Search

Zhongxing Zhang,1 Yves Dauvilliers,2– 4 Giuseppe Plazzi,5,6 Geert Mayer,7 Gert Jan Lammers,8,9 Joan Santamaria,10 Markku Partinen,11 Sebastiaan Overeem,12,13 Rafael del Rio Villegas,14 Karel Sonka,15 Rosa Peraita-Adrados,16 Raphaël Heinzer,17 Aleksandra Wierzbicka,18 Birgit Högl,19 Mauro Manconi,20 Eva Feketeova,21 Antonio Martins da Silva,22 Jitka Bušková,23 Claudio LA Bassetti,24,25 Lucie Barateau,2– 4 Fabio Pizza,5,26 Elena Antelmi,5,6 Jari K Gool,8,9 Rolf Fronczek,8,9 Carles Gaig,10 Ramin Khatami1,24 1Center for Sleep Medicine, Sleep Research and Epileptology, Klinik Barmelweid AG, Barmelweid, Aargau, Switzerland; 2Sleep-Wake Disorders Unit, Department of Neurology, Gui-de-Chauliac Hospital, CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France; 3National Reference Centre for Orphan Diseases, Narcolepsy, Idiopathic Hypersomnia, and Kleine-Levin Syndrome, Montpellier, France; 4Institute for Neurosciences of Montpellier INM, Univ Montpellier, INSERM, Montpellier, France; 5Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy; 6IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 7Neurology Department, Hephata Klinik, Schwalmstadt, Germany; 8Sleep Wake Center SEIN Heemstede, Stichting Epilepsie Instellingen Nederland, Heemstede, the Netherlands; 9Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; 10Neurology Service, Institut de Neurociències Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; 11Helsinki Sleep Clinic, Vitalmed Research Center, Helsinki, Finland; 12Sleep Medicine Center Kempenhaeghe, Heeze, the Netherlands; 13Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; 14Neurophysiology and Sleep Disorders Unit, Hospital Vithas Nuestra Señora de América, Madrid, Spain; 15Neurology Department and Centre of Clinical Neurosciences, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic; 16Sleep and Epilepsy Unit – Clinical Neurophysiology Service, University General Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Research Institute Gregorio Marañón, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain; 17Center for Investigation and Research in Sleep, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland; 18Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland; 19Neurology Department, Sleep Disorders Clinic, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria; 20Neurology Department, EOC, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, Lugano, Ticino, Switzerland; 21Neurology Department, Medical Faculty of P. J. Safarik University, University Hospital of L. Pasteur Kosice, Kosice, Slovak Republic; 22Serviço de Neurofisiologia, Hospital Santo António/Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto and UMIB-Instituto Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal; 23Department of Sleep Medicine, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czech Republic; 24Department of Neurology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; 25Department of Neurology, Sechenov First Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia; 26Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, ItalyCorrespondence: Yves Dauvilliers, National Reference Network for Narcolepsy, Sleep-Disorders Center, Department of Neurology, Hopital Gui de Chauliac, INSERM U1061, Montpellier, UM1, France, Email ydauvilliers@yahoo.fr Ramin Khatami, Center for Sleep Medicine, Sleep Research and Epileptology, Klinik Barmelweid AG, Barmelweid, CH-5017, Switzerland, Email ramin.khatami@barmelweid.chPurpose: Narcolepsy type-1 (NT1) is a rare chronic neurological sleep disorder with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) as usual first and cataplexy as pathognomonic symptom. Shortening the NT1 diagnostic delay is the key to reduce disease burden and related low quality of life. Here we investigated the changes of diagnostic delay over the diagnostic years (1990– 2018) and the factors associated with the delay in Europe.Patients and Methods: We analyzed 580 NT1 patients (male: 325, female: 255) from 12 European countries using the European Narcolepsy Network database. We combined machine learning and linear mixed-effect regression to identify factors associated with the delay.Results: The mean age at EDS onset and diagnosis of our patients was 20.9± 11.8 (mean ± standard deviation) and 30.5± 14.9 years old, respectively. Their mean and median diagnostic delay was 9.7± 11.5 and 5.3 (interquartile range: 1.7− 13.2 years) years, respectively. We did not find significant differences in the diagnostic delay over years in either the whole dataset or in individual countries, although the delay showed significant differences in various countries. The number of patients with short (≤ 2-year) and long (≥ 13-year) diagnostic delay equally increased over decades, suggesting that subgroups of NT1 patients with variable disease progression may co-exist. Younger age at cataplexy onset, longer interval between EDS and cataplexy onsets, lower cataplexy frequency, shorter duration of irresistible daytime sleep, lower daytime REM sleep propensity, and being female are associated with longer diagnostic delay.Conclusion: Our findings contrast the results of previous studies reporting shorter delay over time which is confounded by calendar year, because they characterized the changes in diagnostic delay over the symptom onset year. Our study indicates that new strategies such as increasing media attention/awareness and developing new biomarkers are needed to better detect EDS, cataplexy, and changes of nocturnal sleep in narcolepsy, in order to shorten the diagnostic interval.Keywords: cataplexy, diagnostic delay, misdiagnosis, symptom onset, machine learning

