Stuart J McCarter1, Grace M Tabatabai1, Ho-Yann Jong1, David J Sandness1, Paul C Timm1, Katie L Johnson1, Allison R McCarter1, Rodolfo Savica1, Prashanthi Vemuri1, Mary M Machulda1, Kejal Kantarci1, Michelle M Mielke1, Bradley F Boeve1, Michael H Silber1, Erik K St Louis2. 1. From the Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine (S.J.M., G.M.T., D.J.S., P.C.T., K.L.J., A.R.M., R.S., M.M.M., B.F.B., M.H.B., E.K.S.L.) and Departments of Neurology (S.J.M., P.V., B.F.B., M.H.S., E.K.S.L.), Health Science Research (R.S., M.M.M.), Psychology (M.M.M.), Radiology (K.K.), and Medicine (E.K.S.L.), Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, MN; Department of Neurology (H.-Y.J.), Providence Neurological Specialties-West, Portland, OR; and University of Minnesota Duluth (A.R.M.). 2. From the Mayo Center for Sleep Medicine (S.J.M., G.M.T., D.J.S., P.C.T., K.L.J., A.R.M., R.S., M.M.M., B.F.B., M.H.B., E.K.S.L.) and Departments of Neurology (S.J.M., P.V., B.F.B., M.H.S., E.K.S.L.), Health Science Research (R.S., M.M.M.), Psychology (M.M.M.), Radiology (K.K.), and Medicine (E.K.S.L.), Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, MN; Department of Neurology (H.-Y.J.), Providence Neurological Specialties-West, Portland, OR; and University of Minnesota Duluth (A.R.M.). stlouis.erik@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether quantitative polysomnographic REM sleep without atonia (RSWA) distinguishes between cognitive impairment phenotypes. BACKGROUND: Neurodegenerative cognitive impairment in older adults predominantly correlates with tauopathy or synucleinopathy. Accurate antemortem phenotypic diagnosis has important prognostic and treatment implications; additional clinical tools might distinguish between dementia syndromes. METHODS: We quantitatively analyzed RSWA in 61 older adults who underwent polysomnography including 46 with cognitive impairment (20 probable synucleinopathy), 26 probable non-synucleinopathy (15 probable Alzheimer disease, 11 frontotemporal lobar dementia), and 15 age- and sex-matched controls. Submentalis and anterior tibialis RSWA metrics and automated REM atonia index were calculated. Group statistical comparisons and regression were performed, and receiver operating characteristic curves determined diagnostic RSWA thresholds that best distinguished synucleinopathy phenotype. RESULTS: Submentalis-but not anterior tibialis RSWA-was greater in synucleinopathy than nonsynucleinopathy; several RSWA diagnostic thresholds distinguished synucleinopathy with excellent specificity including submentalis tonic, 5.6% (area under the curve [AUC] 0.791); submentalis any, 15.0% (AUC 0.871); submentalis phasic, 10.8% (AUC 0.863); and anterior tibialis phasic, 31.4% (AUC 0.694). In the subset of patients without dream enactment behaviors, submentalis RSWA was also greater in patients with synucleinopathy than in those without synucleinopathy. RSWA was detected more frequently by quantitative than qualitative methods (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Elevated submentalis RSWA distinguishes probable synucleinopathy from probable nonsynucleinopathy in cognitively impaired older adults, even in the absence of clinical dream enactment symptoms. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that quantitative RSWA analysis is useful for distinguishing cognitive impairment phenotypes. Further studies with pathologic confirmation of dementia diagnoses are needed to confirm the diagnostic utility of RSWA in dementia.