Search

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea is associated with increased blood pressure (BP). Obstructive sleep apnea treatment reduces BP with substantial variability, not explained by the apnea-hypopnea index, partly due to inadequate characterization of obstructive sleep apnea's physiological consequences, such as oxygen desaturation, cardiac autonomic response, and suboptimal treatment efficacy. We sought to examine whether a high baseline heart rate response (ΔHR), a marker of high cardiovascular risk in obstructive sleep apnea, predicts a larger reduction in post-treatment systolic BP (SBP). Furthermore, we aimed to assess the extent to which a reduction in SBP is explained by a treatment-related reduction in hypoxic burden (HB)., Methods: ΔHR and HB were measured from pretreatment and posttreatment polygraphy, followed by a 24-hour BP assessment in 168 participants treated with continuous positive airway pressure or nocturnal supplemental oxygen from the HeartBEAT study (Heart Biomarker Evaluation in Apnea Treatment). Multiple linear regression models assessed whether high versus mid (reference) ΔHR predicted a larger reduction in SBP (primary outcome) and whether there was an association between treatment-related reductions in SBP and HB., Results: A high versus mid ΔHR predicted improvement in SBP (adjusted estimate, 5.8 [95% CI, 1.0-10.5] mm Hg). Independently, a greater treatment-related reduction in HB was significantly associated with larger reductions in SBP (4.2 [95% CI, 0.9-7.5] mm Hg per 2 SD treatment-related reduction in HB). Participants with substantial versus minimal treatment-related reductions in HB had a 6.5 (95% CI, 2.5-10.4) mm Hg drop in SBP., Conclusions: A high ΔHR predicted a more favorable BP response to therapy. Furthermore, the magnitude of the reduction in BP was partly explained by a greater reduction in HB., Competing Interests: Disclosures A. Azarbarzin receives grant support from Somnifix and serves as a consultant for Somnifix, Respicardia, Eli Lilly, and Apnimed; Apnimed is a developing pharmacological treatment for obstructive sleep apnea. A. Azarbarzin’s interests were reviewed by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Mass General Brigham in accordance with their institutional policies. S. Sands receives personal fees as a consultant for Nox Medical, Apnimed, Merck, and Inspire outside the submitted work, and he has received grant support from Apnimed, Prosomnus, and Dynaflex. A. Wellman works as a consultant for Apnimed, Somnifix, Inspire, and Nox Medical. He has received grants from Somnifix and Regeneron. He has a financial interest in Apnimed, a company developing pharmacological therapies for sleep apnea. His interests were reviewed and are managed by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Partners HealthCare in accordance with their conflict of interest policies. C. Schmickl reports income from consulting for Verily outside the submitted work. A. Malhotra is funded by the National Institutes of Health. He reports income related to medical education from Livanova, Eli Lilly, Jazz, and Zoll. ResMed provided a philanthropic donation to University of California San Diego. S. Redline received consulting fees from Eli Lilly, Inc, and Jazz Pharma and has consulted for Apnimed, Inc. D.J. Gottlieb has served on scientific advisory boards for Signifier Medical Technologies, Inc, and Wesper, Inc, and as a consultant to Powell-Mansfield, Inc, and Apnimed, Inc, and has received research support from ResMed, Inc. The other authors report no conflicts.

