Test-retest reliability of the multiple sleep latency test in narcolepsy without cataplexy and idiopathic hypersomnia

Validation and performance of the sleep inertia questionnaire in central disorders of hypersomnolence

BACKGROUND

Optimal measurement tools for problematic sleep inertia, common in some central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH), have not yet been determined. We evaluated the performance of the Sleep Inertia Questionnaire (SIQ) in CDH, and how well it distinguished hypersomnolent groups from controls, and IH (idiopathic hypersomnia) from narcolepsy type 1 (NT1).

METHODS

This prospective, bi-centric study included 63 control, 84 IH, 16 NT1, 18 narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), and 88 subjective excessive daytime sleepiness (sEDS) participants, using ICSD-3 criteria. 126 (47.2 %) participants were on any medication at the time of SIQ completion. We assessed construct validity of SIQ scores, and sleep inertia duration (SID), and compared them across diagnoses, controlling for age and center. We derived cutpoints to distinguish hypersomnolent patients from controls and IH from NT1. Sensitivity analyses for depression, chronotype, and medication were performed.

RESULTS

The SIQ sum and composite score were significantly lower in controls than in other groups (p < 0.0001), demonstrating outstanding ability to distinguish patients from controls (AUCs 0.92), without differences among hypersomnolent groups. SID (AUC 0.76) was significantly shorter in controls than in all hypersomnolent groups except NT1, and was shorter in NT1 than in IH or sEDS. Optimal SIQ sum cutpoint was 42 (J = 0.71) for patients versus controls. Optimal SID cutpoint in distinguishing IH from NT1 was 25 min (J = 0.39).

CONCLUSION

The SIQ has excellent ability to distinguish hypersomnolent patients from healthy controls, after controlling for depression, eveningness, and medication. SID is best at distinguishing IH from NT1.

Sleep architecture in idiopathic hypersomnia: the influence of age, sex, and body mass index

This study aimed to progress the understanding of idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) by assessing the moderating influence of individual characteristics, such as age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) on sleep architecture. In this retrospective study, 76 IH participants (38.1 ± 11.3 years; 40 women) underwent a clinical interview, an in-laboratory polysomnography with a maximal 9-h time in bed and a multiple sleep latency test (MSLT). They were compared to 106 healthy controls (38.1 ± 14.1 years; 60 women). Multiple regressions were used to assess moderating influence of age, sex, and BMI on sleep variables. We used correlations to assess whether sleep variables were associated with Epworth Sleepiness Scale scores and mean sleep onset latency on the MSLT in IH participants. Compared to controls, IH participants had shorter sleep latency (p = 0.002), longer total sleep time (p < 0.001), more time spent in N2 sleep (p = 0.008), and showed trends for a higher sleep efficiency (p = 0.023) and more time spent in rapid eye movement (REM) sleep (p = 0.022). No significant moderating influence of age, sex, or BMI was found. More severe self-reported sleepiness in IH patients was correlated with shorter REM sleep latency and less N1 sleep in terms of proportion and duration (ps < 0.01). This study shows that, when compared to healthy controls, patients with IH had no anomalies in their sleep architecture that can explain their excessive daytime sleepiness. Moreover, there is no moderating influence of age, sex, and BMI, suggesting that the absence of major group differences is relatively robust.

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.

Clinical considerations in the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia

Idiopathic hypersomnia typically is a chronic and potentially debilitating neurologic sleep disorder, and is characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness. In addition to excessive daytime sleepiness, idiopathic hypersomnia symptoms can include severe sleep inertia; long, unrefreshing naps; long sleep time; and cognitive dysfunction. Patients with idiopathic hypersomnia may experience a significant impact on their quality of life, work or school performance, earnings, employment, and overall health. Given the complex range of symptoms associated with idiopathic hypersomnia and the array of treatments available, there is a need to provide guidance on the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia and the clinically relevant recommendations that enhance effective disease management. Identifying appropriate treatment options for idiopathic hypersomnia requires timely and accurate diagnosis, consideration of individual patient factors, and frequent reassessment of symptom severity. In 2021, low-sodium oxybate was the first treatment to receive approval by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. However, many off-label treatments continue to be used. Adjunct nonpharmacologic therapies, including good sleep hygiene, patient education and counseling, and use of support groups, should be recognized and recommended when appropriate. This narrative review describes optimal treatment strategies that take into account patient-specific factors, as well as the unique characteristics of each medication and the evolution of a patient's response to treatment. Perspectives on appropriate symptom measurement and management, and potential future therapies, are also offered.

Louis EK, Ruoff CM, Kolla BP. Aging and sex are associated with multiple sleep latency test findings and their relationship with self-reported sleepiness

The aim of this study was to assess age- and sex-related differences in multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) results and in the performance of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) at classifying objective hypersomnia (mean sleep latency (MSL) ≤ 8 min). We studied 480 consecutive adults (39.3 ± 15.3 years old [18-93], 67.7% female) who underwent hypersomnia evaluation. We fit linear regression models to investigate associations between age and sex and sleep latencies (mean and for every nap), after adjusting for total sleep time and sleep efficiency (on polysomnography), and REM-suppressing antidepressant effect. A logistic regression was performed to assess whether age and sex were associated with sleep-onset REM period (SOREMP) occurrence. ROC analysis assessed the diagnostic performance of ESS scores to identify a MSL ≤ 8 min in different age/sex groups. For every 10 years of age, there was 0.41 (95% CI 0.11-0.72, p = 0.008) min reduction in MSL. Objectively (MSL ≤ 8 min) sleepy patients had shortening of latencies in naps 4 and 5 with aging. Female sex was associated with a higher MSL only in patients with MSL > 8 min. A 2.4% reduction in the odds of SOREMP occurrence was observed for every year of age in objectively sleepy patients (p = 0.045). ESS scores had a better diagnostic performance in older (≥ 50 years old) men than younger (< 50 years old) women (p < 0.05). Older patients with objectively confirmed hypersomnia may be sleepier in later naps, possibly due to less restorative naps and/or circadian rhythm factors. Self-reported sleepiness is more predictive of objective sleepiness in older men than younger women.

High-resolution HLA sequencing and hypocretin receptor 2 autoantibodies in narcolepsy type 1 and type 2

Narcolepsy is a sleep disorder caused by an apparent degeneration of orexin/hypocretin neurons in the lateral hypothalamic area and a subsequent decrease in orexin/hypocretin levels in the cerebrospinal fluid. Narcolepsy is classified into type 1 (NT1) and type 2 (NT2). While genetic associations in the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) region and candidate autoantibodies have been investigated in NT1 to imply an autoimmune origin, less is known about the pathogenesis in NT2. Twenty-six NT1 and 15 NT2 patients were included, together with control groups of 24 idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) patients and 778 general population participants. High-resolution sequencing was used to determine the alleles, the extended haplotypes, and the genotypes of HLA-DRB3, -DRB4, -DRB5, -DRB1, -DQA1, -DQB1, -DPA1, and -DPB1. Radiobinding assay was used to determine autoantibodies against hypocretin receptor 2 (anti-HCRTR2 autoantibodies). NT1 was associated with HLA-DRB5*01:01:01, -DRB1*15:01:01, -DQA1*01:02:01, -DQB1*06:02:01, -DRB5*01:01:01, -DRB1*15:01:01, -DQA1*01:02:01, -DQB1*06:02:01 (odds ratio [OR]: 9.15; p = 8.31 × 10-4) and HLA-DRB5*01:01:01, -DRB1*15:01:01, -DQA1*01:02:01, -DQB1*06:02:01, -DRB4*01:03:01, -DRB1*04:01:01, -DQA1*03:02//03:03:01, -DQB1*03:01:01 (OR: 23.61; p = 1.58 × 10-4) genotypes. Lower orexin/hypocretin levels were reported in the NT2 subgroup (n = 5) that was associated with the extended HLA-DQB1*06:02:01 haplotype (p = .001). Anti-HCRTR2 autoantibody levels were not different between study groups (p = .8524). We confirmed the previous association of NT1 with HLA-DQB1*06:02:01 extended genotypes. A subgroup of NT2 patients with intermediate orexin/hypocretin levels and association with HLA-DQB1*06:02:01 was identified, indicating a possible overlap between the two distinct narcolepsy subtypes, NT1 and NT2. Low anti-HCRTR2 autoantibody levels suggest that these receptors might not function as autoimmune targets in either NT1 or NT2.