Steve Poirier,1,2 Gaétan Mayer1–31Laboratory of Molecular Cell Biology, Montreal Heart Institute, Montréal, QC, Canada; 2Départements de Pharmacologie, 3Médecine, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, CanadaAbstract: Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) directly binds to the epidermal growth factor-like repeat A domain of low-density lipoprotein receptor and induces its degradation, thereby controlling circulating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration. Heterozygous loss-of-function mutations in PCSK9 can decrease the incidence of coronary heart disease by up to 88%, owing to lifelong reduction of LDL-C. Moreover, two subjects with PCSK9 loss-of-function mutations on both alleles, resulting in a total absence of functional PCSK9, were found to have extremely low circulating LDL-C levels without other apparent abnormalities. Accordingly, PCSK9 could represent a safe and effective pharmacological target to increase clearance of LDL-C and to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. Recent clinical trials using anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies that block the PCSK9:low-density lipoprotein receptor interaction were shown to considerably reduce LDL-C levels by up to 65% when given alone and by up to 72% in patients already receiving statin therapy. In this review, we will discuss how major scientific breakthroughs in PCSK9 cell biology have led to the development of new and forthcoming LDL-C-lowering pharmacological agents.Keywords: PCSK9, LDLR, LDL-cholesterol, lipoproteins, coronary heart disease, inhibitors, monoclonal antibody therapy

ObjectivesWe aimed to provide a consensus statement by the International Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behavior Disorder Study Group (IRBD-SG) on devising controlled active treatment studies in rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) and devising studies of neuroprotection against Parkinson disease (PD) and related neurodegeneration in RBD.MethodsThe consensus statement was generated during the fourth IRBD-SG symposium in Marburg, Germany in 2011. The IRBD-SG identified essential methodologic components for a randomized trial in RBD, including potential screening and diagnostic criteria, inclusion and exclusion criteria, primary and secondary outcomes for symptomatic therapy trials (particularly for melatonin and clonazepam), and potential primary and secondary outcomes for eventual trials with disease-modifying and neuroprotective agents. The latter trials are considered urgent, given the high conversion rate from idiopathic RBD (iRBD) to Parkinsonian disorders (i.e., PD, dementia with Lewy bodies [DLB], multiple system atrophy [MSA]).ResultsSix inclusion criteria were identified for symptomatic therapy and neuroprotective trials: (1) diagnosis of RBD needs to satisfy the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, second edition, (ICSD-2) criteria; (2) minimum frequency of RBD episodes should preferably be ⩾2 times weekly to allow for assessment of change; (3) if the PD-RBD target population is included, it should be in the early stages of PD defined as Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3 in Off (untreated); (4) iRBD patients with soft neurologic dysfunction and with operational criteria established by the consensus of study investigators; (5) patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI); and (6) optimally treated comorbid OSA. Twenty-four exclusion criteria were identified. The primary outcome measure for RBD treatment trials was determined to be the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) efficacy index, consisting of a four-point scale with a four-point side-effect scale. Assessment of video-polysomnographic (vPSG) changes holds promise but is costly and needs further elaboration. Secondary outcome measures include sleep diaries; sleepiness scales; PD sleep scale 2 (PDSS-2); serial motor examinations; cognitive indices; mood and anxiety indices; assessment of frequency of falls, gait impairment, and apathy; fatigue severity scale; and actigraphy and customized bed alarm systems. Consensus also was established for evaluating the clinical and vPSG aspects of RBD. End points for neuroprotective trials in RBD, taking lessons from research in PD, should be focused on the ultimate goal of determining the performance of disease-modifying agents. To date no compound with convincing evidence of disease-modifying or neuroprotective efficacy has been identified in PD. Nevertheless, iRBD patients are considered ideal candidates for neuroprotective studies.ConclusionsThe IRBD-SG provides an important platform for developing multinational collaborative studies on RBD such as on environmental risk factors for iRBD, as recently reported in a peer-reviewed journal article, and on controlled active treatment studies for symptomatic and neuroprotective therapy that emerged during the 2011 consensus conference in Marburg, Germany, as described in our report.