Long sleep time and excessive need for sleep: State of the art and perspectives

The mechanisms underlying the individual need for sleep are unclear. Sleep duration is indeed influenced by multiple factors, such as genetic background, circadian and homeostatic processes, environmental factors, and sometimes transient disturbances such as infections. In some cases, the need for sleep dramatically and chronically increases, inducing a daily-life disability. This "excessive need for sleep" (ENS) was recently proposed and defined in a European Position Paper as a dimension of the hypersomnolence spectrum, "hypersomnia" being the objectified complaint of ENS. The most severe form of ENS has been described in Idiopathic Hypersomnia, a rare neurological disorder, but this disabling symptom can be also found in other hypersomnolence conditions. Because ENS has been defined recently, it remains a symptom poorly investigated and understood. However, protocols of long-term polysomnography recordings have been reported by expert centers in the last decades and open the way to a better understanding of ENS through a neurophysiological approach. In this narrative review, we will 1) present data related to the physiological and pathological variability of sleep duration and their mechanisms, 2) describe the published long-term polysomnography recording protocols, and 3) describe current neurophysiological tools to study sleep microstructure and discuss perspectives for a better understanding of ENS.

Medications for daytime sleepiness in individuals with idiopathic hypersomnia

BACKGROUND

Idiopathic hypersomnia is a disorder of excessive daytime sleepiness, often accompanied by long sleep times or pronounced difficulty in awakening, in the absence of a known cause. The optimal treatment strategy for idiopathic hypersomnia is currently unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of medications for daytime sleepiness and related symptoms in individuals with idiopathic hypersomnia and, in particular, whether medications may: 1. reduce subjective measures of sleepiness; 2. reduce objective measures of sleepiness; 3. reduce symptoms of cognitive dysfunction; 4. improve quality of life; and 5. be associated with adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 4 February 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 1 February 2021), and reference lists of articles. CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the specialized registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We previously searched the WHO ICTRP separately when loading of ICTRP records into CRS Web was temporarily suspended.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized studies comparing any medication to placebo, another medication, or a behavioral intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We contacted study authors for additional data. We collected data on adverse events from the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials, with a total of 112 participants. Risk of bias was low for the included studies. Two pharmaceutical company-sponsored trials compared modafinil with placebo, involving 102 participants, nearly all of whom had idiopathic hypersomnia without long sleep time. Modafinil significantly improved self-reported sleepiness on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale by 5.08 points more than placebo (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.01 to 7.16; 2 studies, 101 participants; high-certainty evidence). Modafinil also significantly improved disease severity on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity scale by 1.02 points (95% CI 0.11 to 1.93; 1 study, 30 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and resulted in a greater proportion of participants who were "much improved" or "very much improved" on the Clinical Global Impression of Change (odds ratio (OR) for improvement 5.14, 95% CI 1.76 to 15.00; 1 study, 70 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Ability to remain awake on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test was significantly improved with modafinil, by 4.74 minutes more than with placebo (95% CI 2.46 to 7.01; 2 studies, 99 participants; high-certainty evidence). Ratings of exhaustion and effectiveness/performance were improved with modafinil compared to placebo in one study. Number of naps per week was no different between modafinil and placebo across two studies. Participants receiving modafinil experienced more side effects, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.68, 95% CI 0.28 to 9.94; 2 studies, 102 participants; low-certainty evidence). One trial studying 20 participants with different disorders of sleepiness included 10 participants with idiopathic hypersomnia, with or without long sleep time, and compared clarithromycin to placebo. We only included the subset of trial data for those participants with idiopathic hypersomnia, per our protocol. There were no significant differences between clarithromycin and placebo for the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, psychomotor vigilance testing, sleep inertia, other subjective ratings, or side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Modafinil is effective for the treatment of several aspects of idiopathic hypersomnia symptomatology, based on studies predominantly including participants with idiopathic hypersomnia without long sleep times, with low risk of bias, and evidence certainty ranging from high to low. There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether clarithromycin is effective for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia. There is a clear need for additional studies testing interventions for the treatment of idiopathic hypersomnia.

On-the-road driving performance of patients with central disorders of hypersomnolence

INTRODUCTION

Excessive 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.

METHODS

Patients 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).

RESULTS

Results 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.

CONCLUSION

Driving 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.

Hypocretin deficiency in narcoleptic humans is associated with abdominal obesity

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of obesity among patients with narcolepsy, to estimate associated long-term health risks on the basis of waist circumference, and to distinguish the impact of hypocretin deficiency from that of increased daytime sleepiness (i.e., reduced physical activity) on these anthropometric measures.

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

A cross-sectional, case-control study was conducted. Patients with narcolepsy (n = 138) or idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) (n = 33) were included. Age-matched, healthy members of the Dutch population (Monitoring Project on Risk Factors for Chronic Diseases and Doetinchem Project; n = 10,526) were used as controls. BMI and waist circumference were determined.

RESULTS

Obesity (BMI > or = 30 kg/m(2)) and overweight (BMI 25 to 30 kg/m(2)) occurred more often among narcolepsy patients [prevalence: 33% (narcoleptics) vs. 12.5% (controls) and 43% (narcoleptics) vs. 36% (controls), respectively; both p < 0.05]. Narcoleptics had a larger waist circumference (mean difference 5 +/- 1.4 cm, p < 0.001). The BMI of patients with IH was significantly lower than that of narcolepsy patients (25.6 +/- 3.6 vs. 28.5 +/- 5.4 kg/m(2); p = 0.004).

DISCUSSION

Overweight and obesity occur frequently in patients with narcolepsy. Moreover, these patients have an increased waist circumference, indicating excess fat storage in abdominal depots. The fact that patients with IH had a lower BMI than narcoleptics supports the notion that excessive daytime sleepiness (i.e., inactivity) cannot account for excess body fat in narcoleptic patients.