First rapid eye movement sleep periods and sleep-onset rapid eye movement periods in sleep-stage sequencing of hypersomnias

Child Neurology: Common Occurrence of Narcolepsy Type 1 and Myasthenia Gravis

Narcolepsy with cataplexy and myasthenia gravis are both chronic neurologic conditions causing symptoms of muscle weakness, often affecting facial muscles, and have both been attributed to an immune-mediated etiology. We report an adolescent girl diagnosed with both conditions and discuss possible shared mechanisms and the diagnostic challenges presented by her case to inform and aid clinicians managing children and young people with these rare conditions.

Narcolepsy and rapid eye movement sleep

Since the first description of narcolepsy at the end of the 19th Century, great progress has been made. The disease is nowadays distinguished as narcolepsy type 1 and type 2. In the 1960s, the discovery of rapid eye movement sleep at sleep onset led to improved understanding of core sleep-related disease symptoms of the disease (excessive daytime sleepiness with early occurrence of rapid eye movement sleep, sleep-related hallucinations, sleep paralysis, rapid eye movement parasomnia), as possible dysregulation of rapid eye movement sleep, and cataplexy resembling an intrusion of rapid eye movement atonia during wake. The relevance of non-sleep-related symptoms, such as obesity, precocious puberty, psychiatric and cardiovascular morbidities, has subsequently been recognized. The diagnostic tools have been improved, but sleep-onset rapid eye movement periods on polysomnography and Multiple Sleep Latency Test remain key criteria. The pathogenic mechanisms of narcolepsy type 1 have been partly elucidated after the discovery of strong HLA class II association and orexin/hypocretin deficiency, a neurotransmitter that is involved in altered rapid eye movement sleep regulation. Conversely, the causes of narcolepsy type 2, where cataplexy and orexin deficiency are absent, remain unknown. Symptomatic medications to treat patients with narcolepsy have been developed, and management has been codified with guidelines, until the recent promising orexin-receptor agonists. The present review retraces the steps of the research on narcolepsy that linked the features of the disease with rapid eye movement sleep abnormality, and those that do not appear associated with rapid eye movement sleep.

Sleep Stage Transitions and Sleep-Dependent Memory Consolidation in Children with Narcolepsy-Cataplexy

Electroencephalographic sleep stage transitions and altered first REM sleep period transitions have been identified as biomarkers of type 1 narcolepsy in adults, but not in children. Studies on memory complaints in narcolepsy have not yet investigated sleep-dependent memory consolidation. We aimed to explore stage transitions; more specifically altered REM sleep transition and its relationship with sleep-dependent memory consolidation in children with narcolepsy. Twenty-one children with narcolepsy-cataplexy and twenty-three healthy control children completed overnight polysomnography and sleep-dependent memory consolidation tests. Overnight transition rates (number of transitions per hour), global relative transition frequencies (number of transitions between a stage and all other stages/total number of transitions × 100), overnight transitions to REM sleep (transition from a given stage to REM/total REM transitions × 100), and altered first REM sleep period transitions (transitions from wake or N1 to the first REM period) were computed. Narcoleptic children had a significantly higher overnight transition rate with a higher global relative transition frequencies to wake. A lower sleep-dependent memory consolidation score found in children with narcolepsy was associated with a higher overnight transition frequency. As observed in narcoleptic adults, 90.48% of narcoleptic children exhibited an altered first REM sleep transition. As in adults, the altered sleep stage transition is also present in children with narcolepsy-cataplexy, and a higher transition rate could have an impact on sleep-dependent memory consolidation. These potential biomarkers could help diagnose type 1 narcolepsy in children more quickly; however, further studies with larger cohorts, including of those with type 2 narcolepsy and hypersomnia, are needed.

Novel Objective Measures of Hypersomnolence

Purpose of review

To provide a brief overview of current objective measures of hypersomnolence, discuss proposed measure modifications, and review emerging measures.

