, do not appear to contribute to the CNS-activating properties of the parent compounds.
Armodafinil exhibits linear time-independent kinetics following single and multiple oral dose administration. Increase in systemic exposure is proportional over the dose range of 50 to 400 mg. No time-dependent change in kinetics was observed through 12 weeks of dosing. Apparent steady state for armodafinil was reached within 7 days of dosing. At steady state, the systemic exposure for armodafinil is 1.8 times the exposure observed after a single dose. The concentration-time profiles of the R-enantiomer following administration of a single-dose of 50 mg NUVIGIL or 100 mg PROVIGIL (modafinil, a 1:1 mixture of R-and S-enantiomers) are nearly superimposable. However, the Cmax and AUC0-∞, of armodafinil at steady-state were approximately 37% and 70% higher, respectively, following administration of 200 mg NUVIGIL than the corresponding values of modafinil following administration of 200 mg PROVIGIL due to the more rapid clearance of the S-enantiomer (elimination half-life approximately 4 hours) as compared to the R-enantiomer.
NUVIGIL is readily absorbed after oral administration. The absolute oral bioavailability was not determined due to the aqueous insolubility of armodafinil, which precluded intravenous administration. Peak plasma concentrations are attained at approximately 2 hours in the fasted state. Food effect on the overall bioavailability of NUVIGIL is considered minimal; however, time to reach peak concentration (tmax) may be delayed by approximately 2-4 hours in the fed state. Since the delay in tmax is also associated with elevated plasma concentrations later in time, food can potentially affect the onset and time course of pharmacologic action for NUVIGIL.
NUVIGIL has an apparent volume of distribution of approximately 42 L. Data specific to armodafinil protein binding are not available. However, modafinil is moderately bound to plasma protein (approximately 60%), mainly to albumin. The potential for interactions of NUVIGIL with highly protein-bound drugs is considered to be minimal.
After oral administration of NUVIGIL, armodafinil exhibits an apparent monoexponential decline from the peak plasma concentration. The apparent terminal t½ is approximately 15 hours. The oral clearance of NUVIGIL is approximately 33 mL/min.
In vitro and in vivo data show that armodafinil undergoes hydrolytic deamidation, S-oxidation, and aromatic ring hydroxylation, with subsequent glucuronide conjugation of the hydroxylated products. Amide hydrolysis is the single most prominent metabolic pathway, with sulfone formation by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4/5 being next in importance. The other oxidative products are formed too slowly in vitro to enable identification of the enzyme(s) responsible. Only two metabolites reach appreciable concentrations in plasma (i.e., R-modafinil acid and modafinil sulfone).
Data specific to NUVIGIL disposition are not available. However, modafinil is mainly eliminated via metabolism, predominantly in the liver, with less than 10% of the parent compound excreted in the urine. A total of 81% of the administered radioactivity was recovered in 11 days post-dose, predominantly in the urine (80% vs. 1.0% in the feces).
In a clinical study, systemic exposure of armodafinil was approximately 15% higher in elderly subjects ( ≥ 65 years of age, N=24), corresponding to approximately 12% lower oral clearance (CL/F), as compared to young subjects (18-45 years of age, N=25). Systemic exposure of armodafinil acid (metabolite) was approximately 61% and 73% greater for Cmax and AUC0-τ, respectively, compared to young subjects. Systemic exposure of the sulfone metabolite was approximately 20% lower for elderly subjects compared with young subjects. A subgroup analysis of elderly subjects demonstrated elderly subjects ≥ 75 and 65-74 years of age had approximately 21% and 9% lower oral clearance, respectively, compared to young subjects. Systemic exposure was approximately 10% greater in subjects 65-74 years of age (N=17) and 27% greater in subjects ≥ 75 years of age (N=7), respectively, when compared to young subjects. The change is considered not likely to be clinically significant for elderly patients, however, because some elderly patients have greater exposure to armodafinil, consideration should be given to the use of lower doses.
Population pharmacokinetic analysis suggests no gender effect on the pharmacokinetics of armodafinil.
The influence of race/ethnicity on the pharmacokinetics of armodafinil has not been studied.
The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of modafinil were examined in patients with cirrhosis of the liver (6 men and 3 women). Three patients had stage B or B+ cirrhosis and 6 patients had stage C or C+ cirrhosis (per the Child-Pugh score criteria). Clinically 8 of 9 patients were icteric and all had ascites. In these patients, the oral clearance of modafinil was decreased by about 60% and the steady state concentration was doubled compared to normal patients [see DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION and Use in Specific Populations].
