Search

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: Patients with CDH 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 nonsleepy 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, 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 Sleepiness Scale and Multiple Sleep Latency Test 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 with 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. CITATION: Trotti LM, Saini P, Bremer E, et al. The Psychomotor Vigilance Test as a measure of alertness and sleep inertia in people with central disorders of hypersomnolence. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(5):1395–1403.

Background and ObjectivesRecent 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsWe 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.DiscussionUsing 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.

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.

Introduction : La narcolepsie et l'hypersomnie idiopathique sont des troubles d'hypersomnie centrale peu compris, caractérisés par une somnolence diurne excessive causant des perturbations majeures au niveau du fonctionnement diurne et de la qualité de vie. Bien que certains aspects cliniques soient propres à chaque condition, plusieurs caractéristiques se chevauchent et ces dernières demeurent très difficile à diagnostiquer adéquatement. Le manque de distinction entre les troubles d'hypersomnolence centrale est extrêmement problématique, limitant la compréhension des mécanismes physiopathologiques sous- jacents. Objectif : À l'aide de la morphométrie cérébrale, l'objectif de l'étude est d'établir des différences anatomiques (c.-à-d., épaisseur corticale, volume sous-cortical) entre la narcolepsie avec cataplexie (NT1), la narcolepsie sans cataplexie (NT2), l'hypersomnie idiopathique (HI) et des participants en santé contrôles dans diverses régions du cerveau qui sont fonctionnellement liées au sommeil et au maintien de l'éveil. Méthodes : Une séquence d’acquisition d’images IRM anatomiques pondérées en T1 fut acquise sur 15 patients NT1, 15 NT2, 15 HI et 15 participants contrôles en santé (n = 60). Les images anatomiques furent traitées avec la suite logicielle FreeSurfer (FreeSurfer version 6.0.1) afin d'obtenir des mesures d'épaisseur corticale et de volume sous-cortical. Les mesures morphométriques obtenus pour différentes régions furent comparées entre les groupes par ANOVAs, ajustées pour l'âge. Résultats : Les résultats ont démontré une réduction volumétrique de la matière grise dans plusieurs structures sous-corticales associées au sommeil et au maintien de l'éveil dont l'hypothalamus et l'amygdale pour les patients NT1 et les patients NT2, comparés aux participants contrôles en santé. Les patients HI quant à eux n'ont pas démontré de différence volumétrique au niveau de l'hypothalamus comparativement aux participants contrôles, mais plutôt une diminution du volume de l'amygdale et du noyau accumbens, des structures associées à un réseau fonctionnel modulant la vigilance. Aucune différence significative d'épaisseur corticale n'a été retrouvée entre les groupes. Conclusion : Les résultats montrent des changements neuroanatomiques distincts entre les patients NT1 et HI, suggérant des mécanismes physiopathologiques différents et soulignent le phénotype hétérogène des patients NT2., Introduction : Narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia are poorly understood central disorders of hypersomnolence characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness leading to severe daytime disturbances and poor quality of life. Although some clinical features are specific to each condition, many characteristics overlap, and a reliable diagnosis remains difficult to achieve. The lack of clinical distinction between central disorders of hypersomnolence is extremely problematic and hinders the understanding of their underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Objective : Using brain morphometry, the objective of this study is to establish anatomical differences (i.e., cortical thickness and subcortical volume) between narcolepsy with cataplexy (NT1), narcolepsy without cataplexy (NT2), idiopathic hypersomnia (HI) and healthy controls in brain regions involved in the modulation of sleep and wakefulness. Methods : T1-weighted MRI sequences were acquired in 15 NT1 patients, 15 NT2, 15 HI and 15 healthy controls (n = 60). Anatomical images were preprocessed using the FreeSurfer software package (FreeSurfer version 6.0.1) to obtain measures of cortical thickness and subcortical volume. Group differences in brain morphometric measurements acquired for different brain regions were analyzed using ANOVAs, adjusted for age. Results : Results displayed reduced gray matter volume in subcortical structures associated with the modulation of sleep and wakefulness, including the hypothalamus and the amygdala in NT1 and NT2 patients, compared to healthy controls. On the other hand, HI patients did not show volume changes in the hypothalamus compared to healthy controls, but instead showed a volume reduction of the amygdala and the nucleus accumbens, both structures associated with a functional network involved in the modulation of alertness. No significant group difference in cortical thickness was found. Conclusion : These results show distinct neuroanatomical changes between NT1 patients and HI patients, suggesting separate pathophysiological mechanisms and underline the heterogeneous phenotype of NT2 patients.

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.