Sleep medicine, sleep research, and sleep education: a whole life devoted to sleep

This article describes my participation in sleep medicine, sleep research, and sleep education, mainly in Europe, between the years 1970 and 2000.

Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Sarcoidosis Interactions

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is very prevalent in sarcoidosis patients. Sarcoidosis of the upper respiratory tract may affect upper airway patency and increase the risk of OSA. Weight gain due to steroid use, upper airway myopathy due to steroids and sarcoidosis itself, and interstitial lung disease with decreased upper airway patency are other reasons for the higher OSA prevalence seen in sarcoidosis. Several clinical manifestations such as fatigue, hypersomnolence, cognitive deficits, and pulmonary hypertension are common to both OSA and sarcoidosis. Therefore, early screening and treatment for OSA can improve symptoms and overall patient quality of life.

Narcolepsy Severity Scale-2 and Idiopathic Hypersomnia Severity Scale to better quantify symptoms severity and consequences in Narcolepsy type 2

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Narcolepsy type 2 (NT2) is an understudied central disorder of hypersomnolence sharing some similarities with narcolepsy type 1 and idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). We aimed: (1) to assess systematically the symptoms in patients with NT2, with self-reported questionnaires: Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Narcolepsy Severity Scale (NSS), IH Severity Scale (IHSS), and (2) to evaluate the responsiveness of these scales to treatment.

METHODS

One hundred and nine patients with NT2 (31.4 ± 12.2 years old, 47 untreated) diagnosed according to ICSD-3 were selected in a Reference Center for Narcolepsy. They all completed the ESS, subgroups completed the modified NSS (NSS-2, without cataplexy items) (n = 95) and IHSS (n = 76). Some patients completed the scales twice (before/during treatment): 42 ESS, 26 NSS-2, and 30 IHSS.

RESULTS

Based on NSS-2, all untreated patients had sleepiness, 58% disrupted nocturnal sleep, 40% hallucinations, and 28% sleep paralysis. On IHSS, 76% reported a prolonged nocturnal sleep, and 83% sleep inertia. In the independent sample, ESS and NSS-2 scores were lower in treated patients, with same trend for IHSS scores. After treatment, ESS, NSS-2, and IHSS total scores were lower, with a mean difference of 3.7 ± 4.1, 5.3 ± 6.7, and 4.1 ± 6.2, respectively. The minimum clinically important difference between untreated and treated patients were 2.1 for ESS, 3.3 for NSS-2, and 3.1 for IHSS. After treatment, 61.9% of patients decreased their ESS > 2 points, 61.5% their NSS-2 > 3 points, and 53.3% their IHSS > 3 points.

CONCLUSIONS

NSS-2 and IHSS correctly quantified symptoms' severity and consequences in NT2, with good performances to objectify response to medications. These tools are useful for monitoring and optimizing NT2 management, and for use in clinical trials.

Idiopathic hypersomnia years after the diagnosis

Little attention has been paid to the long-term development of idiopathic hypersomnia symptoms and idiopathic hypersomnia comorbidities. The aim of this study was to describe the general health of patients with idiopathic hypersomnia years after the initial diagnosis, focusing on current subjective hypersomnolence and the presence of its other possible causes. Adult patients diagnosed with idiopathic hypersomnia ≥ 3 years ago at sleep centres in Prague and Kosice were invited to participate in this study. A total of 60 patients were examined (age 47.3 ± SD = 13.2 years, 66.7% women). In all participants, their hypersomnolence could not be explained by any other cause but idiopathic hypersomnia at the time of diagnosis. The mean duration of follow-up was 9.8 + 8.0 years. Fifty patients (83%) reported persisting hypersomnolence, but only 33 (55%) had no other disease that could also explain the patient's excessive daytime sleepiness and/or prolonged sleep. In two patients (3%), the diagnosis in the meantime had changed to narcolepsy type 2, and 15 patients (25%) had developed a disease or diseases potentially causing hypersomnolence since the initial diagnosis. Complete hypersomnolence resolution without stimulant treatment lasting longer than 6 months was reported by 10 patients (17%). To conclude, in a longer interval from the diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia, hypersomnolence may disappear or may theoretically be explained by another newly developed disease, or the diagnosis may be changed to narcolepsy type 2. Thus, after 9.8 years, only 55% of the examined patients with idiopathic hypersomnia had a typical clinical picture of idiopathic hypersomnia without doubts about the cause of the current hypersomnolence.

Objective evaluation of excessive daytime sleepiness

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is multifactorial. It combines, among other things, an excessive propensity to fall asleep ("physiological sleepiness") and a continuous non-imperative sleepiness (or drowsiness/hypo-arousal) leading to difficulties remaining awake and maintaining sustained attention and vigilance over the long term ("manifest sleepiness"). There is no stand-alone biological measure of EDS. EDS measures can either capture the severity of physiological sleepiness, which corresponds to the propensity to fall asleep, or the severity of manifest sleepiness, which corresponds to behavioral consequences of sleepiness and reduced vigilance. Neuropsychological tests (The psychomotor vigilance task (PVT), Oxford Sleep Resistance Test (OSLeR), Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART)) explore manifest sleepiness through several sustained attention tests but the lack of normative values and standardized protocols make the results difficult to interpret and use in clinical practice. Neurophysiological tests explore the two main aspects of EDS, i.e. the propensity to fall asleep (Multiple sleep latency test, MSLT) and the capacity to remain awake (Maintenance of wakefulness test, MWT). The MSLT and the MWT are widely used in clinical practice. The MSLT is recognized as the "gold standard" test for measuring the severity of the propensity to fall asleep and it is a diagnostic criterion for narcolepsy. The MWT measures the ability to stay awake. The MWT is not a diagnostic test as it is recommended only to evaluate the evolution of EDS and efficacy of EDS treatment. Even if some efforts to standardize the protocols for administration of these tests have been ongoing, MSLT and MWT have numerous limitations: age effect, floor or ceiling effects, binding protocol, no normal or cutoff value (or determined in small samples), and no or low test-retest values in some pathologies. Moreover, the recommended electrophysiological set-up and the determination of sleep onset using the 30‑sec epochs scoring rule show some limitations. New, more precise neurophysiological techniques should aim to detect very brief periods of physiological sleepiness and, in the future, the brain local phenomenon of sleepiness likely to underpin drowsiness, which could be called "physiological drowsiness".

Is there a role for repeating the multiple sleep latency test across childhood when initially non-diagnostic?