Rationale: Acetazolamide and atomoxetine-plus-oxybutynin ('AtoOxy') can improve obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) by stabilising ventilatory control and improving dilator muscle responsiveness respectively. Given the different pathophysiological mechanisms targeted by each intervention, we tested whether AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide would be more efficacious than AtoOxy alone., Methods: In a multicentre randomised crossover trial, 19 patients with moderate-to-severe OSA received AtoOxy (80/5 mg), acetazolamide (500 mg), combined AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide or placebo at bedtime for three nights (half doses on first night) with a 4-day washout between conditions. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and night 3 of each treatment period. Mixed model analysis compared the reduction in Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index (AHI) from baseline between AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide and AtoOxy (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included hypoxic burden and arousal index., Results: Although AtoOxy lowered AHI by 49 (33, 62)% baseline (estimate (95% CI)) vs placebo, and acetazolamide lowered AHI by+34 (14, 50)% baseline vs placebo, AtoOxy-plus-acetazolamide was not superior to AtoOxy alone (difference: -2 (-18, 11)% baseline , primary outcome p=0.8). Likewise, the hypoxic burden was lowered with AtoOxy (+58 (37, 71)% baseline ) and acetazolamide (+37 (5, 58)% baseline ), but no added benefit versus AtoOxy occurred when combined (difference: -13 (-5, 39)% baseline ). Arousal index was also modestly reduced with each intervention (11% baseline -16% baseline ). Mechanistic analyses revealed that similar traits (ie, higher baseline compensation, lower loop gain) were associated with both AtoOxy and acetazolamide efficacy., Conclusions: While AtoOxy halved AHI, and acetazolamide lowered AHI by a third, the combination of these leading experimental interventions provided no greater efficacy than AtoOxy alone. Failure of acetazolamide to further increase efficacy suggests overlapping physiological mechanisms., Trial Registration Number: NCT03892772., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The combination intervention under investigation in the current study was protected by a patent ('Combination pharmacological interventions for multiple mechanisms of obstructive sleep apnoea', WO-2021091902-A1, Sands co-inventor) licensed to Apnimed from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. SS has received grant funding from Apnimed, Prosomnus and Dynaflex, and has served as a consultant for Apnimed, Nox Medical, Inspire, Eli Lilly, Merck, Forepont, LinguaFlex, Achaemenid. He is also co-inventor on a patent related to wearable oximetry technology. He has received royalties from licensed intellectual property. AA served as a consultant for Somnifix, Respicardia and Apnimed; SS and AA’s industry interactions are managed by the Brigham and Women’s Hospital. SJ and GH has received equipment to support research projects from Resmed, Philips Respironics and Air Liquide Healthcare. BE has received grant funding from Apnimed and Incannex, and received personal fees from Signifier Medical outside the current work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Rationale: The physiological factors modulating the severity of snoring have not been adequately described. Airway collapse or obstruction is generally the leading determinant of snore sound generation; however, we suspect that ventilatory drive is of equal importance. Objective: To determine the relationship between airway obstruction and ventilatory drive on snore loudness. Methods: In 40 patients with suspected or diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (1-98 events/hr), airflow was recorded via a pneumotachometer attached to an oronasal mask, ventilatory drive was recorded using calibrated intraesophageal diaphragm electromyography, and snore loudness was recorded using a calibrated microphone attached over the trachea. "Obstruction" was taken as the ratio of ventilation to ventilatory drive and termed flow:drive, i.e., actual ventilation as a percentage of intended ventilation. Lower values reflect increased flow resistance. Using 165,063 breaths, mixed model analysis (quadratic regression) quantified snore loudness as a function of obstruction, ventilatory drive, and the presence of extreme obstruction (i.e., apneic occlusion). Results: In the presence of obstruction (flow:drive = 50%, i.e., doubled resistance), snore loudness increased markedly with increased drive (+3.4 [95% confidence interval, 3.3-3.5] dB per standard deviation [SD] change in ventilatory drive). However, the effect of drive was profoundly attenuated without obstruction (at flow:drive = 100%: +0.23 [0.08-0.39] dB per SD change in drive). Similarly, snore loudness increased with increasing obstruction exclusively in the presence of increased drive (at drive = 200% of eupnea: +2.1 [2.0-2.2] dB per SD change in obstruction; at eupneic drive: +0.14 [-0.08 to 0.28] dB per SD change). Further, snore loudness decreased substantially with extreme obstruction, defined as flow:drive <20% (-9.9 [-3.3 to -6.6] dB vs. unobstructed eupneic breathing). Conclusions: This study highlights that ventilatory drive, and not simply pharyngeal obstruction, modulates snore loudness. This new framework for characterizing the severity of snoring helps better understand the physiology of snoring and is important for the development of technologies that use snore sounds to characterize sleep-disordered breathing.