INTRODUCTION: This guideline establishes clinical practice recommendations for the treatment of central disorders of hypersomnolence in adults and children. METHODS: The American Academy of Sleep Medicine commissioned a task force of experts in sleep medicine to develop recommendations and assign strengths to each recommendation, based on a systematic review of the literature and an assessment of the evidence using the GRADE process. The task force provided a summary of the relevant literature and the quality of evidence, the balance of benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, and resource use considerations that support the recommendations. The AASM Board of Directors approved the final recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: The following recommendations are intended to guide clinicians in choosing a specific treatment for central disorders of hypersomnolence in adults and children. Each recommendation statement is assigned a strength (“strong” or “conditional”). A “strong” recommendation (ie, “We recommend…”) is one that clinicians should follow under most circumstances. A “conditional” recommendation (ie, “We suggest…”) is one that requires that the clinician use clinical knowledge and experience and strongly consider the individual patient’s values and preferences to determine the best course of action. Under each disorder, strong recommendations are listed in alphabetical order followed by the conditional recommendations in alphabetical order. The section on adult patients with hypersomnia because of medical conditions is categorized based on the clinical and pathological subtypes identified in ICSD-3. The interventions in all the recommendation statements were compared to no treatment. ADULT PATIENTS WITH NARCOLEPSY: 1. We recommend that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (STRONG); 2. We recommend that clinicians use pitolisant for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (STRONG); 3. We recommend that clinicians use sodium oxybate for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (STRONG); 4. We recommend that clinicians use solriamfetol for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (STRONG); 5. We suggest that clinicians use armodafinil for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 6. We suggest that clinicians use dextroamphetamine for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 7. We suggest that clinicians use methylphenidate for the treatment of narcolepsy in adults. (CONDITIONAL). ADULT PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC HYPERSOMNIA: 8. We recommend that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. (STRONG); 9. We suggest that clinicians use clarithromycin for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 10. We suggest that clinicians use methylphenidate for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 11. We suggest that clinicians use pitolisant for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 12. We suggest that clinicians use sodium oxybate for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia in adults. (CONDITIONAL). ADULT PATIENTS WITH KLEINE-LEVIN SYNDROME: 13. We suggest that clinicians use lithium for the treatment of Kleine-Levin syndrome in adults. (CONDITIONAL). ADULT PATIENTS WITH HYPERSOMNIA DUE TO MEDICAL CONDITIONS: HYPERSOMNIA SECONDARY TO ALPHA-SYNUCLEINOPATHIES: 14. We suggest that clinicians use armodafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to dementia with Lewy bodies in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 15. We suggest that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to Parkinson’s disease in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 16. We suggest that clinicians use sodium oxybate for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to Parkinson’s disease in adults. (CONDITIONAL). POSTTRAUMATIC HYPERSOMNIA: 17. We suggest that clinicians use armodafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to traumatic brain injury in adults. (CONDITIONAL); 18. We suggest that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to traumatic brain injury in adults. (CONDITIONAL). ADULT PATIENTS WITH GENETIC DISORDERS ASSOCIATED WITH PRIMARY CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM SOMNOLENCE: 19. We suggest that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to myotonic dystrophy in adults. (CONDITIONAL). ADULT PATIENTS WITH HYPERSOMNIA SECONDARY TO BRAIN TUMORS, INFECTIONS, OR OTHER CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM LESIONS: 20. We suggest that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of hypersomnia secondary to multiple sclerosis in adults. (CONDITIONAL). PEDIATRIC PATIENTS WITH NARCOLEPSY: 21. We suggest that clinicians use modafinil for the treatment of narcolepsy in pediatric patients. (CONDITIONAL); 22. We suggest that clinicians use sodium oxybate for the treatment of narcolepsy in pediatric patients. (CONDITIONAL). CITATION: Maski K, Trotti LM, Kotagal S, et al. Treatment of central disorders of hypersomnolence: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(9):1881–1893.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) is used to objectively evaluate an individual’s ability to remain awake; however, microsleeps are not included in the assessment. We aimed to determine if microsleep data prior to sleep onset assisted in interpretation of ability to maintain wakefulness across a range of typical patient groups. METHODS: Forty-eight patients referred for overnight polysomnography and subsequent MWT were included. Patients were divided into 3 groups (treated obstructive sleep apnea [OSA], untreated OSA, or treated idiopathic hypersomnia or narcolepsy) based on prior medical diagnosis. Demographics, clinical characteristics, polysomnography, and MWT variables, including frequency, distribution, duration, and latency of microsleeps were compared between groups. RESULTS: Microsleeps were observed in MWT trials significantly more frequently in patients with treated idiopathic hypersomnia/narcolepsy over the course of the day (0.34 ± 0.06 vs 0.07 ± 0.02 microsleeps/min; P < .001) and in patients with untreated OSA toward the end of the day (0.31 ± 0.06 vs 0.05 ± 0.02 microsleeps/min; P < .001) compared to the group with treated OSA. Microsleeps were often observed in series and earlier in patients with treated idiopathic hypersomnia/narcolepsy (10.9 ± 1.6 minutes) and those with untreated OSA (16.2 ± 2.7 minutes) compared to the group with treated OSA (24.9 ± 3.0 minutes; P < .05), and, if taken into consideration, would increase the proportion of patients demonstrating inability to maintain wakefulness by 33% and 22%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MWT performance varies significantly across patient groups. Microsleep analysis prior to sleep onset may be a more sensitive measure of patient daytime wakefulness than sleep latency alone and should be considered in MWT assessment. CITATION: Anniss AM, Young A, O’Driscoll DM. Microsleep assessment enhances interpretation of the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(8):1571–1578.

