Department of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45267, USA.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2013 Feb;45(2):159-69. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.02.016. Epub 2012 Aug 20.
Fatigue has been identified in more than one-half of patients with sarcoidosis. Although fatigue is not synonymous with impaired quality of life, most studies of sarcoidosis identify fatigue as a major cause of impaired quality of life.
To test the hypothesis that stimulants may have a role in the treatment of fatigued sarcoidosis patients, even without objective evidence of daytime sleepiness.
This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of sarcoidosis patients followed up in one sarcoidosis clinic Sarcoidosis patients with fatigue received either armodafinil or placebo with eight weeks of therapy for each arm and a two week washout period before crossover to the other treatment. Initial armodafinil dose was 150mg and increased to 250mg after four weeks. Patients underwent polysomnography and multiple sleep latency testing (MSLT) the following day. Patients with an apnea/hypopnea index <6/hour received either armodafinil or placebo. Polysomnography with MSLT was repeated after each treatment arm.
Fifteen patients received the study drug. Fatigue was assessed using the Fatigue Assessment Scale (the lower the score, the less the fatigue) and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) (the higher the score, the less the fatigue). After eight weeks of therapy, there was a significant improvement in the Fatigue Assessment Scale during armodafinil treatment (median -4.5, range -20, 5) compared with placebo treatment (median 3.5, range -9, 14, P<0.05) and for the FACIT-F (armodafinil: median 9, range -12, 26 vs. placebo: median -5, range -17, 11, P<0.005). This improvement in fatigue was seen for both those with and without shortened sleep onset latency time during the MSLT.
Armodafinil treatment led to a significant reduction in fatigue in sarcoidosis patients. This effect was seen even in patients who did not have excessive daytime somnolence.
类肉瘤病患者有一半以上存在疲劳。虽然疲劳与生活质量受损并不完全等同,但大多数类肉瘤病研究都将疲劳确认为生活质量受损的主要原因。
检验假说,即兴奋剂可能在治疗类肉瘤病疲劳患者中发挥作用,即使患者没有日间嗜睡的客观证据。
这是一项在一家类肉瘤病诊所随访的类肉瘤病患者的双盲、安慰剂对照、交叉研究。患有疲劳的类肉瘤病患者接受阿莫达非尼或安慰剂治疗,每臂治疗 8 周,然后在交叉至另一治疗前进行两周洗脱期。初始阿莫达非尼剂量为 150mg,四周后增加至 250mg。患者在次日进行多导睡眠图和多次睡眠潜伏期试验(MSLT)。接受睡眠呼吸暂停低通气指数<6/小时的患者接受阿莫达非尼或安慰剂治疗。在每臂治疗后重复进行多导睡眠图和 MSLT。
15 名患者接受了研究药物。使用疲劳评估量表(得分越低,疲劳越轻)和慢性疾病治疗疲劳功能评估量表(FACIT-F)(得分越高,疲劳越轻)评估疲劳。经过 8 周的治疗,与安慰剂治疗相比,阿莫达非尼治疗时疲劳评估量表的评分显著改善(中位数 -4.5,范围 -20,5)(中位数 3.5,范围 -9,14,P<0.05),FACIT-F 评分也显著改善(阿莫达非尼:中位数 9,范围 -12,26 与安慰剂:中位数 -5,范围 -17,11,P<0.005)。这种疲劳的改善见于 MSLT 中睡眠潜伏期缩短和未缩短的患者。
阿莫达非尼治疗可显著减轻类肉瘤病患者的疲劳。即使在没有过度日间嗜睡的患者中也能看到这种效果。