BACKGROUND

The gold standard investigation for central disorders of hypersomnolence is the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT). As the clinical features of these disorders of hypersomnolence evolve with time in children, clinicians may consider repeating a previously non-diagnostic MSLT. Currently there are no guidelines available regards the utility and timing of repeating paediatric MSLTs.

METHODS

Retrospective review of children aged 3-18years with ≥2MSLTs between 2005 and 2022. Narcolepsy was defined as mean sleep latency (MSL) <8min with ≥2 sleep onset REM (SOREM); idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) was defined as MSL <8min with <2 SOREM. MSLTs not meeting these criteria were labelled non-diagnostic.

RESULTS

19 children (9 female) with initial non-diagnostic MSLT underwent repeat MSLT, with 6 proceeding to a 3rd MSLT following 2 non-diagnostic MSLTs. The 2nd MSLT resulted in diagnosis in 6/19 (32 %) (3 narcolepsy, 3 IH); and 2/6 (33 %) 3rd MSLT were diagnostic (2 IH). Median age at initial MSLT was 7.5y (range 3.4-17.8y), with repeat performed after median of 2.9y (range 0.9-8.2y), and 3rd after a further 1.9 years (range 1.2-4.2y). Mean change in MSL on repeat testing was -2min (range -15.5min to +4.9min, p = 0.18). Of the 8 diagnostic repeat MSLTs, in addition to the MSL falling below 8 min, 2 children also developed ≥2 SOREM that had not been previously present.

CONCLUSIONS

A third of repeat MSLTs became diagnostic, suggesting repeat MSLT should be considered in childhood if clinical suspicion persists. Further work needs to address the ideal interval between MSLTs and diagnostic cut-points specific to the paediatric population.

Sleepy Kids: are the current diagnostic criteria for multiple sleep latency tests enough?

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is common in childhood and is currently quantified using adult criteria on a multiple sleep latency test (MSLT). This study aimed to describe paediatric MSLT results, particularly focussing on a previously proposed alternative mean sleep latency (MSL) threshold for children of 12 min, and assess the impact of a 5th nap. We performed a retrospective analysis of MSLTs at a single paediatric centre from 2004 to 2021. Narcolepsy was defined as a mean sleep latency (MSL) ≤8min with ≥2 sleep onset REM (SOREM) periods. Idiopathic Hypersomnia (IH) was defined as a MSL ≤8min with <2 SOREMs. An ambiguous MSLT result was defined as a MSL 8-12min and/or ≥2 SOREM periods. Of 214 MSLTs [50 % female, median age 14.0y (range 3.3-20.1y)], narcolepsy was diagnosed in 48 (22 %), IH in 22 (10 %) and the result was ambiguous in 44 (21 %). Those with ambiguous MSLT results were older (15.6 vs 13.4y, p = 0.006) with a higher proportion of females (61 % vs 35 %, p = 0.01) in comparison to the narcolepsy group. A 5th nap was performed in 60 (28 %) of MSLTs and only changed the outcome in one case. In conclusion, MSLT results are borderline in 21 % of paediatric cases, suggesting that current adult diagnostic criteria may miss narcolepsy and IH in children. A 5th nap usually makes no difference or increases the MSL, suggesting that a four nap MSLT protocol could be used apart from rare cases where the result is borderline after the 4th nap.

Disentangling the complex landscape of sleep-wake disorders with data-driven phenotyping: A study of the Bernese center

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The diagnosis of sleep-wake disorders (SWDs) is challenging because of the existence of only few accurate biomarkers and the frequent coexistence of multiple SWDs and/or other comorbidities. The aim of this study was to assess in a large cohort of well-characterized SWD patients the potential of a data-driven approach for the identification of SWDs.

METHODS

We included 6958 patients from the Bernese Sleep Registry and 300 variables/biomarkers including questionnaires, results of polysomnography/vigilance tests, and final clinical diagnoses. A pipeline, based on machine learning, was created to extract and cluster the clinical data. Our analysis was performed on three cohorts: patients with central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDHs), a full cohort of patients with SWDs, and a clean cohort without coexisting SWDs.

RESULTS

A first analysis focused on the cohort of patients with CDHs and revealed four patient clusters: two clusters for narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) but not for narcolepsy type 2 or idiopathic hypersomnia. In the full cohort of SWDs, nine clusters were found: four contained patients with obstructive and central sleep apnea syndrome, one with NT1, and four with intermixed SWDs. In the cohort of patients without coexisting SWDs, an additional cluster of patients with chronic insomnia disorder was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the existence of clear clusters of NT1 in CDHs, but mainly intermixed groups in the full spectrum of SWDs, with the exception of sleep apnea syndromes and NT1. New biomarkers are needed for better phenotyping and diagnosis of SWDs.

Efficacy of once-nightly sodium oxybate (FT218) in narcolepsy type 1 and type 2: post hoc analysis from the Phase 3 REST-ON Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Post hoc analyses from the phase 3 REST-ON trial evaluated efficacy of extended-release once-nightly sodium oxybate (ON-SXB; FT218) vs placebo for daytime sleepiness and disrupted nighttime sleep in narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and 2 (NT2).

METHODS

Participants were stratified by narcolepsy type and randomized 1:1 to ON-SXB (4.5 g, week 1; 6 g, weeks 2-3; 7.5 g, weeks 4-8; and 9 g, weeks 9-13) or placebo. Assessments included mean sleep latency on Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) rating (coprimary endpoints) and sleep stage shifts, nocturnal arousals, and patient-reported sleep quality, refreshing nature of sleep, and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score (secondary endpoints) separately in NT1 and NT2 subgroups.

RESULTS

The modified intent-to-treat population comprised 190 participants (NT1, n = 145; NT2, n = 45). Significant improvements were demonstrated with ON-SXB vs placebo in sleep latency for NT1 (all doses, p < .001) and NT2 (6 and 9 g, p < .05) subgroups. Greater proportions of participants in both subgroups had CGI-I ratings of much/very much improved with ON-SXB vs placebo. Sleep stage shifts and sleep quality significantly improved in both subgroups (all doses vs placebo, p < .001). Significant improvements with all ON-SXB doses vs placebo in refreshing nature of sleep (p < .001), nocturnal arousals (p < .05), and ESS scores (p ≤ .001) were reported for NT1 with directional improvements for NT2.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically meaningful improvements of a single ON-SXB bedtime dose were shown for daytime sleepiness and DNS in NT1 and NT2, with less power for the limited NT2 subgroup.

Evaluation of hypersomnolence: From symptoms to diagnosis, a multidimensional approach

Hypersomnolence is a major public health issue given its high frequency, its impact on academic/occupational functioning and on accidentology, as well as its heavy socio-economic burden. The positive and aetiological diagnosis is crucial, as it determines the therapeutic strategy. It must consider the following aspects: i) hypersomnolence is a complex concept referring to symptoms as varied as excessive daytime sleepiness, excessive need for sleep, sleep inertia, or drowsiness, all of which warrant specific dedicated investigations; ii) the boundary between physiological and abnormal hypersomnolence is blurred, since most symptoms can be encountered in the general population to varying degrees without being considered as pathological, meaning that their severity, frequency, context of occurrence and related impairment need to be carefully assessed; iii) investigation of hypersomnolence relies on scales/questionnaires as well as behavioural and neurophysiological tests, which measure one or more dimensions, keeping in mind the possible discrepancy between objective and subjective assessment; iv) aetiological reasoning is driven by knowledge of the main sleep regulation mechanisms, epidemiology, and associated symptoms. The need to assess hypersomnolence is growing, both for its management, and for assessing the efficacy of treatments. The landscape of tools available for investigating hypersomnolence is constantly evolving, in parallel with research into sleep physiology and technical advances. These investigations face the challenges of reconciling subjective perception and objective data, making tools accessible to as many people as possible and predicting the risk of accidents.