Recent findings

There is potential to optimize current tools using novel metrics. High-density and quantitative EEG-based measures may provide discriminative informative. Cognitive testing may quantify cognitive dysfunction common to hypersomnia disorders, particularly in attention, and objectively measure pathologic sleep inertia. Structural and functional neuroimaging studies in narcolepsy type 1 have shown considerable variability but so far implicate both hypothalamic and extra-hypothalamic regions; fewer studies of other CDH have been performed. There is recent renewed interest in pupillometry as a measure of alertness in the evaluation of hypersomnolence.

Summary

No single test captures the full spectrum of disorders and use of multiple measures will likely improve diagnostic precision. Research is needed to identify novel measures and disease-specific biomarkers, and to define combinations of measures optimal for CDH diagnosis.

Muscle atonia index during multiple sleep latency test: A possible marker to differentiate narcolepsy from other hypersomnias

OBJECTIVE

The complexity and delay of the diagnosis of narcolepsy require several diagnostic tests and invasive procedures such as lumbar puncture. Our study aimed to determine the changes in muscle tone (atonia index, AI) at different levels of vigilance during the entire multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and each nap in people with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and 2 (NT2) compared with other hypersomnias and its potential diagnostic value.

METHODS

Twenty-nine patients with NT1 (11 M 18F, mean age 34.9 years, SD 16.8) and sixteen with NT2 (10 M 6F, mean age 39 years, SD 11.8) and 20 controls with other hypersomnias (10 M, 10F mean age 45.1 years, SD 15.1) were recruited. AI was evaluated at different levels of vigilance (Wake and REM sleep) in each nap and throughout the MSLT of each group. The validity of AI in identifying patients with narcolepsy (NT1 and NT2) was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

AI during wakefulness (WAI) was significantly higher in the narcolepsy groups (NT1 and NT2 p < 0.001) compared to the hypersomniac group. AI during REM sleep (RAI) (p = 0.03) and WAI in nap with sudden onsets of REM sleep periods (SOREMP) (p = 0.001) were lower in NT1 than in NT2. The ROC curves showed high AUC values for WAI (NT1 0.88; Best Cut-off > 0.57, Sensitivity 79.3 % Specificity 90 %; NT2 0.89 Best Cut-off > 0.67 Sensitivity 87.5 % Specificity 95 %; NT1 and NT2 0.88 Best Cut-off > 0.57 Sensitivity 82.2 % Specificity 90 %) in discriminating subjects suffering from other hypersomnias. RAI and WAI in nap with SOREMP showed a poor AUC value (RAI AUC: 0.7 Best cutoff 0.7 Sensitivity 50 % Specificity 87.5 %; WAI in nap before SOREMP AUC: 0.66, Best cut-off < 0.82 sensitivity 61.9 % and specificity 67.35 %) differentiating NT1 and NT2.

CONCLUSIONS

WAI may represent an encouraging electrophysiological marker of narcolepsy and suggests a vulnerable tendency to dissociative wake / sleep dysregulation lacking in other forms of hypersomnia.

SIGNIFICANCE

AI during wakefulness may help distinguish between narcolepsy and other hypersomnias.

Temporal distribution of sleep onset REM periods and N3 sleep in the MSLT and night polysomnogram of narcolepsy type 1 and other hypersomnias

INTRODUCTION

The presence of ≥2 sleep onset REM periods (SOREMP) in the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) and the previous night polysomnogram (PSG) is part of the diagnostic criteria of narcolepsy, with every SOREMP having the same diagnostic value, despite evidence suggesting that time of SOREMP appearance and their preceding sleep stage might be relevant. We studied the temporal distribution of SOREMPs and associated sleep stages in the MSLT of patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and other hypersomnias (OH).

METHODS

We reviewed consecutive five-nap MSLTs and their preceding PSG from 83 untreated adult patients with hypersomnolence and ≥1 SOREMPs. Wake/N1(W/N1)-SOREMPs, N2-SOREMPs, and N3 sleep presence and time of appearance were analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients had NT1 and 44 OH. There were 183 (78%) SOREMPs in patients with NT1 and 83 (31%) in OH. Sixty-seven percent of SOREMPs in NT1 were from W/N1, and 20% -none from wake-in OH (p < 0.001). Most patients (94%) with ≥2 W/N1-SOREMPs had NT1 (specificity 95%, sensitivity 82%). In patients with NT1 but not in OH, W/N1-SOREMPs decreased throughout the day (from 79% in the 1st nap to 33% in the preceding night, p < 0.001), whereas N2-SOREMPs did not change. N3 sleep frequency in the 5th nap was higher in NT1 than in OH (28% vs. 7%, p:0.009). Nocturnal-SOREMP plus ≥4 daytime SOREMPs, Wake-REM transitions, and REM followed by N3 were only seen in NT1.