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether quantitative polysomnographic REM sleep without atonia (RSWA) distinguishes between cognitive impairment phenotypes. BACKGROUND: Neurodegenerative cognitive impairment in older adults predominantly correlates with tauopathy or synucleinopathy. Accurate antemortem phenotypic diagnosis has important prognostic and treatment implications; additional clinical tools might distinguish between dementia syndromes. METHODS: We quantitatively analyzed RSWA in 61 older adults who underwent polysomnography including 46 with cognitive impairment (20 probable synucleinopathy), 26 probable non-synucleinopathy (15 probable Alzheimer disease, 11 frontotemporal lobar dementia), and 15 age- and sex-matched controls. Submentalis and anterior tibialis RSWA metrics and automated REM atonia index were calculated. Group statistical comparisons and regression were performed, and receiver operating characteristic curves determined diagnostic RSWA thresholds that best distinguished synucleinopathy phenotype. RESULTS: Submentalis-but not anterior tibialis RSWA-was greater in synucleinopathy than nonsynucleinopathy; several RSWA diagnostic thresholds distinguished synucleinopathy with excellent specificity including submentalis tonic, 5.6% (area under the curve [AUC] 0.791); submentalis any, 15.0% (AUC 0.871); submentalis phasic, 10.8% (AUC 0.863); and anterior tibialis phasic, 31.4% (AUC 0.694). In the subset of patients without dream enactment behaviors, submentalis RSWA was also greater in patients with synucleinopathy than in those without synucleinopathy. RSWA was detected more frequently by quantitative than qualitative methods (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Elevated submentalis RSWA distinguishes probable synucleinopathy from probable nonsynucleinopathy in cognitively impaired older adults, even in the absence of clinical dream enactment symptoms. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that quantitative RSWA analysis is useful for distinguishing cognitive impairment phenotypes. Further studies with pathologic confirmation of dementia diagnoses are needed to confirm the diagnostic utility of RSWA in dementia.
Authors: Heiko Braak; Kelly Del Tredici; Udo Rüb; Rob A I de Vos; Ernst N H Jansen Steur; Eva Braak Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: David J Irwin; Murray Grossman; Daniel Weintraub; Howard I Hurtig; John E Duda; Sharon X Xie; Edward B Lee; Vivianna M Van Deerlin; Oscar L Lopez; Julia K Kofler; Peter T Nelson; Gregory A Jicha; Randy Woltjer; Joseph F Quinn; Jeffery Kaye; James B Leverenz; Debby Tsuang; Katelan Longfellow; Dora Yearout; Walter Kukull; C Dirk Keene; Thomas J Montine; Cyrus P Zabetian; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Hugo Botha; Joseph R Duffy; Jennifer L Whitwell; Edythe A Strand; Mary M Machulda; Christopher G Schwarz; Robert I Reid; Anthony J Spychalla; Matthew L Senjem; David T Jones; Val Lowe; Clifford R Jack; Keith A Josephs Journal: Cortex Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 4.027
Authors: T J Ferman; B F Boeve; G E Smith; S-C Lin; M H Silber; O Pedraza; Z Wszolek; N R Graff-Radford; R Uitti; J Van Gerpen; W Pao; D Knopman; V S Pankratz; K Kantarci; B Boot; J E Parisi; B N Dugger; H Fujishiro; R C Petersen; D W Dickson Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: B F Boeve; M H Silber; J E Parisi; D W Dickson; T J Ferman; E E Benarroch; A M Schmeichel; G E Smith; R C Petersen; J E Ahlskog; J Y Matsumoto; D S Knopman; C H Schenck; M W Mahowald Journal: Neurology Date: 2003-07-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Sommer L Amundsen-Huffmaster; Matthew N Petrucci; Maria E Linn-Evans; Jae Woo Chung; Michael J Howell; Aleksandar Videnovic; Paul J Tuite; Scott E Cooper; Colum D MacKinnon Journal: J Parkinsons Dis Date: 2021 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Thomas R Gossard; Stuart J McCarter; Evan Gorres; John C Feemster; Paul C Timm; Luke N Teigen; Christy L Ralston; Sarah M Westerland; Jimmy P Conway; Jack T Jagielski; Carl D Olson; Liam J Edgar; Emma L Veum; Rodolfo Savica; Brad F Boeve; Michael H Silber; Erik K St Louis Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2020-11-26
Authors: Michelle F Devine; John C Feemster; Elizabeth A Lieske; Stuart J McCarter; David J Sandness; Tyler Steele; Paul C Timm; Jay Mandrekar; Bradley F Boeve; Michael H Silber; Divyanshu Dubey; Andrew McKeon; Erik K St Louis Journal: Sleep Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 5.849