Repeated polysomnography and multiple sleep latency test in narcolepsy type 1 and other hypersomnolence disorders

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of narcolepsy is based on clinical information, combined with polysomnography (PSG) and the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT). PSG and the MSLT are moderately reliable at diagnosing narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) but unreliable for diagnosing narcolepsy type 2 (NT2). This is a problem, especially given the increased risk of a false-positive MSLT in the context of circadian misalignment or sleep deprivation, both of which commonly occur in the general population.

AIM

We aimed to clarify the accuracy of PSG/MSLT testing in diagnosing NT1 versus controls without sleep disorders. Repeatability and reliability of PSG/MSLT testing and temporal changes in clinical findings of patients with NT1 versus patients with hypersomnolence with normal hypocretin-1 were compared.

METHOD

84 patients with NT1 and 100 patients with non-NT1-hypersomnolence disorders, all with congruent cerebrospinal fluid hypocretin-1 (CSF-hcrt-1) levels, were included. Twenty-five of the 84 NT1 patients and all the hypersomnolence disorder patients underwent a follow-up evaluation consisting of clinical assessment, PSG, and a modified MSLT. An additional 68 controls with no sleep disorders were assessed at baseline.

CONCLUSION

Confirming results from previous studies, we found that PSG and our modified MSLT accurately and reliably diagnosed hypocretin-deficient NT1 (accuracy = 0.88, reliability = 0.80). Patients with NT1 had stable clinical and electrophysiological presentations over time that suggested a stable phenotype. In contrast, the PSG/MSLT results of patients with hypersomnolence, and normal CSF-hcrt-1 had poor reliability (0.32) and low repeatability.

Long-Term Treatment of Narcolepsy and Idiopathic Hypersomnia with Low-Sodium Oxybate

Narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia are chronic conditions that negatively affect alertness, mental and physical energy, functioning, and quality of life (QoL). Calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium oxybates (low-sodium oxybate; LXB) is an oxybate formulation with 92% less sodium than sodium oxybate (SXB; a treatment for narcolepsy) and the same active moiety. LXB is approved in the US for treatment of cataplexy or excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in patients 7 years of age or older with narcolepsy, and idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. In Phase 3 clinical trials, LXB exhibited a safety profile consistent with that of SXB in narcolepsy. Besides continued efficacy in treating symptoms, potential benefits of long-term LXB treatment include flexible optimization of dosing and regimen, improvement of QoL and functioning, weight loss, and (relative to SXB in narcolepsy) health benefits of reduced sodium content. Dosing of LXB is twice nightly (for narcolepsy) or once or twice nightly (for idiopathic hypersomnia) based on patient characteristics and response, and individualized titration can be leveraged over the long term as a patient's life circumstances change. Patients with narcolepsy transitioning from SXB initiate LXB at the same dose, and most patients require no further changes to achieve similar efficacy and tolerability. Improvements in functioning and QoL with LXB treatment could have cascading positive effects in multiple domains, particularly in younger patients. In clinical trials, LXB was associated with weight loss in both narcolepsy (in which obesity is a well-established comorbidity) and idiopathic hypersomnia, only occasionally leading participants to be underweight. As both narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia are associated with increased risk of cardiometabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities, limiting medication-related sodium intake with LXB may have significant health benefits, although this has not yet been verified prospectively due to the prolonged follow-up required. LXB is a promising long-term treatment for narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia.

Central Disorders of Hypersomnolence

OBJECTIVE

The goals of this article are to describe the clinical approach to and management of patients with central disorders of hypersomnolence, and to understand and differentiate available diagnostic tools.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Updated clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of central disorders of hypersomnolence and narcolepsy specifically highlight new treatment options. Approval for a lower-sodium oxybate formulation that contains 92% less sodium than the standard sodium oxybate for the treatment of narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia adds to the number of medications available for these disorders, allowing for a more tailored management of symptoms.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

Central disorders of hypersomnolence are characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness that impacts daily functions. These disorders can be differentiated by obtaining a detailed clinical sleep history and by a thoughtful interpretation of sleep diagnostic testing. Tailoring treatment approaches to meet the needs of individuals and accounting for medical and psychiatric comorbidities may improve quality of life.

Narcolepsy and Idiopathic Hypersomnia

Narcolepsy types 1 and 2 and idiopathic hypersomnia are primary Central Nervous System (CNS) disorders of hypersomnolence characterized by profound daytime sleepiness and/or excessive sleep need. Onset of symptoms begins typically in childhood or adolescence, and children can have unique presentations compared with adults. Narcolepsy type 1 is likely caused by immune-mediated loss of orexin (hypocretin) neurons in the hypothalamus; however, the causes of narcolepsy type 2 and idiopathic hypersomnia are unknown. Existing treatments improve daytime sleepiness and cataplexy but there is no cure for these disorders.

Idiopathic Hypersomnia: Neurobiology, Diagnosis, and Management

Idiopathic hypersomnia is a chronic neurologic sleep disorder that manifests as excessive daytime sleepiness despite normal or prolonged sleep times for age. Frequently, idiopathic hypersomnia is clinically characterized by marked sleep inertia, long and unrefreshing naps, and a high sleep efficiency. Since the initial description, there has been an ongoing evolution of its nomenclature, approach to diagnosis, characterization of symptoms, and determination of the burden of disease. In addition, an increased attention to and study of its epidemiology, neurobiology, and potential therapeutic strategies has begun to contribute to a better approach to identifying and treating it. At present, idiopathic hypersomnia is considered an orphan disease with unknown frequency and the cause is unknown; however, there is evidence to suggest circadian and sleep structure differences, structural brain changes, and neurochemical changes may contribute to the development and expression of this disease. The approach to treatment can be challenging owing to a limited number of approved treatments (calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium oxybates) in idiopathic hypersomnia. However, consideration of therapies shown to improve excessive daytime sleepiness in other disorders is frequently employed. Future directions require a clear consensus on the defining characteristics of idiopathic hypersomnia to enhance the opportunity for improved recognition, diagnosis, and treatment strategies to be established. This article provides a historical review of the evolving diagnostic classification of idiopathic hypersomnia, potential insights to the underlying pathophysiology, and a summary of proposed approaches for diagnosis and therapeutic intervention.

The evolving diagnosis and classification of CNS hypersomnolence disorders

Purpose of Review

We describe the evolution and limitations of current diagnostic criteria and classification systems of CNS hypersomnolence disorders and propose some changes.

Recent Findings

An unsupervised cluster analysis of 1100 Europeans with hypersomnolence identified the narcolepsy type 1 phenotype but not other categories listed in ICSD-3.

Summary

There are long-standing unsolved issues regarding the diagnosis and classification of central disorders of hypersomnolence. These include delineating and identifying phenotypes and unique conditions (“sui generis”), sleep deprivation’s impact on phenotypes and how to separate sleep deprivation as a trigger from other causes, as well as the association of excessive sleepiness with other disorders. We discuss these issues and present a novel, straightforward classification system with consistent terminology to get out of the impasse and do justice to people with hypersomnolence.