Rationale: Loss of pharyngeal dilator muscle activity is a key determinant of respiratory events in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). After the withdrawal of wakefulness stimuli to the genioglossus at sleep onset, mechanoreceptor negative pressure and chemoreceptor ventilatory drive feedback govern genioglossus activation during sleep, but the relative contributions of drive and pressure stimuli to genioglossus activity across progressive obstructive events remain unclear. We recently showed that drive typically falls during events, whereas negative pressures increase, providing a means to assess their individual contributions to the time course of genioglossus activity. Objectives: For the first time, we critically test whether the loss of drive could explain the loss of genioglossus activity observed within events in OSA. Methods: We examined the time course of genioglossus activity (EMGgg; intramuscular electromyography), ventilatory drive (intraesophageal diaphragm electromyography), and esophageal pressure during spontaneous respiratory events (using the ensemble-average method) in 42 patients with OSA (apnea-hypopnea index 5-91 events/h). Results: Multivariable regression demonstrated that the falling-then-rising time course of EMGgg may be well explained by falling-then-rising drive and rising negative pressure stimuli (model R  = 0.91 [0.88-0.98] [95% confidence interval]). Overall, EMGgg was 2.9-fold (0.47-∞) more closely associated with drive than pressure stimuli (ratio of standardized coefficients, β drive :β pressure ; ∞ denotes absent pressure contribution). However, individual patient results were heterogeneous: approximately one-half ( n  = 22 of 42) exhibited drive-dominant responses (i.e., β drive :β pressure  > 2:1), and one-quarter ( n  = 11 of 42) exhibited pressure-dominant EMGgg responses (i.e., β drive :β pressure  < 1:2). Patients exhibiting more drive-dominant EMGgg responses experienced greater event-related EMGgg declines (12.9 [4.8-21.0] % baseline /standard deviation of β drive :β pressure ; P  = 0.004, adjusted analysis). Conclusions: Loss of genioglossus activity precipitating events in patients with OSA is strongly associated with a contemporaneous loss of drive and is greatest in those whose activity tracks drive rather than pressure stimuli. These findings were upheld for events without prior arousal. Responding to falling drive rather than rising negative pressure during events may be deleterious; future therapeutic strategies whose aim is to sustain genioglossus activity by preferentially enhancing responses to rising pressure rather than falling drive are of interest.

Rationale: A low respiratory arousal threshold is a key endotype responsible for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) pathogenesis. Pimavanserin is an antiserotoninergic capable of suppressing CO 2 -mediated arousals without affecting the respiratory motor response in animal models, and thus it holds potential for increasing the arousal threshold in OSA and subsequently reducing OSA severity. Objectives: We measured the effect of pimavanserin on arousal threshold (primary outcome), OSA severity, arousal index, and other OSA endotypes (secondary outcomes). Methods: A total of 18 OSA participants were studied in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Patients received a single dose of placebo or pimavanserin 34 mg 4 hours before in-lab polysomnography. Airflow was measured with an oronasal mask attached to a pneumotachograph, and ventilatory drive was recorded with an intraesophageal electromyography catheter. Results are presented as mean or median changes (Δ) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Pimavanserin did not increase the arousal threshold, nor did it decrease OSA severity or arousal index. It, however, prolonged total sleep time (Δ[confidence interval (CI)], 39.5 [95%CI, -1.2 to 80.1] min). In an exploratory analysis, a subgroup of seven patients who had a 10% or more increase in arousal threshold on pimavanserin exhibited a decrease in AHI 4 (hypopneas associated with 4% desaturation) (Δ[CI], 5.6 [95%CI, 3.6-11.1] events/h) and hypoxic burden (Δ[CI], 22.3 [95%CI, 6.6-32.3] %min/h). Conclusions: A single dose of pimavanserin did not have a significant effect on arousal threshold or OSA severity. However, in a post hoc analysis, a subset of patients who exhibited an increase in arousal threshold on pimavanserin showed a small decrease in OSA severity. Thus, if the arousal threshold could be increased with pimavanserin, perhaps with longer dosing to reach higher drug blood concentrations, then the desired effect on OSA severity might be achievable. Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04538755).