In a single dose 200 mg modafinil study, severe chronic renal failure (creatinine clearance ≤ 20 mL/min) did not significantly influence the pharmacokinetics of modafinil, but exposure to modafinil acid (metabolite) was increased 9-fold.
In vitro data demonstrated that armodafinil weakly induces CYP1A2 and possibly CYP3A activities in a concentration-related manner and that CYP2C19 activity is reversibly inhibited by armodafinil. Other CYP activities did not appear to be affected by armodafinil. An in vitro study demonstrated that armodafinil is a substrate of P-glycoprotein.
Potential Interactions with Drugs That Inhibit, Induce, or Are Metabolized by Cytochrome P450 Isoenzymes and Other Hepatic Enzymes
The existence of multiple pathways for armodafinil metabolism, as well as the fact that a nonCYP-related pathway is the most rapid in metabolizing armodafinil, suggest that there is a low probability of substantive effects on the overall pharmacokinetic profile of NUVIGIL due to CYP inhibition by concomitant medications. However, due to the partial involvement of CYP3A enzymes in the metabolic elimination of armodafinil, coadministration of potent inducers of CYP3A4/5 (e.g., carbamazepine, phenobarbital, rifampin) or inhibitors of CYP3A4/5 (e.g., ketoconazole, erythromycin) could alter the plasma concentrations of armodafinil.
The Potential of NUVIGIL to Alter the Metabolism of Other Drugs by Enzyme Induction or Inhibition
- Drugs Metabolized by CYP3A4/5
In vitro data demonstrated that armodafinil is a weak inducer of CYP3A activity in a concentration-related manner. In a clinical study, concomitant administration of NUVIGIL 250 mg resulted in a reduction in systemic exposure to midazolam by 32% after a single oral dose (5 mg) and 17% after a single intravenous dose (2 mg). Therefore, the blood levels and effectiveness of drugs that are substrates for CYP3A enzymes (e.g., steroidal contraceptives, cyclosporine, midazolam, and triazolam) may be reduced after initiation of concomitant treatment with NUVIGIL [see DRUG INTERACTIONS].
In a separate clinical study, concomitant administration of NUVIGIL 250 mg with quetiapine (300 mg to 600 mg daily doses) resulted in a reduction in the mean systemic exposure of quetiapine by approximately 29%. No dose adjustment is required.
- Drugs Metabolized by CYP1A2
In vitro data demonstrated that armodafinil is a weak inducer of CYP1A2 in a concentration-related manner. However, in a clinical study using caffeine as a probe substrate, no significant effect on CYP1A2 activity was observed.
- Drugs Metabolized by CYP2C19
In vitro data demonstrated that armodafinil is a reversible inhibitor of CYP2C19 activity. In a clinical study, concomitant administration of NUVIGIL 400 mg resulted in a 40% increase in exposure to omeprazole after a single oral dose (40 mg), as a result of moderate inhibition of CYP2C19 activity [see DRUG INTERACTIONS].
- Interactions with CNS Active Drugs
Concomitant administration of NUVIGIL with quetiapine reduced the systemic exposure of quetiapine.
Data specific to NUVIGIL drug-drug interaction potential with other CNS active drugs are not available. However, the following available drug-drug interaction information on modafinil should be applicable to NUVIGIL.
Concomitant administration of modafinil with methylphenidate or dextroamphetamine produced no significant alterations on the pharmacokinetic profile of modafinil or either stimulant, even though the absorption of modafinil was delayed for approximately one hour.
Concomitant modafinil or clomipramine did not alter the pharmacokinetic profile of either drug; however, one incident of increased levels of clomipramine and its active metabolite desmethylclomipramine was reported in a patient with narcolepsy during treatment with modafinil.
Data specific to NUVIGIL or modafinil drug-drug interaction potential with monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors are not available [see DRUG INTERACTIONS].
- Interaction with P-Glycoprotein
An in vitro study demonstrated that armodafinil is a substrate of P-glycoprotein. The impact of inhibition of P-glycoprotein is not known.
- Interactions with Other Drugs
Data specific to NUVIGIL drug-drug interaction potential for additional other drugs are not available. However, the following available drug-drug interaction information on modafinil should be applicable to NUVIGIL.