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.

Update on the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia: Progress, challenges, and expert opinion

Idiopathic hypersomnia is a central hypersomnolence disorder of unknown origin characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness despite normal or long sleep time, and frequent severe sleep inertia. Management strategies have been largely derived from expert consensus, due to a lack of disease-specific assessments and reliance on case series and rare randomized controlled studies. Guidelines recommend treatment with off-label medications. Modafinil, which was approved for idiopathic hypersomnia until 2011 in Europe, is the most commonly used treatment and improved sleepiness in two recent randomized placebo-controlled trials. In 2021, low-sodium oxybate (LXB) was approved in the United States for idiopathic hypersomnia. In a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized withdrawal study, LXB reduced daytime sleepiness and sleep inertia, and improved daily functioning. Here, treatment options are reviewed considering the authors' professional experience, current guidelines, and the latest research developments. The choice of pharmacotherapy should be guided by symptom profile, age, comorbidities (eg, depressive symptoms, cardiovascular problems), and concomitant medications (eg, oral contraceptives). Nonpharmacologic approaches have a role in management. An instrument (idiopathic hypersomnia severity scale) has been validated in idiopathic hypersomnia specifically, opening a path to better assessment of symptoms, impact, and response to treatment. Continued research on idiopathic hypersomnia is needed to support treatment algorithms.

Differentiation of central disorders of hypersomnolence with manual and artificial-intelligence-derived polysomnographic measures

Differentiation of central disorders of hypersomnolence (DOH) is challenging but important for patient care. This study aimed to investigate whether biomarkers derived from sleep structure evaluated both by manual scoring as well as with artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms allow distinction of patients with different DOH. We included video-polysomnography data of 40 narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), 26 narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), 23 patients with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) and 54 participants with subjective excessive daytime sleepiness (sEDS). Sleep experts manually scored sleep stages. A previously validated AI algorithm was employed to obtain automatic hypnograms and hypnodensity graphs (where each epoch is represented as a mixture of sleep stage probabilities). One-thousand-three features describing sleep architecture and instability were extracted from manual/automatic hypnogram and hypnodensity graphs. After feature selection, random forest classifiers were trained and tested in a 5-fold-cross-validation scheme to distinguish groups pairwise (NT1-vs-NT2, NT1-vs-IH, …) and single groups from the pooled remaining ones (NT1-vs-rest, NT2-vs-rest,…). The accuracy/F1-score values obtained in the test sets were: 0.74 ± 0.04/0.79 ± 0.05 (NT1-vs-NT2), 0.89 ± 0.09/0.91 ± 0.08 (NT1-vs-IH), 0.93 ± 0.06/0.91 ± 0.07 (NT1-vs-sEDS), 0.88 ± 0.04/0.80 ± 0.07 (NT1-vs-rest), 0.65 ± 0.10/0.70 ± 0.09 (NT2-vs-IH), 0.72 ± 0.12/0.60 ± 0.10 (NT2-vs-sEDS), 0.54 ± 0.19/0.38 ± 0.13 (NT2-vs-rest), 0.57 ± 0.11/0.35 ± 0.18 (IH-vs-sEDS), 0.71 ± 0.08/0.35 ± 0.10 (IH-vs-rest) and 0.76 ± 0.08/0.71 ± 0.13 (sEDS-vs-rest). The results confirm previous findings on sleep instability in patients with NT1 and show that combining manual and automatic AI-based sleep analysis could be useful for better distinction of NT2 from IH, but no precise sleep biomarker of NT2 or IH could be identified. Validation in a larger and multi-centric cohort is needed to confirm these findings.

Rapid eye movement sleep duration during the multiple sleep latency test to diagnose hypocretin-deficient narcolepsy

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To assess the performances of alternative measures of the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) to identify hypocretin-deficiency in patients with a complaint of hypersomnolence, including patients with narcolepsy.

METHODS

MSLT parameters from 374 drug-free patients with hypersomnolence, with complete clinical and polysomnographic (PSG) assessment and cerebrospinal hypocretin-1 measurement were collected. Conventional (sleep latency, number of sleep onset REM-SOREM-periods) and alternative (sleep duration, REM sleep latency and duration, sleep stage transitions) MSLT measures were compared as function of hypocretin-1 levels (≤110 vs > 110 pg/mL). We performed receiver-operating characteristics analyses to determine the best thresholds of MSLT parameters to identify hypocretin-deficiency in the global population and in subgroups of patients with narcolepsy (i.e. typical cataplexy and/or positive PSG/MSLT criteria, n = 223).

RESULTS

Patients with hypocretin-deficiency had shorter mean sleep and REM sleep latencies, longer mean sleep and REM sleep durations and more direct REM sleep transitions during the MSLT. The current standards of MSLT/PSG criteria identified hypocretin-deficient patients with a sensitivity of 0.87 and a specificity of 0.69, and 0.81/0.99 when combined with cataplexy. A mean REM sleep duration ≥ 4.1 min best identified hypocretin-deficiency in patients with hypersomnolence (AUC = 0.932, sensitivity 0.87, specificity 0.86) and ≥ 5.7 min in patients with narcolepsy (AUC = 0.832, sensitivity 0.77, specificity 0.82).

CONCLUSION

Compared to the current neurophysiological standard criteria, alternative MSLT parameters would better identify hypocretin-deficiency among patients with hypersomnolence and those with narcolepsy. We highlighted daytime REM sleep duration as a relevant neurophysiological biomarker of hypocretin-deficiency to be used in clinical and research settings.

Sex differences in variables associated with excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is common in patients with epilepsy (PWE). The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) is a self-reported measure of sleepiness in widespread use. The purpose of this study was to identify contributors to the ESS score in PWE and to identify variables associated with a high score indicative of EDS.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed on 115 PWE presenting to the epilepsy clinic. Self-reported questionnaires were administered and demographic and clinical information was gathered from the electronic medical record. Regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A high ESS score was found in nearly 20% of the cohort. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) risk, standardized anti-seizure drug (ASD) dose, and female sex were associated with an increased likelihood of a high ESS score. Assessment of the ESS without the use of a cutpoint showed that standardized ASD dose and OSA risk were associated with the ESS in men, but standardized ASD dose was not associated with the ESS in women. Higher use of valproic acid and oxcarbazepine in men and higher use of lamotrigine in women may be contributing factors.

SIGNIFICANCE

Sex is likely to be a key factor in determining contributors to EDS in PWE.

Clinical considerations for the diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia

Idiopathic hypersomnia is a sleep disorder of neurologic origin characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, with sleep inertia, long, unrefreshing naps, and prolonged nighttime sleep being key symptoms in many patients. Idiopathic hypersomnia is described in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, 3rd Edition as a central disorder of hypersomnolence with distinct clinical features and diagnostic criteria; however, confirming the diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia is often challenging. Diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia is based on objective sleep testing and the presence of associated clinical features but may be difficult for clinicians to recognize and correctly diagnose because of its low prevalence, clinical heterogeneity, and symptoms, which are similar to those of other sleep disorders. The testing required for diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia also presents logistical barriers, and reliability of objective sleep measures is suboptimal. The pathophysiology of idiopathic hypersomnia remains unknown. In this review, clinical considerations related to the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of idiopathic hypersomnia will be discussed, including perspectives from the European Union and United States.

