Skip to content

Clarithromycin for the Treatment of Hypersomnia

Clarithromycin for the Treatment of Hypersomnia

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01146600
Enrollment
26
Registered
2010-06-17
Start date
2010-07-31
Completion date
2012-09-30
Last updated
2017-11-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Hypersomnia, Idiopathic Hypersomnia, Narcolepsy

Keywords

Primary hypersomnia, CNS hypersomnia, hypersomnia, idiopathic hypersomnia, clarithromycin, Narcolepsy without Cataplexy

Brief summary

The term 'hypersomnia' describes a group of symptoms that includes severe daytime sleepiness and sleeping long periods of time (more than 10 hours per night). Sometimes, hypersomnia is caused by a problem with the quality of sleep occurring at night, for instance when nighttime sleep is disrupted by frequent breathing pauses. In other cases, however, hypersomnia occurs even when nighttime sleep is of good quality. These cases of hypersomnia are presumed to be a symptom of brain dysfunction, and so are referred to as hypersomnias of central (i.e., brain) origin. The causes of most of these central hypersomnias are not known. However, our group has recently identified a problem with the major brain chemical responsible for sedation, known as GABA. In a subset of our hypersomnia patients, there is a naturally-occurring substance that causes the GABA receptor to be hyperactive. In essence, it is as though these patients are chronically medicated with Valium (or Xanax or alcohol, all substances that act through the GABA system), even though they do not take these medications. Current treatment of central hypersomnias is limited. For the fraction of cases with narcolepsy, there are FDA-approved, available treatments. However, for the remainder of patients, there are no treatments approved by the FDA. They are usually treated with medications approved for narcolepsy, but sleep experts agree that these medications are often not effective for this group of patients. Based on our understanding of the GABA abnormality in these patients, we evaluated whether clarithromycin (an antibiotic approved by the FDA for the treatment of infections) would reverse the GABA abnormality. In a test tube model of this disease, clarithromycin does in fact return the function of the GABA system to normal. The investigators have treated a few patients with clarithromycin and most have felt that their hypersomnia symptoms improved with this treatment. To determine whether clarithromycin is truly beneficial for central hypersomnia, this study will compare clarithromycin to an inactive pill (the placebo). All subjects will receive both clarithromycin and the placebo at different times, and their reaction times and symptoms will be compared on these two treatments to determine if one is superior. If this study shows that clarithromycin is more effective than placebo in the treatment of hypersomnia, it will identify a potential new therapy for this difficult-to-treat disorder.

Detailed description

Central hypersomnias are characterized by severe excessive daytime sleepiness despite long sleep periods (\>10 hours/night) and the absence of nocturnal sleep pathology. They preferentially affect young adults, may result in loss of employment, and can lead to motor vehicle accidents (1). Despite these health, safety, and quality of life consequences, there are no FDA-approved therapies for several forms of central hypersomnia, including idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). Currently, IH is treated using therapies approved for narcolepsy, despite a lack of clinical trial data and a consensus that treatment response is poor (2). Treatments include traditional psychostimulants (e.g., amphetamine derivatives) as well as wake-promoting agents with unknown mechanisms of action such as modafinil and sodium oxybate. In addition to side effects including high abuse potential, tachycardia, and altered mental status, treatments are often ineffective and substantial residual sleepiness frequently persists despite poly-therapy. The investigators hypothesize that pathology in the GABA neurotransmitter system, the brain's major inhibitory system, underlies these central hypersomnias. Currently, there are no hypersomnia therapies that are GABA-antagonists. However, the macrolide antibiotic clarithromycin has been shown to have GABA-modulating properties, resulting in the development of insomnia or mania in a subset of patients. Clarithromycin is therefore a potentially viable, promising therapeutic agent for hypersomnia related to positive modulation of the GABAA receptor. Open-label use of clarithromycin in six hypersomnia patients with known (n = 4) or suspected (n = 2) excess GABAA potentiation resulted in marked improvements in vigilance, as measured on the psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) (unpublished data). The investigators therefore propose a pilot, crossover trial comparing clarithromycin to placebo for the treatment of hypersomnia in patients with excess GABAA potentiation. The primary endpoint will be a decrease in PVT reaction time. Secondary endpoints will include a decrease in PVT lapses and changes in Epworth, Stanford, and FOSQ sleep scales. Successful results from this trial would provide early evidence for a more rational and efficacious treatment for hypersomnia that could avoid the potential abuse, toxicities, and treatment failures associated with traditional treatments. This will be a pilot crossover trial of clarithromycin and placebo to treat central hypersomnia. Subjects who are untreated for hypersomnia or who experience persistent symptoms despite traditional therapies will be eligible. Subjects who are on medication for hypersomnia at the beginning of the study will be asked to maintain stable doses of these medications for one month before and throughout the study period. Twenty subjects will be assessed at baseline and one and two weeks after being on each study drug (clarithromycin 500 mg bid and matched placebo bid). After two weeks on study drug, they will undergo a one week washout period, then change to the other study drug for an additional two weeks. Patients will be randomized to order of presentation of study drugs such that ten subjects will be randomized to each group. Random sequence generation will be performed our pharmacy. All study investigators and subjects will remain blinded to group assignment.