Warfarin: Concomitant administration of modafinil with warfarin did not produce significant changes in the pharmacokinetic profiles of R-and S-warfarin. However, since only a single dose of warfarin was tested in this study, an interaction cannot be ruled out [see DRUG INTERACTIONS].
Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA)
The effectiveness of NUVIGIL in improving wakefulness in patients with excessive sleepiness associated with OSA was established in two 12-week, multi-center, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, double-blind clinical studies of outpatients who met the criteria for OSA. The criteria include either: 1) excessive sleepiness or insomnia, plus frequent episodes of impaired breathing during sleep, and associated features such as loud snoring, morning headaches or dry mouth upon awakening; or 2) excessive sleepiness or insomnia; and polysomnography demonstrating one of the following: more than five obstructive apneas, each greater than 10 seconds in duration, per hour of sleep; and one or more of the following: frequent arousals from sleep associated with the apneas, bradytachycardia, or arterial oxygen desaturation in association with the apneas. In addition, for entry into these studies, all patients were required to have excessive sleepiness as demonstrated by a score ≥ 10 on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), despite treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Evidence that CPAP was effective in reducing episodes of apnea/hypopnea was required along with documentation of CPAP use.
Patients were required to be compliant with CPAP, defined as CPAP use ≥ 4 hours/night on ≥ 70% of nights. CPAP use continued throughout the study. In both studies, the primary measures of effectiveness were 1) sleep latency, as assessed by the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and 2) the change in the patient's overall disease status, as measured by the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI-C) at the final visit. For a successful trial both measures had to show statistically significant improvement.
The MWT measures latency (in minutes) to sleep onset. An extended MWT was performed with test sessions at 2 hour intervals between 9AM and 7PM. The primary analysis was the average of the sleep latencies from the first four test sessions (9AM to 3PM). For each test session, the subject was asked to attempt to remain awake without using extraordinary measures. Each test session was terminated after 30 minutes if no sleep occurred or immediately after sleep onset. The CGI-C is a 7-point scale, centered at No Change, and ranging from Very Much Worse to Very Much Improved. Evaluators were not given any specific guidance about the criteria they were to apply when rating patients.
In the first study, a total of 395 patients with OSA were randomized to receive NUVIGIL 150 mg/day, NUVIGIL 250 mg/day or matching placebo. Patients treated with NUVIGIL showed a statistically significant improvement in the ability to remain awake compared to placebo-treated patients as measured by the MWT at final visit. A statistically significant greater number of patients treated with NUVIGIL showed improvement in overall clinical condition as rated by the CGI-C scale at final visit. The average sleep latencies (in minutes) in the MWT at baseline for the trials are shown in Table 3 below, along with the average change from baseline on the MWT at final visit. The percentages of patients who showed any degree of improvement on the CGI-C in the clinical trials are shown in Table 4 below. The two doses of NUVIGIL produced statistically significant effects of similar magnitudes on the MWT, and also on the CGI-C.
In the second study, 263 patients with OSA were randomized to either NUVIGIL 150 mg/day or placebo. Patients treated with NUVIGIL showed a statistically significant improvement in the ability to remain awake compared to placebo-treated patients as measured by the MWT (Table 3). A statistically significant greater number of patients treated with NUVIGIL showed improvement in overall clinical condition as rated by the CGI-C scale (Table 4).
Nighttime sleep measured with polysomnography was not affected by the use of NUVIGIL in either study.
The effectiveness of NUVIGIL in improving wakefulness in patients with excessive sleepiness associated with narcolepsy was established in one 12-week, multi-center, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, double-blind study of outpatients who met the criteria for narcolepsy. A total of 196 patients were randomized to receive NUVIGIL 150 or 250 mg/day, or matching placebo. The criteria for narcolepsy include either: 1) recurrent daytime naps or lapses into sleep that occur almost daily for at least three months, plus sudden bilateral loss of postural muscle tone in association with intense emotion (cataplexy); or 2) a complaint of excessive sleepiness or sudden muscle weakness with associated features: sleep paralysis, hypnagogic hallucinations, automatic behaviors, disrupted major sleep episode; and polysomnography demonstrating one of the following: sleep latency less than 10 minutes or rapid eye movement (REM) sleep latency less than 20 minutes and a Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) that demonstrates a mean sleep latency of less than 5 minutes and two or more sleep onset REM periods and no medical or mental disorder accounts for the symptoms. For entry into these studies, all patients were required to have objectively documented excessive daytime sleepiness, via MSLT with a sleep latency of 6 minutes or less and the absence of any other clinically significant active medical or psychiatric disorder. The MSLT, an objective polysomnographic assessment of the patient's ability to fall asleep in an unstimulating environment, measured latency (in minutes) to sleep onset averaged over 4 test sessions at 2-hour intervals. For each test session, the subject was told to lie quietly and attempt to sleep. Each test session was terminated after 20 minutes if no sleep occurred or immediately after sleep onset.