CONCLUSION

Measuring the sleep stage sequence and temporal distribution of SOREMP helps to identify patients with narcolepsy in the MSLT.

The Psychomotor Vigilance Test as a measure of alertness and sleep inertia in people with central disorders of hypersomnolence

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH) manifest with daytime sleepiness, often accompanied by cognitive symptoms. Objective tests characterizing cognitive dysfunction may have diagnostic utility. Further, because some people with CDH report worsening cognition upon awakening, cognitive testing before and after napping may provide additional diagnostic information.

METHODS

CDH patients with idiopathic hypersomnia (n = 76), narcolepsy type 1 (n = 19), narcolepsy type 2 (n = 22), and self-reported excessive daytime sleepiness not meeting current diagnostic criteria (n = 76), and non-sleepy controls (n = 33) underwent testing with the psychomotor vigilance test (PVT), a 10-minute reaction time test. A subset of participants underwent repeat testing during a Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT), before and immediately after naps 2 and 4.

RESULTS

Most PVT metrics were significantly better in controls than in patients with CDH. Minimal group differences in PVT performance were observed by CDH diagnosis. PVT performance was weakly correlated to Epworth and MSLT mean sleep latency in the CDH group. Before and after naps, PVT metrics were minimally different for controls, while PVT performance generally worsened following naps in the CDH group, with significant worsening compared to controls for nap 2 mean, median, lapses, and fastest 10% of responses, and nap 4 lapses and slowest 10% of responses. Change in performance did not differ based on CDH diagnostic group for any metric on either nap.

CONCLUSIONS

The PVT, at baseline and following a short nap, may provide adjunctive diagnostic utility in separating individuals with CDH from controls.

Idiopathic Hypersomnia: Historical Account, Critical Review of Current Tests and Criteria, Diagnostic Evaluation in the Absence of Biological Markers and Robust Electrophysiological Diagnostic Criteria

Idiopathic hypersomnia was first described in 1976 under two forms: polysymptomatic, characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, long and unrefreshing naps, nocturnal sleep of abnormally long duration and signs of sleep drunkenness upon awakening; monosymptomatic, manifested by excessive daytime sleepiness only. Yet, after 45 years, this sleep disorder is still poorly delineated and diagnostic criteria produced by successive International Classifications of Sleep Disorders are far from satisfactory. The first part of this review is a historical account of the successive names and descriptions of idiopathic hypersomnia: monosymptomatic and polysymptomatic idiopathic hypersomnia in 1976; central nervous system idiopathic hypersomnia in 1979; idiopathic hypersomnia in 1990; idiopathic hypersomnia with and without long sleep time in 2005; idiopathic hypersomnia again in 2014; and, within the last few years, the proposal of separating idiopathic hypersomnia into a well-defined subtype, idiopathic hypersomnia with long sleep duration, and a more heterogeneous subtype combining idiopathic hypersomnia without long sleep duration and narcolepsy type 2. The second part is a critical review of both current ICSD-3 diagnostic criteria and clinical features, scales and questionnaires, electrophysiological and circadian control tests, research techniques, currently used to diagnose idiopathic hypersomnia. The third part proposes a diagnostic evaluation of idiopathic hypersomnia, in the absence of biologic markers and of robust electrophysiological diagnostic criteria.