Interventions

DRUGClarithromycin followed by placebo

Clarithromycin 500 mg po bid for two weeks, then one week with no medication, then matched placebo po bid for two weeks.

DRUGPlacebo then Clarithromycin

Matched placebo po bid for two weeks, then one week with no intervention, then clarithromycin 500 mg po bid for two weeks

Sponsors

Lynn Marie Trotti
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Hypersomnia (meeting clinical criteria for Idiopathic hypersomnia with or without long sleep time, narcolepsy lacking cataplexy, or symptomatic hypersomnia not meeting ICSD criteria) * evidence for GABA-related abnormality, as demonstrated by in-house, in vitro assay * age \> 18 * high performance liquid chromatography/liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry verification of the absence of exogenous benzodiazepines

Exclusion criteria

* Contraindications to use of clarithromycin (pregnancy, severe renal impairment, history of QT prolongation, hypomagnesemia, hypokalemia, bradycardia, history of myocardial infarction or cardiomyopathy, myasthenia gravis, age \> 70) * Current use of cisapride, pimozide, astemizole, terfenadine, colchicines, and ergotamine or dihydroergotamine * Current use of benzodiazepines or benzodiazepine-receptor agonists * moderate or severe sleep apnea (RDI \> 15/hr), severe periodic limb movement disorder (PLMI \> 30/hr) * diagnosis of narcolepsy with cataplexy, as determined by cerebrospinal hypocretin levels * metabolic disorders such as anemia, severe iron deficiency, B12 deficiency, or hypothyroidism that may explain symptoms of hypersomnia

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Timeweek 2 of each interventionMedian reaction time on the PVT at the end of the second week of treatment. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (I.e., greater vigilance). Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (\ 100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 2, placebo week 2)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
PVT Number of Lapsesbaseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drugNumber of lapses (no response for \> 500 msec) on the PVT, averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice at baseline, four times on clarithromycin (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2), and four times on placebo (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2)). Higher numbers indicate worse vigilance.
Epworth Sleepiness Scalebaseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drugScores on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). ESS scores can range from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicate higher levels of sleepiness.
PVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1week 1median reaction time on the PVT at week 1 of each intervention. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (i.e., better vigilance) Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (\ 100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 1, placebo week 1)
SF-36, Vitality Subscalebaseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drugThe SF-36 is a health outcome scale with multiple subsections. Subjects were administered the entire SF-36; this analysis is of the vitality subscore provided by this scale. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered once at baseline, twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). The vitality subscore is calculated using four questions from the SF-36, and can range from 0 to 100. Higher scores reflect more vitality.
PSQIbaseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drugScores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a questionnaire based assessment of sleep quality. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). Scores on the PSQI can range from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicate poorer sleep quality.
FOSQbaseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drugScores on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). Scores on the FOSQ can range from 5 to 20. Higher FOSQ scores indicate less impairment due to sleepiness.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Most subjects were recruited from the patient population of a single Sleep Center affiliated with Emory University School of Medicine. One subject contacted investigators for participation after reading of the study on clinicaltrials.gov. The first patient was recruited 3/5/11 and the final patient completed the study on 9/28/12.

Pre-assignment details

All subjects underwent screening laboratories after enrollment but before beginning medication. In the case of abnormal laboratory results (n = 2), subjects did not begin treatment with either study drug (clarithromycin or placebo). One patient dropped out after consent but before randomization (because of scheduling conflict).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Clarithromycin, Then Placebo
Subjects will be randomized to group A or group B. The order of presentation of placebo and clarithromycin will be opposite in these two groups, but investigators and subjects will remain blinded to group allocation and order of treatment presentation within the groups. Clarithromycin followed by placebo : Clarithromycin 500 mg po bid (with breakfast and lunch) for two weeks, then one week with no medication, then matched placebo po bid (with breakfast and lunch) for two weeks.
13
Placebo, Then Clarithromycin
Subjects will be randomized to group A or group B. The order of presentation of placebo and clarithromycin will be opposite in these two groups, but investigators and subjects will remain blinded to group allocation and order of treatment presentation within the groups. Placebo then Clarithromycin : Matched placebo po bid (with breakfast and lunch) for two weeks, then one week with no intervention, then clarithromycin 500 mg po bid (with breakfast and lunch) for two weeks
10
Total23