Background and Objective: The combination of the noradrenergic atomoxetine plus the anti-muscarinic oxybutynin acutely increased genioglossus activity and reduced obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) severity. However, oxybutynin has shorter half-life than atomoxetine and side effects that might discourage long-term usage. Accordingly, we aimed to test the combination of atomoxetine and fesoterodine (Ato-Feso), a newer anti-muscarinic with extended release formulation, on OSA severity and endotypes., Methods: Twelve subjects with OSA underwent a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial comparing one night of atomoxetine plus fesoterodine (80-4 mg) to placebo. Parameters of OSA severity (e.g., apnoea-hypopnoea index [AHI], nadir oxygen desaturation and hypoxic burden) were calculated from two clinical, in-lab polysomnographic studies. OSA endotypes (including collapsibility per V MIN and arousal threshold) were derived from validated algorithms., Results: Compared to placebo, Ato-Feso did not reduce the AHI (34.2 ± 19.1 vs. 30.1 ± 28.2 events/h, p = 0.493), but reduced the apnoea index (12.9 [28.8] vs. 1.8 [9.1] events/h, median [interquartile range], p = 0.027) and increased nadir desaturation (76.8 [8.0] vs. 82.2 [8.8] %, p = 0.003); a non-significant trend for improved hypoxic burden was observed (52.4 [50.5] vs. 29.7 [78.9] %min/h, p = 0.093). Ato-Feso lowered collapsibility (raised V MIN ; 43.7 [29.8-55.7] vs. 56.8 [43.8-69.8] %V EUPNOEA , mean [CI], p = 0.002), but reduced the arousal threshold (129.3 [120.1-138.6] vs. 116.7 [107.5-126] %V EUPNOEA , p = 0.038). In post hoc analysis, 6/6 patients with milder collapsibility (V MIN  > 43%) exhibited OSA resolution (drop in AHI > 50% and residual AHI < 10 events/h) and improved hypoxaemia., Conclusion: While inefficacious in unselected patients, Ato-Feso administered for one night suppressed OSA in patients with milder collapsibility. Ato-Feso may hold some promise as an alternative OSA treatment in certain subgroups of individuals., (© 2022 Asian Pacific Society of Respirology.)

Background: In the classic model of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), respiratory events occur with sleep-related dilator muscle hypotonia, precipitating increased neural ventilatory 'drive'. By contrast, a drive-dependent model has been proposed, whereby falling drive promotes dilator muscle hypotonia to precipitate respiratory events. Here we determine the extent to which the classic versus drive-dependent models of OSA are best supported by direct physiological measurements., Methods: In 50 OSA patients (5-91 events/hour), we recorded ventilation ('flow', oronasal mask and pneumotach) and ventilatory drive (calibrated intraoesophageal diaphragm electromyography, EMG) overnight. Flow and drive during events were ensemble averaged; patients were classified as drive dependent if flow fell/rose simultaneously with drive. Overnight effects of lower drive on flow, genioglossus muscle activity (EMGgg) and event risk were quantified (mixed models)., Results: On average, ventilatory drive fell (rather than rose) during events (-20 (-42 to 3)% baseline , median (IQR)) and was strongly correlated with flow (R=0.78 (0.24 to 0.94)). Most patients (30/50, 60%) were classified as exhibiting drive-dependent event pathophysiology. Lower drive during sleep was associated with lower flow (-17 (-20 to -14)%/drive) and EMGgg (-3.5 (-3.8 to -3.3)% max /drive) and greater event risk (OR: 2.2 (1.8 to 2.5) per drive reduction of 100% eupnoea ); associations were concentrated in patients with drive-dependent OSA (ie, flow: -37 (-40 to -34)%/drive, OR: 6.8 (5.3 to 8.7)). Oesophageal pressure-without tidal volume correction-falsely suggested rising drive during events ( classic model)., Conclusions: In contrast to the prevailing view, patients with OSA predominantly exhibit drive-dependent event pathophysiology, whereby flow is lowest at nadir drive, and lower drive raises event risk. Preventing ventilatory drive decline is therefore considered a target for OSA intervention., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SS received grant support from Apnimed, Prosomnus and Dynaflex and has served as a consultant for Apnimed, Nox Medical and Merck. DPW is a distinguished scientist with Apnimed and a consultant for RBNC Therateutics, Philips Respironics, Cryosa and Cerebra Health. AA serves as consultant for Somnifix and Apnimed and receives grant support from Somnifix. AW works as a consultant for Apnimed, Nox, Inspire and Somnifix and has received grants from Sanofi and Somnifix. LT-M works as medical director at Apnimed. AW and LT-M have a financial interest in Apnimed Inc, a company developing pharmacological therapies for sleep apnoea; their interests were reviewed and are managed by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Partners HealthCare in accordance with their conflict of interest policies., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Study Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea has major health consequences but is challenging to treat. For many therapies, efficacy is determined by the severity of underlying pharyngeal collapsibility, yet there is no accepted clinical means to measure it. Here, we provide insight into which polysomnographic surrogate measures of collapsibility are valid, applicable across the population, and predictive of therapeutic outcomes., Methods: Seven promising polysomnography-derived surrogate collapsibility candidates were evaluated: Vpassive (flow at eupneic ventilatory drive), Vmin (ventilation at nadir drive), event depth (depth of the average respiratory event), oxygen desaturation slope and mean oxygen desaturation (events-related averages), Fhypopneas (fraction of events scored as hypopneas), and apnea index. Evaluation included (1) validation by comparison to physiological gold-standard collapsibility values (critical closing pressure, Pcrit), (2) capacity to detect increased collapsibility with older age, male sex, and obesity in a large community-based cohort (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, MESA), and (3) prediction of treatment efficacy (oral appliances and pharmacological pharyngeal muscle stimulation using atomoxetine-plus-oxybutynin)., Results: Pcrit was significantly correlated with Vmin (r = -0.54), event depth (r = 0.49), Vpassive (r = -0.38), Fhypopneas (r = -0.46), and apnea index (r = -0.46; all p < .01) but not others. All measures detected greater collapsibility with male sex, age, and obesity, except Fhypopneas and apnea index which were not associated with obesity. Fhypopneas and apnea index were associated with oral appliance and atomoxetine-plus-oxybutynin efficacy (both p < .05)., Conclusions: Among several candidates, event depth, Fhypopneas, and apnea index were identified as preferred pharyngeal collapsibility surrogates for use in the clinical arena., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Sleep Research Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Rationale: REM sleep is associated with reduced ventilation and greater obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity than non-REM (nREM) sleep for reasons that have not been fully elucidated. Objectives: Here, we use direct physiological measurements to determine whether the pharyngeal compromise in REM sleep OSA is most consistent with 1 ) withdrawal of neural ventilatory drive or 2 ) deficits in pharyngeal pathophysiology per se (i.e., increased collapsibility and decreased muscle responsiveness ). Methods: Sixty-three participants with OSA completed sleep studies with gold standard measurements of ventilatory "drive" (calibrated intraesophageal diaphragm EMG), ventilation (oronasal "ventilation"), and genioglossus EMG activity. Drive withdrawal was assessed by examining these measurements at nadir drive (first decile of drive within a stage). Pharyngeal physiology was assessed by examining collapsibility (lowered ventilation at eupneic drive) and responsiveness (ventilation-drive slope). Mixed-model analysis compared REM sleep with nREM sleep; sensitivity analysis examined phasic REM sleep. Measurements and Main Results: REM sleep (⩾10 min) was obtained in 25 patients. Compared with drive in nREM sleep, drive in REM sleep dipped to markedly lower nadir values (first decile, estimate [95% confidence interval], -21.8% [-31.2% to -12.4%] of eupnea; P  < 0.0001), with an accompanying reduction in ventilation (-25.8% [-31.8% to -19.8%] of eupnea; P  < 0.0001). However, there was no effect of REM sleep on collapsibility (ventilation at eupneic drive), baseline genioglossus EMG activity, or responsiveness. REM sleep was associated with increased OSA severity (+10.1 [1.8 to 19.8] events/h), but this association was not present after adjusting for nadir drive (+4.3 [-4.2 to 14.6] events/h). Drive withdrawal was exacerbated in phasic REM sleep. Conclusions: In patients with OSA, the pharyngeal compromise characteristic of REM sleep appears to be predominantly explained by ventilatory drive withdrawal rather than by preferential decrements in muscle activity or responsiveness. Preventing drive withdrawal may be the leading target for REM sleep OSA.

Background and Objective: Animal studies indicate that alpha-1 adrenergic receptor agonists and antimuscarinic agents improve genioglossus muscle activity during sleep and may be candidates for the pharmacological treatment of OSA. On the other hand, noradrenergic stimulants may be wake-promoting or cause insomnia symptoms if taken before bedtime, and the addition of a medication with sedative properties, such as an antihistaminic, may reduce these side effects. In this study, we aimed to determine the effects of the combination of an alpha-1 adrenergic agonist (pseudoephedrine) and an antihistaminic-antimuscarinic (diphenhydramine) on OSA severity (AHI), genioglossus responsiveness and other endotypic traits (V passive , muscle compensation, LG and arousal threshold)., Methods: Ten OSA patients performed a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trial comparing one night of pseudoephedrine 120 mg plus diphenhydramine 50 mg (DAW1033D) to placebo administered prior to sleep. The AHI, genioglossus muscle responsiveness to negative oesophageal pressure and the endotypic traits were measured via PSG., Results: The participants' median (interquartile range) age was 50 (46-53) years and body mass index (BMI) was 34.3 (30.6-39.2) kg/m 2 . The drug combination had no effect on AHI (21.6 (9.1-49.8) on placebo vs 37.9 (5.1-55.4) events/h on DAW1033D, P > 0.5) or genioglossus responsiveness (6.0 (2.6-9.2) on placebo vs 4.0 (3.5-7.3) %/cm H 2 O). Amongst the phenotypic traits, only V passive was improved by 29 (3-55) % eupnoea, P = 0.03 (mean (95% CI))., Conclusion: The combination of pseudoephedrine and diphenhydramine did not improve OSA severity or genioglossus responsiveness but induced a small improvement in upper airway collapsibility, possibly due to the decongestant effect of the medications. The results of this study do not support the use of these medications for OSA treatment., (© 2021 Asian Pacific Society of Respirology.)