Dream Generation and Recall in Daytime NREM Sleep of Patients With Narcolepsy Type 1

The less rigid architecture of sleep in patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) compared with healthy subjects may provide new insights into some unresolved issues of dream experience (DE), under the assumption that their DE frequencies are comparable. The multiple transition from wakefulness to REM sleep (sleep onset REM period: SOREMP) during the five trials of the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) appears of particular interest. In MSLT studies, NT1 patients reported a DE after about 80% of SOREMP naps (as often as after nighttime REM sleep of themselves and healthy subjects), but only after about 30% of NREM naps compared to 60% of daytime and nighttime NREM sleep of healthy subjects. To estimate accurately the “real” DE frequency, we asked participants to report DE (“dream”) after each MSLT nap and, in case of failure, to specify if they were unable to retrieve any content (“white dream”) or DE did not occur (“no-dream”). The proportions of dreams, white dreams, and no dreams and the indicators of structural organization of DEs reported after NREM naps by 17 adult NT1 patients were compared with those reported by 25 subjects with subjective complaints of excessive daytime sleepiness (sc-EDS), who take multiple daytime NREM naps. Findings were consistent with the hypothesis of a failure in recall after awakening rather than in generation during sleep: white dreams were more frequent in NT1 patients than in sc-EDS subjects (42.86 vs 17.64%), while their frequency of dreams plus white dreams were similar (67.86 and 61.78%) and comparable with that of NREM-DEs in healthy subjects. The longer and more complex NREM-DEs of NT1 patients compared with sc-EDS subjects suggest that the difficulty in DE reporting depends on their negative attitude toward recall of contents less vivid and bizarre than those they usually retrieve after daytime SOREMP and nighttime REM sleep. As this attitude may be reversed by some recall training before MSLT, collecting wider amounts of DE reports after NREM naps would cast light on both the across-stage continuity in the functioning of cognitive processes underlying DE and the difference in content and structural organization of SOREM-DEs preceded by N1 or also N2 sleep.

Structural organization of dream experience during daytime sleep-onset rapid eye movement period sleep of patients with narcolepsy type 1

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of dream experience (DE) developed during naps at Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) by patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and establish, using story-grammar analysis, the structural organization of DEs developed during naps with sleep onset rapid eye movement (REM) period (SOREMP) sleep compared with their DEs during early- and late-night REM sleep.

METHODS

Thirty drug-free cognitively intact adult NT1 patients were asked to report DE developed during each MSLT nap. Ten NT1 patients also spent voluntarily a supplementary night being awakened during the first-cycle and third-cycle REM sleep. Patients provided dream reports, white dreams, and no dreams, whose frequencies were matched in naps with SOREMP versus non-REM (NREM) sleep. All dream reports were then analyzed using story-grammar rules.

RESULTS

DE was recalled in detail (dream report) by NT1 patients after 75% of naps with SOREMP sleep and after 25% of naps with NREM sleep. Dream reports were provided by 8 out of 10 NT1 patients after both awakenings from nighttime REM sleep. Story-grammar analysis of dream reports showed that SOREMP-DEs are organized as hierarchically ordered sequences of events (so-called dream-stories), which are longer and more complex in the first and fourth SOREMP naps and are comparable with nighttime REM-DEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The similar structural organization of SOREMP-DEs with nighttime REM-DEs indicates that their underlying cognitive processes are highly, albeit not uniformly, effective during daytime SOREMP sleep. Given the peculiar neurophysiology of SOREMP sleep, investigating SOREMP-DEs may cast further light on the relationships between the neurophysiological and psychological processes involved in REM-dreaming.

Narcolepsy type 1

Although being the second most common cause of disabling daytime sleepiness in the world, narcolepsy in India is seldom diagnosed. So far, only two cases had been reported. This is the case of narcolepsy in a 15-year-old female student struggling in her scholastic pursuit because of the disease.

Neural network analysis of sleep stages enables efficient diagnosis of narcolepsy

Analysis of sleep for the diagnosis of sleep disorders such as Type-1 Narcolepsy (T1N) currently requires visual inspection of polysomnography records by trained scoring technicians. Here, we used neural networks in approximately 3,000 normal and abnormal sleep recordings to automate sleep stage scoring, producing a hypnodensity graph-a probability distribution conveying more information than classical hypnograms. Accuracy of sleep stage scoring was validated in 70 subjects assessed by six scorers. The best model performed better than any individual scorer (87% versus consensus). It also reliably scores sleep down to 5 s instead of 30 s scoring epochs. A T1N marker based on unusual sleep stage overlaps achieved a specificity of 96% and a sensitivity of 91%, validated in independent datasets. Addition of HLA-DQB1*06:02 typing increased specificity to 99%. Our method can reduce time spent in sleep clinics and automates T1N diagnosis. It also opens the possibility of diagnosing T1N using home sleep studies.