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPlacebo, Then ClarithromycinClarithromycin, Then PlaceboTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
10 Participants13 Participants23 Participants
Age, Continuous34.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.5
33.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.4
34.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.6
Region of Enrollment
United States
10 participants13 participants23 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
8 Participants9 Participants17 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
2 Participants4 Participants6 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
21 / 2215 / 20
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 220 / 20

Outcome results

Primary

Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Time

Median reaction time on the PVT at the end of the second week of treatment. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (I.e., greater vigilance). Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (\ 100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 2, placebo week 2)

Time frame: week 2 of each intervention

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinPsychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Time279.1 MsecStandard Deviation 77.3
PlaceboPsychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Time311.6 MsecStandard Deviation 114.1
BaselinePsychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) Reaction Time333.8 MsecStandard Deviation 291.4
p-value: 0.47ANOVA
Secondary

Epworth Sleepiness Scale

Scores on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). ESS scores can range from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicate higher levels of sleepiness.

Time frame: baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinEpworth Sleepiness Scale10.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.4
PlaceboEpworth Sleepiness Scale14.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.7
BaselineEpworth Sleepiness Scale15.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.3
p-value: 0.002ANOVA
Secondary

FOSQ

Scores on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). Scores on the FOSQ can range from 5 to 20. Higher FOSQ scores indicate less impairment due to sleepiness.

Time frame: baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinFOSQ16.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
PlaceboFOSQ14.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.7
BaselineFOSQ13.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
p-value: 0.002ANOVA
Secondary

PSQI

Scores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a questionnaire based assessment of sleep quality. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). Scores on the PSQI can range from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicate poorer sleep quality.

Time frame: baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinPSQI5.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.9
PlaceboPSQI6.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.8
BaselinePSQI6.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.5
p-value: 0.76ANOVA
Secondary

PVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1

median reaction time on the PVT at week 1 of each intervention. Lower values reflect faster reaction times (i.e., better vigilance) Note that the PVT provides a median of reaction times to all stimuli (\ 100) presented during the 10 minute PVT test. Each subject had two PVT tests at each visit, resulting in two median values. These were averaged, and then, for the purposes of this outcome, we then obtained the MEAN across multiple subjects for each condition (baseline, clarithromycin week 1, placebo week 1)

Time frame: week 1

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinPVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1285.4 MsecStandard Deviation 71.3
PlaceboPVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1308.4 MsecStandard Deviation 120.6
BaselinePVT Median Reaction Time at Week 1333.8 MsecStandard Deviation 291.4
p-value: 0.63ANOVA
Secondary

PVT Number of Lapses

Number of lapses (no response for \> 500 msec) on the PVT, averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered twice at baseline, four times on clarithromycin (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2), and four times on placebo (twice during week 1 and twice during week 2)). Higher numbers indicate worse vigilance.

Time frame: baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinPVT Number of Lapses5.7 Number of lapsesStandard Deviation 11.3
PlaceboPVT Number of Lapses10.3 Number of lapsesStandard Deviation 18.7
BaselinePVT Number of Lapses6.5 Number of lapsesStandard Deviation 16.9
p-value: 0.64ANOVA
Secondary

SF-36, Vitality Subscale

The SF-36 is a health outcome scale with multiple subsections. Subjects were administered the entire SF-36; this analysis is of the vitality subscore provided by this scale. Scores were averaged by subject across all administrations for a given drug condition (i.e. administered once at baseline, twice on clarithromycin (once during week 1 and once during week 2) and twice on placebo (once during week 1 and once during week 2)). The vitality subscore is calculated using four questions from the SF-36, and can range from 0 to 100. Higher scores reflect more vitality.

Time frame: baseline, then after 1 week and 2 weeks on each study drug

Population: Analysis was performed on all subjects who took both study drugs (i.e., clarithromycin and placebo)

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
ClarithromycinSF-36, Vitality Subscale48.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.9
PlaceboSF-36, Vitality Subscale28.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.5
BaselineSF-36, Vitality Subscale25.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.6
p-value: 0.01ANOVA

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 4, 2026