Study Objectives: Oral appliance therapy is an increasingly common option for treating obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in patients who are intolerant to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Clinically applicable tools to identify patients who could respond to oral appliance therapy are limited., Methods: Data from three studies (N = 81) were compiled, which included two sleep study nights, on and off oral appliance treatment. Along with clinical variables, airflow features were computed that included the average drop in airflow during respiratory events (event depth) and flow shape features, which, from previous work, indicates the mechanism of pharyngeal collapse. A model was developed to predict oral appliance treatment response (>50% reduction in apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] from baseline plus a treatment AHI <10 events/h). Model performance was quantified using (1) accuracy and (2) the difference in oral appliance treatment efficacy (percent reduction in AHI) and treatment AHI between predicted responders and nonresponders., Results: In addition to age and body mass index (BMI), event depth and expiratory "pinching" (validated to reflect palatal prolapse) were the airflow features selected by the model. Nonresponders had deeper events, "pinched" expiratory flow shape (i.e. associated with palatal collapse), were older, and had a higher BMI. Prediction accuracy was 74% and treatment AHI was lower in predicted responders compared to nonresponders by a clinically meaningful margin (8.0 [5.1 to 11.6] vs. 20.0 [12.2 to 29.5] events/h, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: A model developed with airflow features calculated from routine polysomnography, combined with age and BMI, identified oral appliance treatment responders from nonresponders. This research represents an important application of phenotyping to identify alternative treatments for personalized OSA management., (© Sleep Research Society 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Sleep Research Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Key Points: A hypersensitive ventilatory control system or elevated "loop gain" during sleep is a primary phenotypic trait causing obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Despite the multitude of methods available to assess the anatomical contributions to OSA during wakefulness in the clinical setting (e.g. neck circumference, pharyngometry, Mallampati score), it is currently not possible to recognize elevated loop gain in patients in this context. Loop gain during sleep can now be recognized using simplified testing during wakefulness, specifically in the form of a reduced maximal breath-hold duration, or a larger ventilatory response to voluntary 20-second breath-holds. We consider that easy breath-holding manoeuvres will enable daytime recognition of a high loop gain in OSA for more personalized intervention., Abstract: Increased "loop gain" of the ventilatory control system promotes obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in some patients and offers an avenue for more personalized treatment, yet diagnostic tools for directly measuring loop gain in the clinical setting are lacking. Here we test the hypothesis that elevated loop gain during sleep can be recognized using voluntary breath-hold manoeuvres during wakefulness. Twenty individuals (10 OSA, 10 controls) participated in a single overnight study with voluntary breath-holding manoeuvres performed during wakefulness. We assessed (1) maximal breath-hold duration, and (2) the ventilatory response to 20 s breath-holds. For comparison, gold standard loop gain values were obtained during non-rapid eye movement (non-REM) sleep using the ventilatory response to 20 s pulses of hypoxic-hypercapnic gas (6% CO 2 -14% O 2 , mimicking apnoea). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was used to maintain airway patency during sleep. Additional measurements included gold standard loop gain measurement during wakefulness and steady-state loop gain measurement during sleep using CPAP dial-ups. Higher loop gain during sleep was associated with (1) a shorter maximal breath-hold duration (r 2  = 0.49, P < 0.001), and (2) a larger ventilatory response to 20 s breath-holds during wakefulness (second breath; r 2  = 0.50, P < 0.001); together these factors combine to predict high loop gain (receiver operating characteristic area-under-curve: 92%). Gold standard loop gain values were remarkably similar during wake and non-REM sleep. The results show that elevated loop gain during sleep can be identified using simple breath-holding manoeuvres performed during wakefulness. This may have implications for personalizing OSA treatment., (© 2018 Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School. The Journal of Physiology © 2018 The Physiological Society.)