Clinical update on central hypersomnias

The central hypersomnias encompass a range of conditions causing persisting or intermittent excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). These conditions therefore present not infrequently in general clinical sleep practice, and remain in the differential for patients presenting with sleepiness. Our understanding of the pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of these conditions has progressed significantly over recent years, and in this article we review this group of disorders, focussing in particular on recent changes in classification and diagnosis, pathophysiological advances, and novel treatment options.

What Does One Sleep-Onset REM Period—During Either Nocturnal Polysomnography or Multiple Sleep Latency Test—Mean in Differential Diagnosis of Central Hypersomnias?

PURPOSE

The differentiation of narcolepsy without cataplexy from idiopathic hypersomnia is based on the number of sleep-onset rapid eye movement periods (SOREMPs) observed by multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and nocturnal polysomnography. The main aim of this study was to investigate the utility of SOREMP in differential diagnosis of central hypersomnias.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively evaluated consecutive 101 patients with a normal polysomnography other than the presence of SOREMP and/or REM without atonia and a latency of ≤8 minutes in MSLT.

RESULTS

The authors classified patients as follows: 52 patients had at least 2 SOREMPs (narcolepsy group), 23 had no SOREMPs (idiopathic hypersomnia group), and 26 patients had only 1 SOREMP (intermediate group). In polysomnographic recordings, both mean sleep latency and REM latency were significantly shorter in the narcolepsy (P = 0.012, P < 0.001, respectively) and intermediate groups (P = 0.005 and P = 0.035, respectively) compared with the idiopathic hypersomnia group. In MSLT recordings, sleep latency was 2.7 ± 2.2 minutes in the narcolepsy group, 3.6 ± 1.4 minutes in the intermediate group, and 5.2 ± 2.7 minutes in the idiopathic hypersomnia group (P < 0.001). The mean REM latency and sleep stages SOREMPs arised from were similar between the narcolepsy and intermediate groups.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, SOREMPs in MSLT and polysomnography remain the sole electrodiagnostic feature that discriminates narcolepsy without cataplexy from idiopathic hypersomnia. Different parameters or combined criteria are being increasingly investigated to increase the sensitivity and specificity of MSLT. The findings showed an altered instability of REM sleep not only in patients with 2 or more SOREMPs in MSLT but also in patients with one SOREMP.

Sleep-stage transitions during polysomnographic recordings as diagnostic features of type 1 narcolepsy

OBJECTIVE

Type 1 narcolepsy/hypocretin deficiency is characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, sleep fragmentation, and cataplexy. Short rapid eye movement (REM) latency (≤15 min) during nocturnal polysomnography (PSG) or during naps of the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) defines a sleep-onset REM sleep period (SOREMP), a diagnostic hallmark. We hypothesized that abnormal sleep transitions other than SOREMPs can be identified in type 1 narcolepsy.

METHODS

Sleep-stage transitions (one to 10 epochs to one to five epochs of any other stage) and bout length features (one to 10 epochs) were extracted from PSGs. The first 15 min of sleep were excluded when a nocturnal SOREMP was recorded. F(0.1) measures and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to identify specific (≥98%) features. A data set of 136 patients and 510 sex- and age-matched controls was used for the training. A data set of 19 cases and 708 sleep-clinic patients was used for the validation.

RESULTS

(1) ≥5 transitions from ≥5 epochs of stage N1 or W to ≥2 epochs of REM sleep, (2) ≥22 transitions from ≥3 epochs of stage N2 or N3 to ≥2 epochs of N1 or W, and (3) ≥16 bouts of ≥6 epochs of N1 or W were found to be highly specific (≥98%). Sensitivity ranged from 16% to 30%, and it did not vary substantially with and without medication or a nocturnal SOREMP. In patients taking antidepressants, nocturnal SOREMPs occurred much less frequently (16% vs. 36%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased sleep-stage transitions notably from ≥2.5 min of W/N1 into REM are specifically diagnostic for narcolepsy independent of a nocturnal SOREMP.

