Saadoun Bin-Hasan1,2, Aleksandar Videnovic3,4, Kiran Maski3,5. 1. University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Movement Disorders Unit and Division of Sleep Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Compare nocturnal REM sleep without atonia (nRWA) and REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) between pediatric patients with and without narcolepsy and determine if the nRWA index is a valid diagnostic biomarker for narcolepsy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of children ages 6 to 18 years who completed a nocturnal polysomnogram (PSG) and Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT). Our study sample included 11 patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), 6 with narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), 12 with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), and 11 with subjective hypersomnia (sHS). We compared group nRWA indices (epochs of RWA/total stage R sleep epochs) from the nocturnal PSGs and analyzed nRWA index receiver operating curve (ROC) statistics for narcolepsy diagnosis. RESULTS: The median nRWA index of patients with NT1 was 15 to 30 times higher compared to sHS and IH (Ps < .005) but similar to that of the NT2 group (P = .46). RBD was present in 25% of patients with narcolepsy (NT1 and NT2). In comparing those with and without narcolepsy, the nRWA index area under the curve was 0.87 (0.6), 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75 to 0.99, P < .001. The threshold of having ≥ 1% of stage R sleep epochs with nRWA yielded a sensitivity of 88.2%, 95% CI = 63.6-98.5 and specificity of 60.9%, 95% CI = 38.5 to 80.3 for diagnosis of narcolepsy. In contrast, a threshold of ≥ 8% yielded a specificity of 95.7%, 95% CI = 78.1 to 99.9 and sensitivity of 52.9%, 95% CI = 27.8 to 77. CONCLUSIONS: The nRWA index is a very good diagnostic biomarker of pediatric narcolepsy. Depending on the clinical cutoffs utilized, this biomarker can identify more children/adolescents with narcolepsy using just the PSG or reduce false-positive diagnostic results.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Compare nocturnal REM sleep without atonia (nRWA) and REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) between pediatric patients with and without narcolepsy and determine if the nRWA index is a valid diagnostic biomarker for narcolepsy. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of children ages 6 to 18 years who completed a nocturnal polysomnogram (PSG) and Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT). Our study sample included 11 patients with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), 6 with narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), 12 with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), and 11 with subjective hypersomnia (sHS). We compared group nRWA indices (epochs of RWA/total stage R sleep epochs) from the nocturnal PSGs and analyzed nRWA index receiver operating curve (ROC) statistics for narcolepsy diagnosis. RESULTS: The median nRWA index of patients with NT1 was 15 to 30 times higher compared to sHS and IH (Ps < .005) but similar to that of the NT2 group (P = .46). RBD was present in 25% of patients with narcolepsy (NT1 and NT2). In comparing those with and without narcolepsy, the nRWA index area under the curve was 0.87 (0.6), 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75 to 0.99, P < .001. The threshold of having ≥ 1% of stage R sleep epochs with nRWA yielded a sensitivity of 88.2%, 95% CI = 63.6-98.5 and specificity of 60.9%, 95% CI = 38.5 to 80.3 for diagnosis of narcolepsy. In contrast, a threshold of ≥ 8% yielded a specificity of 95.7%, 95% CI = 78.1 to 99.9 and sensitivity of 52.9%, 95% CI = 27.8 to 77. CONCLUSIONS: The nRWA index is a very good diagnostic biomarker of pediatric narcolepsy. Depending on the clinical cutoffs utilized, this biomarker can identify more children/adolescents with narcolepsy using just the PSG or reduce false-positive diagnostic results.
Authors: Christian R Baumann; Emmanuel Mignot; Gert Jan Lammers; Sebastiaan Overeem; Isabelle Arnulf; David Rye; Yves Dauvilliers; Makoto Honda; Judith A Owens; Giuseppe Plazzi; Thomas E Scammell Journal: Sleep Date: 2014-06-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Carole L Marcus; Reneé H Moore; Carol L Rosen; Bruno Giordani; Susan L Garetz; H Gerry Taylor; Ron B Mitchell; Raouf Amin; Eliot S Katz; Raanan Arens; Shalini Paruthi; Hiren Muzumdar; David Gozal; Nina Hattiangadi Thomas; Janice Ware; Dean Beebe; Karen Snyder; Lisa Elden; Robert C Sprecher; Paul Willging; Dwight Jones; John P Bent; Timothy Hoban; Ronald D Chervin; Susan S Ellenberg; Susan Redline Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 91.245