Louis EK, Przybelski SA, Morgenthaler TI, Machulda MM, Boeve BF, Petersen RC, Jack CR, Graff-Radford J, Vemuri P, Mielke MM. Sleepiness in Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults Is Associated With CSF Biomarkers of Inflammation and Axonal Integrity

Introduction

Sleepiness has been associated with cognitive decline and dementia in the elderly. Older adults with excessive daytime sleepiness appear to be more vulnerable to longitudinal amyloid PET accumulation before the onset of the dementia. However, it remains unclear whether sleepiness is similarly associated with other biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD), axonal integrity, and inflammation, which may also contribute to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline.

Methods

In this cross-sectional analysis, we identified 260 cognitively unimpaired adults (>60 years) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging, a population-based cohort from Olmsted County (MN), who underwent CSF quantification of AD biomarkers (Aβ42, p-tau, p-tau/Aβ42) in addition to at least one of the following biomarkers [neurofilament light chain (NfL) interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)]. We fit linear regression models to assess associations between sleepiness, as measured by the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and CSF biomarkers, controlling for age, sex, APOε4 status, body mass index, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and prior diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea.

Results

Higher ESS scores were associated with higher CSF IL-6 and NfL, but not with the other CSF biomarkers. For every ESS score point increase, there was a 0.009 ([95% CI 0.001-0.016], p = 0.033) increase in the log of IL-6 and 0.01 ([95% CI 0.002-0.018], p = 0.016) increase in the log of NfL. A sensitivity analysis showed an association between ESS scores and log of p-tau/Aβ42 only in participants with an abnormal ratio (>0.023), highly predictive of amyloid positivity. For every ESS score point increase, there was a 0.006 ([95% CI 0.001-0.012], p = 0.021) increase in the log of CSF p-tau/Aβ42.

Conclusion

Sleepiness was associated with greater CSF IL-6 and NfL levels, which could contribute to neurodegeneration or alternatively cause sleepiness. Higher NfL levels may result from sleep disruption and/or contribute to sleepiness via disturbed connectivity or damage to wake-promoting centers. Associations between sleepiness and p-tau/Aβ42 in participants with abnormal ratio suggest that amyloid positivity contributes to vulnerability to sleep disturbance, which may further amyloid accumulation in a feed-forward loop process. Prospective studies of these markers are needed to determine cause-effect relationships between these associations.

The orexin story, sleep and sleep disturbances

The orexins, also known as hypocretins, are two neuropeptides (orexin A and B or hypocretin 1 and 2) produced by a few thousand neurons located in the lateral hypothalamus that were independently discovered by two research groups in 1998. Those two peptides bind two receptors (orexin/hypocretin receptor 1 and receptor 2) that are widely distributed in the brain and involved in the central physiological regulation of sleep and wakefulness, orexin receptor 2 having the major role in the maintenance of arousal. They are also implicated in a multiplicity of other functions, such as reward seeking, energy balance, autonomic regulation and emotional behaviours. The destruction of orexin neurons is responsible for the sleep disorder narcolepsy with cataplexy (type 1) in humans, and a defect of orexin signalling also causes a narcoleptic phenotype in several animal species. Orexin discovery is unprecedented in the history of sleep research, and pharmacological manipulations of orexin may have multiple therapeutic applications. Several orexin receptor antagonists were recently developed as new drugs for insomnia, and orexin agonists may be the next-generation drugs for narcolepsy. Given the broad range of functions of the orexin system, these drugs might also be beneficial for treating various conditions other than sleep disorders in the near future.

Data-Driven Phenotyping of Central Disorders of Hypersomnolence With Unsupervised Clustering

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Recent studies fueled doubts as to whether all currently defined central disorders of hypersomnolence are stable entities, especially narcolepsy type 2 and idiopathic hypersomnia. New reliable biomarkers are needed, and the question arises of whether current diagnostic criteria of hypersomnolence disorders should be reassessed. The main aim of this data-driven observational study was to see whether data-driven algorithms would segregate narcolepsy type 1 and identify more reliable subgrouping of individuals without cataplexy with new clinical biomarkers.

METHODS

We used agglomerative hierarchical clustering, an unsupervised machine learning algorithm, to identify distinct hypersomnolence clusters in the large-scale European Narcolepsy Network database. We included 97 variables, covering all aspects of central hypersomnolence disorders such as symptoms, demographics, objective and subjective sleep measures, and laboratory biomarkers. We specifically focused on subgrouping of patients without cataplexy. The number of clusters was chosen to be the minimal number for which patients without cataplexy were put in distinct groups.

RESULTS

We included 1,078 unmedicated adolescents and adults. Seven clusters were identified, of which 4 clusters included predominantly individuals with cataplexy. The 2 most distinct clusters consisted of 158 and 157 patients, were dominated by those without cataplexy, and among other variables, significantly differed in presence of sleep drunkenness, subjective difficulty awakening, and weekend-week sleep length difference. Patients formally diagnosed as having narcolepsy type 2 and idiopathic hypersomnia were evenly mixed in these 2 clusters.

DISCUSSION

Using a data-driven approach in the largest study on central disorders of hypersomnolence to date, our study identified distinct patient subgroups within the central disorders of hypersomnolence population. Our results contest inclusion of sleep-onset REM periods in diagnostic criteria for people without cataplexy and provide promising new variables for reliable diagnostic categories that better resemble different patient phenotypes. Cluster-guided classification will result in a more solid hypersomnolence classification system that is less vulnerable to instability of single features.

A rare genetic variant in the cleavage site of prepro-orexin is associated with idiopathic hypersomnia

Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) is a rare, heterogeneous sleep disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness. In contrast to narcolepsy type 1, which is a well-defined type of central disorders of hypersomnolence, the etiology of IH is poorly understood. No susceptibility loci associated with IH have been clearly identified, despite the tendency for familial aggregation of IH. We performed a variation screening of the prepro-orexin/hypocretin and orexin receptors genes and an association study for IH in a Japanese population, with replication (598 patients and 9826 controls). We identified a rare missense variant (g.42184347T>C; p.Lys68Arg; rs537376938) in the cleavage site of prepro-orexin that was associated with IH (minor allele frequency of 1.67% in cases versus 0.32% in controls, P = 2.7 × 10^-8, odds ratio = 5.36). Two forms of orexin (orexin-A and -B) are generated from cleavage of one precursor peptide, prepro-orexin. The difference in cleavage efficiency between wild-type (Gly-Lys-Arg; GKR) and mutant (Gly-Arg-Arg; GRR) peptides was examined by assays using proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin (PCSK) type 1 and PCSK type 2. In both PCSK1 and PCSK2 assays, the cleavage efficiency of the mutant peptide was lower than that of the wild-type peptide. We also confirmed that the prepro-orexin peptides themselves transmitted less signaling through orexin receptors than mature orexin-A and orexin-B peptides. These results indicate that a subgroup of IH is associated with decreased orexin signaling, which is believed to be a hallmark of narcolepsy type 1.

Self-reported symptoms and objective measures in idiopathic hypersomnia and hypersomnia associated with psychiatric disorders: a prospective cross-sectional study

STUDY OBJECTIVES

In some patients, it is difficult to correctly nosologically classify daytime sleepiness. Clinical manifestations may be nonspecific; on the basis of objective measures it is possible to determine the current severity of sleepiness, but they do not always allow accurate diagnosis. It is especially difficult to distinguish between idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) and hypersomnia associated with a psychiatric disorder (PSY).