Central Disorders of Hypersomnolence: Focus on the Narcolepsies and Idiopathic Hypersomnia

The central disorders of hypersomnolence are characterized by severe daytime sleepiness, which is present despite normal quality and timing of nocturnal sleep. Recent reclassification distinguishes three main subtypes: narcolepsy type 1, narcolepsy type 2, and idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), which are the focus of this review. Narcolepsy type 1 results from loss of hypothalamic hypocretin neurons, while the pathophysiology underlying narcolepsy type 2 and IH remains to be fully elucidated. Treatment of all three disorders focuses on the management of sleepiness, with additional treatment of cataplexy in those patients with narcolepsy type 1. Sleepiness can be treated with modafinil/armodafinil or sympathomimetic CNS stimulants, which have been shown to be beneficial in randomized controlled trials of narcolepsy and, quite recently, IH. In those patients with narcolepsy type 1, sodium oxybate is effective for the treatment of both sleepiness and cataplexy. Despite these treatments, there remains a subset of hypersomnolent patients with persistent sleepiness, in whom alternate therapies are needed. Emerging treatments for sleepiness include histamine H3 antagonists (eg, pitolisant) and possibly negative allosteric modulators of the gamma-aminobutyric acid-A receptor (eg, clarithromycin and flumazenil).

Altered Sleep Stage Transitions of REM Sleep: A Novel and Stable Biomarker of Narcolepsy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic values, longitudinal stability, and HLA association of the sleep stage transitions in narcolepsy.

METHODS

To compare the baseline differences in the sleep stage transition to REM sleep among 35 patients with type 1 narcolepsy, 39 patients with type 2 narcolepsy, 26 unaffected relatives, and 159 non-narcoleptic sleep patient controls, followed by a reassessment at a mean duration of 37.4 months.

RESULTS

The highest prevalence of altered transition from stage non-N2/N3 to stage R in multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and nocturnal polysomnography (NPSG) was found in patients with type 1 narcolepsy (92.0% and 57.1%), followed by patients with type 2 narcolepsy (69.4% and 12.8%), unaffected relatives (46.2% and 0%), and controls (39.3% and 1.3%). Individual sleep variables had varied sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing narcolepsy. By incorporating a combination of sleep variables, the decision tree analysis improved the sensitivity to 94.3% and 82.1% and enhanced specificity to 82.4% and 83% for the diagnosis of type 1 and type 2 narcolepsy, respectively. There was a significant association of DBQ1*0602 with the altered sleep stage transition (OR = 16.0, 95% CI: 1.7-149.8, p = 0.015). The persistence of the altered sleep stage transition in both MSLT and NPSG was high for both type 1 (90.5% and 64.7%) and type 2 narcolepsy (92.3% and 100%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Altered sleep stage transition is a significant and stable marker of narcolepsy, which suggests a vulnerable wake-sleep dysregulation trait in narcolepsy. Altered sleep stage transition has a significant diagnostic value in the differential diagnosis of hypersomnias, especially when combined with other diagnostic sleep variables in decision tree analysis.

Nocturnal Sleep Dynamics Identify Narcolepsy Type 1

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the reliability of nocturnal sleep dynamics in the differential diagnosis of central disorders of hypersomnolence.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Sleep laboratory.

PATIENTS

One hundred seventy-five patients with hypocretin-deficient narcolepsy type 1 (NT1, n = 79), narcolepsy type 2 (NT2, n = 22), idiopathic hypersomnia (IH, n = 22), and "subjective" hypersomnolence (sHS, n = 52).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

METHODS

Polysomnographic (PSG) work-up included 48 h of continuous PSG recording. From nocturnal PSG conventional sleep macrostructure, occurrence of sleep onset rapid eye movement period (SOREMP), sleep stages distribution, and sleep stage transitions were calculated. Patient groups were compared, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to test the diagnostic utility of nocturnal PSG data to identify NT1.