IntroductionExcessive Daytime Sleepiness is a core symptom of narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia, which impairs driving performance. Adequate treatment improves daytime alertness, but it is unclear whether driving performance completely normalizes. This study compares driving performance of patients with narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia receiving treatment to that of healthy controls.MethodsPatients diagnosed with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1, n = 33), narcolepsy type 2 (NT2, n = 7), or idiopathic hypersomnia (IH, n = 6) performed a standardized one-hour on-the-road driving test, measuring standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP).ResultsResults showed that mean SDLP in patients did not differ significantly from controls, but the 95%CI of the mean difference (+1.02 cm) was wide (-0.72 to +2.76 cm). Analysis of subgroups, however, showed that mean SDLP in NT1 patients was significantly increased by 1.90 cm as compared to controls, indicating impairment. Moreover, four NT1 patients requested to stop the test prematurely due to self-reported somnolence, and two NT1 patients were stopped by the driving instructor for similar complaints.ConclusionDriving performance of NT1 patients may still be impaired, despite receiving treatment. No conclusions can be drawn for NT2 and IH patients due to the low sample sizes of these subgroups. In clinical practice, determination of fitness to drive for these patients should be based on an individual assessment in which also coping strategies are taken into account.

Narcolepsy types 1 (NT1) and 2 (NT2) and idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) are thought to be a disease continuum known as narcolepsy spectrum disorders (NSDs). This study aimed to assess the prevalence of and factors associated with metabolic-syndrome-related disorders (MRDs) among patients with NSD. Japanese patients with NSD (NT1, n = 94; NT2, n = 83; and IH, n = 57) aged ≥35 years were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. MRD was defined as having at least one of the following conditions: hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Demographic variables and MRD incidence were compared among patients in the respective NSD categories. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the factors associated with MRDs. Patients with NT1 had a higher body mass index (BMI) and incidence of MRD than that had by those with NT2 or IH. Age, BMI, and the presence of OSA were significantly associated with the incidence of MRD in NSDs. Age and BMI in NT1, BMI and human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DQB1*06:02 positivity in NT2, and only age in IH were factors associated with the incidence of MRD. Obesity should be carefully monitored in narcolepsy; however, NT2 with HLA-DQB1*06:02 positive should be followed up for the development of MRD even without obesity.

Study Objectives To review the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) as assessment of daytime sleepiness in the evaluation of treatment effects and driving fitness in central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH). Methods We performed a scoping review of studies using the MWT in patients with CDH (i.e. narcolepsy types 1 and 2, and idiopathic hypersomnia). N = 20 articles were included, comprising 683 patients and 129 controls. MWT effect sizes were compared to the Clinical Global Impression (GCI) scale and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). MWT sleep latency was correlated to objective driving performances. The role of motivation was evaluated by comparing MWTs of treatment studies (low motivation) to driving fitness studies (high motivation to stay awake). Healthy controls were compared to norm values. Results MWT and CGI were both impacted by the same treatment; however, the MWT has higher effect sizes and was more sensitive to measure these effects. The MWT correlated fairly to moderately (ρ = −0.26 to −0.56; p ≤ .05) to objective driving performance. Motivation played a major role on MWT sleep latencies (d = 0.76 to 1.43; p ≤ .001). Current norm values may not be valid, as sleep latency may be impacted by age. Conclusions The MWTs applicability to measure treatment effects in CDH was confirmed, but age-adjusted norm values are needed. For a more complete evaluation of EDS it should be combined with subjective measures. Its reliability for driving fitness evaluation is insufficient, and motivation plays a major role. To predict or monitor driving performance in CDH, valid and easy methods should be developed.