The primary measures of effectiveness were: 1) sleep latency as assessed by the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT); and 2) the change in the patient's overall disease status, as measured by the CGI-C at the final visit [see Clinical Studies for a description of these measures]. Each MWT test session was terminated after 20 minutes if no sleep occurred or immediately after sleep onset in this study.
Patients treated with NUVIGIL showed a statistically significantly enhanced ability to remain awake on the MWT at each dose compared to placebo at final visit [Table 3]. A statistically significant greater number of patients treated with NUVIGIL at each dose showed improvement in overall clinical condition as rated by the CGI-C scale at final visit [Table 4].
The two doses of NUVIGIL produced statistically significant effects of similar magnitudes on the CGI-C. Although a statistically significant effect on the MWT was observed for each dose, the magnitude of effect was observed to be greater for the higher dose.
Nighttime sleep measured with polysomnography was not affected by the use of NUVIGIL.
Shift Work Disorder (SWD)
The effectiveness of NUVIGIL in improving wakefulness in patients with excessive sleepiness associated with SWD was demonstrated in a 12-week, multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. A total of 254 patients with chronic SWD were randomized to receive NUVIGIL 150 mg/day or placebo. All patients met the criteria for chronic SWD. The criteria include: 1) either, a) a primary complaint of excessive sleepiness or insomnia which is temporally associated with a work period (usually night work) that occurs during the habitual sleep phase, or b) polysomnography and the MSLT demonstrate loss of a normal sleep-wake pattern (i.e., disturbed chronobiological rhythmicity); and 2) no other medical or mental disorder accounts for the symptoms; and 3) the symptoms do not meet criteria for any other sleep disorder producing insomnia or excessive sleepiness (e.g., time zone change [jet lag] syndrome).
It should be noted that not all patients with a complaint of sleepiness who are also engaged in shift work meet the criteria for the diagnosis of SWD. In the clinical trial, only patients who were symptomatic for at least 3 months were enrolled.
Enrolled patients were also required to work a minimum of 5 night shifts per month, have excessive sleepiness at the time of their night shifts (MSLT score ≤ 6 minutes), and have daytime insomnia documented by a daytime polysomnogram.
The primary measures of effectiveness were: 1) sleep latency, as assessed by the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) performed during a simulated night shift at the final visit; and 2) the change in the patient's overall disease status, as measured by the CGI-C at the final visit [see Clinical Studies for a description of these measures].
Patients treated with NUVIGIL showed a statistically significant prolongation in the time to sleep onset compared to placebo-treated patients, as measured by the nighttime MSLT at final visit (Table 3). A statistically significant greater number of patients treated with NUVIGIL showed improvement in overall clinical condition as rated by the CGI-C scale at final visit (Table 4).
Daytime sleep measured with polysomnography was not affected by the use of NUVIGIL.
Table 3: Average Baseline Sleep Latency and Change
from Baseline at Final Visit (MWT and MSLT in minutes)
|Disorder||Measure||NUVIGIL 150 mg*||NUVIGIL 250 mg*||Placebo|
|Baseline||Change from Baseline||Baseline||Change from Baseline||Baseline||Change from Baseline|
|*Significantly different than placebo for all trials (p < 0.05)|
Table 4: Clinical Global
Impression of Change (CGI-C) (Percent of Patients Who Improved at Final Visit)
|Disorder||NUVIGIL 150 mg*||NUVIGIL 250 mg*||Placebo|
|*Significantly different than placebo for all trials (p < 0.05)|
Last reviewed on RxList: 2/27/2017
This monograph has been modified to include the generic and brand name in many instances.
Additional Nuvigil Information
Nuvigil - User Reviews
Nuvigil User Reviews
Now you can gain knowledge and insight about a drug treatment with Patient Discussions.
Report Problems to the Food and Drug Administration
You are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Visit the FDA MedWatch website or call 1-800-FDA-1088.
Get tips for better sleep.