RESULTS

Sleep macrostructure was substantially stable in the 2 nights of each diagnostic group. NT1 and NT2 patients had lower latency to rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, and NT1 patients showed the highest number of awakenings, sleep stage transitions, and more time spent in N1 sleep, as well as most SOREMPs at daytime PSG and at multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) than all other groups. ROC curve analysis showed that nocturnal SOREMP (area under the curve of 0.724 ± 0.041, P < 0.0001), percent of total sleep time spent in N1 (0.896 ± 0.023, P < 0.0001), and the wakefulness-sleep transition index (0.796 ± 0.034, P < 0.0001) had a good sensitivity and specificity profile to identify NT1 sleep, especially when used in combination (0.903 ± 0.023, P < 0.0001), similarly to SOREMP number at continuous daytime PSG (0.899 ± 0.026, P < 0.0001) and at MSLT (0.956 ± 0.015, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Sleep macrostructure (i.e. SOREMP, N1 timing) including stage transitions reliably identifies hypocretin-deficient narcolepsy type 1 among central disorders of hypersomnolence.

Update on hypersomnias of central origin

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the multiple clinical aspects of hypersomnias of central origin. Emphasis is given to the new pathophysiological pathways and treatment options described in the current literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Narcolepsy is the most recognized of the hypersomnias of central origin. Hypocretin deficiency appears to underlie narcolepsy with cataplexy, and infections and vaccinations have been associated with disease onset. Targeted therapeutic approaches are currently underway. A putative naturally occurring constituent in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with non-narcoleptic primary hypersomnias, able to stimulate γ-aminobutyric acid alpha receptors and induce sleep, has recently been postulated. Neuroimaging has also provided more insight into the pathophysiology of Kleine-Levin syndrome. Sleep deprivation is currently recognized as a major differential diagnosis.

SUMMARY

Excessive daytime sleepiness is the cardinal symptom of the hypersomnias of central origin, with major impact on the quality of life. It is important that clinicians be able to recognize these conditions, so that appropriate management or onward referral is expedited.

Polysomnographic and actigraphic characteristics of patients with H1N1-vaccine-related and sporadic narcolepsy

OBJECTIVE

After the pandemic H1N1 influenza ASO3-adjuvanted vaccine, Pandemrix©, was used in late 2009 and early 2010, the incidence of narcolepsy increased in many European countries. This incidence mainly increased in children and adolescents and, to a lesser degree, in adults.

PATIENTS/METHODS

125 unmedicated patients, aged 4 to 61 years, were included in this case-series study. Of these, 69 were diagnosed to have an H1N1-vaccine-related narcolepsy and 57 had sporadic narcolepsy. Most of these patients had: an actigraphy recording of 1-2 weeks, polysomnography, a Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT), and cerebrospinal fluid hypocretin-1 concentration analysis.

RESULTS

Patients with H1N1-vaccine-related narcolepsy had shorter diagnostic delays, lower periodic leg movement index during sleep, earlier sleep-wake rhythm, and were younger in age at diagnosis, compared with sporadic cases. They also had shorter sleep latency and more sleep onset REM periods in MSLT, but these results were strongly age-dependent. Actigraphy showed quantitatively less sleep and more sleep fragmentation than polysomnography.

CONCLUSION

Regarding polysomnographic and actigraphic characteristics, there were no dramatic deviations between H1N1-vaccine-related and sporadic narcolepsy. Circadian rhythms indicated some interesting new findings with respect to the H1N1-vaccine-related disease. An actigraphy recording of 1-2 weeks is useful when studying the nocturnal aspects of narcolepsy and sleep-wake rhythms of narcoleptic patients.

Narcolepsy: a clinical review

Despite the classic tetrad of clinical features that typify it, narcolepsy remains much under-diagnosed, in part, because of the wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes, but also because of its insidious onset, usually in a young person. The median time to diagnosis from first symptoms remains very long, around 10 years in the UK. Conversely, in the specialist setting, it is likely over-diagnosed, largely because of failure to exclude other causes of hypersomnia. There is an over-reliance on a biological marker of the condition, the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT), which, like many tests, has a significant false-positive and false-negative rate. This review aims to discuss some of the difficulties in achieving a diagnosis, interpretation of investigations, differential diagnosis, and appropriate management of patients with narcolepsy.