Background and ObjectivesNarcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia usually begin in early adolescence, but diagnostic delays ranging from 5 to 10 years are common, affecting disease burden. To improve early identification of these treatable conditions, we developed and validated the Pediatric Hypersomnolence Survey (PHS).MethodsContent was developed through literature review, patient focus groups, interviews with experts in the field, and field testing. We then validated the 14-item self-reported survey across 3 hospitals and web recruitment from patient groups. In the validation phase, we recruited a total of 331 participants (patients with narcolepsy type 1 [n = 64], narcolepsy type 2 [n = 34], idiopathic hypersomnia [n = 36], and other sleep disorders [n = 97] and healthy controls [n = 100], ages 8–18 years) to complete the survey. We assessed a range of psychometric properties, including discriminant diagnostic validity for CNS disorders of hypersomnolence using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and reliability across a 1-week period.ResultsConfirmatory factor analysis indicated a 4-domain solution with good reliability expressed by satisfactory omega values. Across groups, the PHS total score showed appropriate positive correlations with other validated surveys of sleepiness (r = 0.65–0.78, p < 0.001) and negative correlations with multiple sleep latency test measures (mean sleep latency: r = −0.27, p = 0.006; number of sleep-onset REM periods: r = 0.26, p = 0.007). Compared to controls and patients with other sleep disorders, the area under the curve for participants with narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia was 0.87 (standard error 0.02, 95% CI 0.83–0.91) with high sensitivity (81.3, 95% CI 73.7%–87.5%) and specificity (81.2%, 95 CI 75.1%–86.4%). Test-retest reliability was r = 0.87.DiscussionThe PHS is a valid and reliable tool for clinicians to identify pediatric patients with narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia. Implemented in clinical practice, the PHS will potentially decrease diagnostic delays and time to treatment, ultimately reducing disease burden for these debilitating conditions.Classification of EvidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that the PHS accurately identifies patients with central disorders of hypersomnolence.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To assess the frequency, determinants, and clinical impact of clinical rapid eye movement (REM) and non-REM (NREM) parasomnias in adult patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), and idiopathic hypersomnia compared with healthy controls. METHODS: Familial and past and current personal parasomnias were assessed by questionnaire and medical interviews in 710 patients (220 NT1, 199 NT2, and 221 idiopathic hypersomnia) and 595 healthy controls. RESULTS: Except for sleep-related eating disorder, current NREM parasomnias were rare in all patient groups and controls. Sleep-related eating disorder was more frequent in NT1 patients (7.9% vs 1.8% in NT2 patients, 2.1% in patients with idiopathic hypersomnia, and 1% in controls) and associated with disrupted nighttime sleep (odds ratio = 3.9) and nocturnal eating in full awareness (odds ratio = 6.9) but not with sex. Clinical REM sleep behavior disorder was more frequent in NT1 patients (41.4%, half being violent) than in NT2 patients (13.2%) and affected men more often than women (odds ratio = 2.4). It was associated with disrupted nighttime sleep, depressive symptoms, and antidepressant use. Frequent (> 1/week) nightmares were reported by 39% of patients with NT1, 29% with NT2, and 27.8% with idiopathic hypersomnia (vs 8.3% in controls) and were associated with depressive symptoms in narcolepsy. No parasomnia (except sleep-related hallucinations) worsened daytime sleepiness. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with central disorders of hypersomnolence, comorbid NREM parasomnias (except for sleep-related eating disorder) are rare and do not worsen sleepiness. In contrast, REM parasomnias are prevalent (especially in NT1) and are associated with male sex, disrupted nighttime sleep, depressive symptoms, and antidepressant use. CITATION: Leu-Semenescu S, Maranci J-B, Lopez R, et al. Comorbid parasomnias in narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia: more REM than NREM parasomnias. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(5):1355–1364.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: First, to determine whether the 3-item Observation and Interview-based Diurnal Sleepiness Inventory (ODSI) measures the degree of excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with suspected narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). Second, to assess the correlation between the ODSI and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) as well as objective polysomnographic measurements. Third, to test the accuracy of the ODSI to detect narcolepsy or IH (narcolepsy/IH) compared with the ESS. METHODS: A total of 181 patients complaining of excessive daytime sleepiness filled in the ESS and the ODSI and underwent measurements including actigraphy, full-night polysomnography, Multiple Sleep Latency Test, and 24-hour bedrest sleep recording. RESULTS: Narcolepsy or IH was diagnosed in 76 patients. The ODSI found excessive daytime sleepiness in 92.3% of all patients and in 98.7% of those diagnosed with narcolepsy/IH. In the whole population, the ODSI was significantly positively correlated with the ESS (R = .547; 95% confidence interval: .436, .642; P < .001) and weakly with 24-hour total sleep time on bedrest recording (R = .208; 95% confidence interval: .056, .350; P = .047) but not with the Multiple Sleep Latency Test. The ODSI offered a higher negative (92.9%) and positive (44.9%) predictive value to detect narcolepsy/IH than did the ESS (66.7% and 43.3%, respectively). In the IH group, the ODSI’s third-item score (daily sleepiness duration) was significantly higher in patients with than without increased 24-hour total sleep time (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: The ODSI is a brief, simple first-line questionnaire that explores both intensity and duration of daytime sleepiness and offers a high sensitivity to detect narcolepsy and IH. CITATION: Peter-Derex L, Subtil F, Lemaitre G, et al. Observation and Interview-based Diurnal Sleepiness Inventory for measurement of sleepiness in patients referred for narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia. J Clin Sleep Med. 2020;16(9):1507–1515.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to describe trends in the 2-year limited duration prevalence of narcolepsy from 2013–2016 in a large insured population with claims activity. Secondary objectives were to assess the prevalence of other sleep disorders and the frequency of diagnostic sleep testing. METHODS: Nationwide medical/prescription claims (Symphony Health) were analyzed to estimate the annual prevalence per 100,000 persons of narcolepsy and other sleep disorders (obstructive sleep apnea, idiopathic hypersomnia, rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, periodic limb movement disorder) and the frequency of diagnostic sleep testing. Prevalence was adjusted to the age/sex distribution of the 2016 US census estimates. RESULTS: The prevalence of narcolepsy per 100,000 persons increased 14% from 38.9 in 2013 to 44.3 in 2016. Obstructive sleep apnea prevalence increased 41% over the study period from 2,429 to 3,420 per 100,000. Large increases in prevalence were also seen for idiopathic hypersomnia (32%), periodic limb movement disorder (30%), and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (64%). For each sleep disorder, prevalence was higher for those with commercial insurance versus Medicare/Medicaid, and markedly lower prevalence was observed for the Northeast compared with the Midwest, South, and Western US regions. The frequency of multiple sleep latency/maintenance of wakefulness testing declined by 20%, and polysomnography declined by 15%. Conversely, home sleep apnea testing increased by 117%. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of narcolepsy, obstructive sleep apnea, and the other sleep disorders increased appreciably over the 2013–2016 period. It remains to be determined whether the trends seen in our analyses are due to increased incidence or increased awareness of these conditions. CITATION: Acquavella J, Mehra R, Bron M, Suomi JM-H, Hess GP. Prevalence of narcolepsy, other sleep disorders, and diagnostic tests from 2013–2016: insured patients actively seeking care. J Clin Sleep Med. 2020;16(8):1255–1263.

Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), characterized by an excessive day-time sleepiness, a prolonged total sleep time on 24 h and/or a reduced sleep latency, affects 1 in 2000 individuals from the general population. However, IH remains underdiagnosed and inaccurately treated despite colossal social, professional and personal impacts. The pathogenesis of IH is poorly known, but recent works have suggested possible alterations of phototransduction. In this context, to identify biomarkers of IH, we studied the Post-Illumination Pupil Response (PIPR) using a specific pupillometry protocol reflecting the melanopsin-mediated pupil response in IH patients with prolonged total sleep time (TST > 660 min) and in healthy subjects. Twenty-eight patients with IH (women 86%, 25.4 year-old ± 4.9) and 29 controls (women 52%, 27.1 year-old ± 3.9) were included. After correction on baseline pupil diameter, the PIPR was compared between groups and correlated to sociodemographic and sleep parameters. We found that patients with IH had a lower relative PIPR compared to controls (32.6 ± 9.9% vs 38.5 ± 10.2%, p = 0.037) suggesting a reduced melanopsin response. In addition, the PIPR was not correlated to age, chronotype, TST, nor depressive symptoms. The melanopsin-specific PIPR may be an innovative trait marker of IH and the pupillometry might be a promising tool to better characterize hypersomnia.

Calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium oxybates (XywavNarcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia are rare, chronic sleep disorders that can debilitate patients’ cognitive function, social functioning and health-related quality of life. They are primarily characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and often require long-term (even life-long) treatment to reduce symptoms and improve functioning. Sodium oxybate (Xyrem