METHODS

To find significant differences between the IH and PSY groups, we included 67 patients (IH, n = 15; PSY, n = 52) in the study, focusing on differences in self-reported symptoms, evaluating current depressive symptoms using the Beck Depression Inventory-II score and personality traits measured by the Temperament and Character Inventory. All of the patients underwent polysomnography, the Multiple Sleep Latency Test, and ad libitum sleep monitoring.

RESULTS

The patients with IH showed greater difficulty than those in the PSY group with waking up in the morning (P < .001) and complained of memory (P = .04) and attention deficit (P = .006). They also showed higher total sleep time (P < .001) and sleep efficiency (P = .007) and a shorter mean sleep latency on the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (P < .001). Nevertheless, the IH and PSY groups did not differ in Beck Depression Inventory scores or personality characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

IH is a syndrome in which depression/external life stressors and personality characteristics also play a role. Patients with IH may benefit from the cooperation of sleep specialists with psychotherapists/psychiatrists.

CITATION

Bušková J, Novák T, Miletínová E, et al. Self-reported symptoms and objective measures in idiopathic hypersomnia and hypersomnia associated with psychiatric disorders: a prospective cross-sectional study. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(3):713-720.

Idiopathic Hypersomnia Severity Scale to better quantify symptoms severity and their consequences in idiopathic hypersomnia

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To assess the responsiveness of the Idiopathic Hypersomnia Severity Scale (IHSS) to medications and estimate the minimum clinically important difference, to report clinically relevant score ranges, and to confirm its psychometric properties and whether items need to be weighted in drug-free and treated patients with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH).

METHODS

Two-hundred twenty-six (166 drug-free and 60 treated) patients with IH (cross-sectional sample) completed the 14-item IHSS to quantify the severity of the 3 major IH symptoms (excessive daytime sleepiness, prolonged nighttime sleep, and sleep inertia) and consequences; 77 untreated patients were evaluated again after treatment (longitudinal sample). Patients filled in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Beck Depression Inventory II, and European Quality of Life questionnaires.

RESULTS

The IHSS confirmed adequate psychometric properties with a factor analysis indicating a 3-component solution. IHSS total score was lower in treated than untreated patients, with a mean difference of 4-5 points in the cross-sectional and longitudinal samples. Distribution-based methods were used to estimate that 4 points represented the minimum clinically important difference. Four severity levels were defined with between-group differences related to treatment. The probability of having severe sleepiness, depressive symptoms, and low quality of life increased with the severity level. Our results showed that IHSS item-weighting was not necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

The IHSS is a valid and reliable tool to quantify IH symptoms, with 4 severity score levels of clinical importance. The IHSS has adequate psychometric properties and can detect symptom changes after treatment. These findings should stimulate its use in clinical settings and in research studies.

CITATION

Rassu AL, Evangelista E, Barateau L, et al. Idiopathic Hypersomnia Severity Scale to better quantify symptoms severity and their consequences in idiopathic hypersomnia. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(2):617-629.

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.

Absence of multiple sleep-onset rapid eye movement periods (SOREMPs) is not a specific feature of patients with pathological sleep prolongation

Purpose

Multiple sleep-onset rapid eye movement periods (SOREMPs) are involved in the pathophysiology of narcolepsy, but it is not clear whether the lack of multiple SOREMPs is associated with the pathophysiology of idiopathic hypersomnia or not. We examined the significance of multiple SOREMPs in patients with pathological sleep prolongation.

Methods

Participants were consecutive patients complaining of unexplained sleepiness and agreed to a 3-day-sleep studies; 24 h polysomnography (PSG) followed by standard PSG and multiple sleep latency test (MSLT). Forty-one (26 females, 21.9 ± 8.1 years old, BMI 20.4 ± 2.3 kg/m2) of 54 eligible patients without other sleep pathologies showed pathological sleep prolongation. We subdivided them into those with and without multiple SOREMPs on MSLT and compared clinical and PSG variables between groups.

Results

Six of 41 (14.6%) patients showed multiple SOREMPs on MSLT. There were almost no differences in sleep variables between those with and without multiple SOREMPs. We only found shorter mean sleep latency on MSLT and more REM cycles on 24 h PSG in those with multiple SOREMPs (adjusted p = 0.016 and 0.031). The frequencies of REM-related phenomena and clinical symptoms related to idiopathic hypersomnia were not different between groups.

Conclusion

Our results indicated that patients with pathological sleep prolongation had the same clinical profiles regardless of the status of SOREMPs, suggesting the absence of multiple SOREMPs, prerequisite for the diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia, is not a specific feature of pathological sleep prolongation. Confirmation of sleep prolongation alone could be a diagnostic tool for idiopathic hypersomnia.

Reliability and Efficacy of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale: Is There Still a Place for It?

The Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) is a commonly used questionnaire to evaluate patients for excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). The ESS has been validated as a measure of EDS, but a number of studies have shown more test-retest variability in clinical settings compared to the original validation study. This observation of higher-than-expected test-retest variability has called into question the utility of the ESS as a clinical tool to assess EDS. The purpose of this review article is to summarize how studies of test-retest variability in clinical populations compare to the original validation study of Johns and to highlight where they differ. Furthermore, use of the ESS as a continuous variable (with no specified cutoff value) versus a categorical variable (normal versus high) is described. These observations are put into a clinical context by comparing the test-retest variability observed on the ESS with that of the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT). Finally, how contributors to ESS scores differ within certain subpopulations is described. The ESS remains an important tool to measure EDS in patient populations, but an awareness of its limitations needs to be considered.

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.

Differential characteristics of repeated polysomnography and multiple sleep latency test parameters in narcolepsy type 1 and type 2 patients: a longitudinal retrospective study

PURPOSE

Narcolepsy is a chronic disorder and its phenotype is dichotomized into narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and narcolepsy type 2 (NT2). The clinical course and pathophysiological mechanisms of these two clinical entities and their differences are not adequately defined. This study aimed to explore the differential longitudinal patterns of polysomnography (PSG) and multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) in NT1 and NT2.

METHODS

In this retrospective study demographic characteristics, PSG, and MSLT parameters at baseline and follow-up were compared between NT1 and NT2 patients. Patients with both follow-up MSLT and PSG were selected for sub-group analysis. Baseline and follow-up MSLT and PSG parameters were compared.

RESULTS

Of 55 patients with narcolepsy, mean follow-up periods were 7.4 ± 3.5 years for NT1 and 5.5 ± 2.9 for NT2. Demographic data showed increased body mass index and prevalence of sleep paralysis in NT1. Baseline PSG characteristics between NT1 and NT2 showed decreased sleep latency (p = 0.016) and REM latency (p = 0.046) in NT1 group when compared with NT2. Nocturnal SOREMP on PSG was more prevalent in NT1 (p = 0.017), and half of NT2 patients with nocturnal SOREMP on PSG changed their diagnoses to NT1. On follow-up PSG, NT1 displayed reductions in sleep stage N2 (p = 0.006) and N3 (p = 0.048), while wake after sleep onset (WASO) (p = 0.023) and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) (p = 0.007) were significantly increased.

CONCLUSION

Differential MSLT and PSG characteristics of NT1 and NT2 in at baseline and follow-up indicate that NT1 and NT2 are distinct disease phenotypes, and that they present with a contrasting course of disease.

Idiopathic Hypersomnia and Depression, the Challenge for Clinicians and Researchers

The review deals with idiopathic hypersomnia, focusing mostly on the research findings about the presence, onset and severity of excessive daytime sleepiness and depressive symptoms in patients with idiopathic hypersomnia.

