SynthesisThe international journal of neuropsychopharmacology2026
Vornorexant versus lemborexant for insomnia disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted to compare vornorexant (VOR) and lemborexant (LEM) in terms of efficacy, tolerability, and safety outcomes in adults with insomnia disorder.
methodsEfficacy outcomes evaluated at weeks 1 and 2 included subjective time to sleep onset (sTSO), which served as the primary outcome at week 2, as well as subjective total sleep time (sTST), subjective wake after sleep onset (sWASO), and subjective sleep efficiency. Tolerability outcome was treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. Safety outcomes included the incidence of death, suicidal behavior or ideation, at least one adverse event, somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, falls, headache, nightmares, cataplexy, and sleep paralysis.
resultsThis network meta-analysis included seven trials (n = 2805, average age = 55.14 years, 69.22% female). Treatment arms comprised VOR 5 mg/day (VOR5), VOR 10 mg/day (VOR10), LEM 5 mg/day (LEM5), LEM 10 mg/day (LEM10), and placebo. All active treatments were associated with significantly greater improvements in sTSO at week 2 than placebo. The mean differences in sTSO at week 2 were -11.997 min (95% CI, -15.236 to -8.757) for LEM5, -14.856 min (95% CI, -18.038 to -11.674) for LEM10, -11.364 min (95% CI, -14.733 to -7.996) for VOR5, and - 9.758 min (95% CI, -13.186 to -6.330) for VOR10. LEM5, LEM10, and VOR5 demonstrated significant improvements across all efficacy outcomes at weeks 1 and 2 over placebo. However, although VOR10 did not demonstrate superiority over placebo for sWASO at weeks 1 and 2, it was superior to placebo for all other efficacy outcomes. LEM5 and LEM10 were associated with a higher incidence of at least one adverse event and somnolence compared with placebo, whereas no significant differences in tolerability or safety outcomes were observed for VOR5 or VOR10 versus placebo.
conclusionsDosage variations could influence both the clinical efficacy and safety profile of these agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.