Cerebrospinal fluid monoamine levels in central disorders of hypersomnolence

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Whether the cause of daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) is a direct consequence of the loss of orexin (ORX) neurons or whether low orexin reduces the efficacy of the monoaminergic systems to promote wakefulness is unclear. The neurobiology underlying sleepiness in other central hypersomnolence disorders, narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), and idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), is currently unknown.

METHODS

Eleven biogenic amines including the monoaminergic neurotransmitters and their metabolites and five trace amines were measured in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of 94 drug-free subjects evaluated at the French National Reference Center for Narcolepsy: 39 NT1(orexin-deficient) patients, 31 patients with objective sleepiness non orexin-deficient (NT2 and IH), and 24 patients without objective sleepiness.

RESULTS

Three trace amines were undetectable in the sample: tryptamine, octopamine, and 3-iodothyronamine. No significant differences were found among the three groups for quantified monoamines and their metabolites in crude and adjusted models; however, CSF 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) levels tended to increase in NT1 compared to other patients after adjustment. Most of the biomarkers were not associated with ORX-A levels, clinical or neurophysiological parameters, but a few biomarkers (e.g. 3-methoxy-4-hydroxyphenylglycol and norepinephrine) correlated with daytime sleepiness and high rapid eye movement (REM) sleep propensity.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no striking differences among CSF monoamines, their metabolites and trace amine levels, and few associations between them and key clinical or neurophysiological parameters in NT1, NT2/IH, and patients without objective sleepiness. Although mostly negative, these findings are a significant contribution to our understanding of the neurobiology of hypersomnolence in these disorders that remain mysterious and deserve further exploration.

Multimodal assessment increases objective identification of hypersomnolence in patients referred for multiple sleep latency testing

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) has limitations when evaluating disorders of hypersomnolence with unknown etiology. Alternative measures of hypersomnolence may objectively identify pathology in patients with complaints of daytime sleepiness that may not be captured by the MSLT alone. This study evaluated the impact of a multimodal hypersomnolence assessment relative to MSLT in patients with unexplained hypersomnolence.

METHODS

Seventy-five patients with unexplained hypersomnolence were included in the analyzed sample. Polysomnography was performed without prescribed wake time, and the psychomotor vigilance task and pupillographic sleepiness test were completed between MSLT nap opportunities. Presence or absence of hypersomnolence for each assessment was defined using a priori cutpoints. Proportions of patients identified as hypersomnolent using the multimodal assessment relative to MSLT alone were evaluated, as well as the sensitivity and specificity of ancillary hypersomnolence measures relative to MSLT as a gold standard.

RESULTS

The multimodal assessment more than doubled the proportion of patients identified as having objective deficits relative to MSLT ≤ 8 minutes alone. The combination of excessive sleep duration, lapses on the psychomotor vigilance task, and impairments on the pupillographic sleepiness test also had perfect sensitivity in identifying all patients identified as sleepy by the MSLT across 3 different MSLT cutpoints (5, 8, and 10 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate the insufficiency of the MSLT as a singular tool to identify objective pathology in persons with unexplained hypersomnolence. Further efforts to refine and standardize multimodal assessments will likely improve diagnostic acumen and research into the causes of these disorders.

PAX8/PAX8-AS1 DNA methylation levels are associated with objective sleep duration in persons with unexplained hypersomnolence using a deep phenotyping approach

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Patients with unexplained hypersomnolence have significant impairment related to daytime sleepiness and excessive sleep duration, the biological bases of which are poorly understood. This investigation sought to examine relationships between objectively measured hypersomnolence phenotypes and epigenetic modification of candidate hypersomnolence genes to advance this line of inquiry.

METHODS

Twenty-eight unmedicated clinical patients with unexplained hypersomnolence were evaluated using overnight ad libitum polysomnography, multiple sleep latency testing, infrared pupillometry, and the psychomotor vigilance task. DNA methylation levels on CpG sites annotated to 11 a priori hypersomnolence candidate genes were assessed for statistical association with hypersomnolence measures using independent regression models with adjusted local index of significance (aLIS) P-value threshold of 0.05.

RESULTS

Nine CpG sites exhibited significant associations between DNA methylation levels and total sleep time measured using ad libitum polysomnography (aLIS p-value < .05). All nine differentially methylated CpG sites were annotated to the paired box 8 (PAX8) gene and its related antisense gene (PAX8-AS1). Among these nine differentially methylated positions was a cluster of five CpG sites located in the body of the PAX8 gene and promoter of PAX8-AS1.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that PAX8/PAX8-AS1 DNA methylation levels are associated with total sleep time in persons with unexplained hypersomnolence. Given prior investigations that have implicated single nucleotide polymorphisms in PAX8/PAX8-AS1 with habitual sleep duration, further research that clarifies the role of DNA methylation levels on these genes in the phenotypic expression of total sleep time is warranted.

Characteristics associated with hypersomnia and excessive daytime sleepiness identified by extended polysomnography recording

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Hypersomnolence, defined by excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) or excessive quantity of sleep (EQS), has been associated with increased morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical and polysomnographic characteristics associated with EQS and EDS assessed objectively during extended polysomnography recording.

METHODS

A total of 266 drug-free subjects (201 women; mean age: 26.5 years [16.08; 60.87]) underwent 32-h bed-rest polysomnography recording preceded by polysomnography and modified multiple sleep latency test (mMSLT). Participants were categorized according to their total sleep time (bed-rest TST ≥19 h, hypersomnia), objective EDS (mean sleep latency on MSLT ≤8 min), and self-reported EDS (Epworth sleepiness scale score >10) and EQS (≥9 h/24 h per week).

RESULTS

Subjects with hypersomnia were often younger, with normal sleep architecture, high nighttime sleep efficiency, and severe objective EDS. No association with sex, body mass index, Epworth sleepiness scale, EQS, and depressive symptoms was detected. Subjects with objective EDS had less EQS, higher sleep efficiency, and increased hypersomnia. Discrepancies were observed between objective and self-reported measures of sleep duration and EDS. Finally, 71 subjects were identified who had objective hypersomnia and/or EDS, no medical and psychiatric conditions and normal polysomnography parameters, and therefore met the stringent criteria of idiopathic hypersomnia, an orphan disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Sleep duration and EDS should be quantified using self-reported and objective measures in a controlled procedure to differentiate long sleepers, patients with hypersomnia, and patients with idiopathic hypersomnia. This will help to better understand their biology, to identify specific biomarkers, and to assess related health outcomes.

To split or to lump? Classifying the central disorders of hypersomnolence

The classification of the central disorders of hypersomnolence has undergone multiple iterations in an attempt to capture biologically meaningful disease entities in the absence of known pathophysiology. Accumulating data suggests that further refinements may be necessary. At the 7th International Symposium on Narcolepsy, a group of clinician-scientists evaluated data in support of keeping or changing classifications, and as a result suggest several changes. First, idiopathic hypersomnia with long sleep durations appears to be an identifiable and meaningful disease subtype. Second, idiopathic hypersomnia without long sleep time and narcolepsy without cataplexy share substantial phenotypic overlap and cannot reliably be distinguished with current testing, and so combining them into a single disease entity seems warranted at present. Moving forward, it is critical to phenotype patients across a wide variety of clinical and biological features, to aid in future refinements of disease classification.