MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W259472958 · doi:10.1093/sleep/34.4.411

Comments on the Letter to the Editor by Ferri et al. on Autonomic Response to Periodic Leg Movements in Sleep in Narcolepsy-Cataplexy

2011· article· en· W259472958 on OpenAlexafffund
Yves Dauvilliers, Marie‐Hélène Pennestri, Jacques Montplaisir

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNarcolepsyCataplexySleep (system call)MedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryNeurologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dr. Dauvilliers has consulted for UCB Pharma, Cephalon, and Bioprojet. Dr. Montplaisir has received research support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi-Aventis, and Merck; served as an advisor for Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck, and Servier; and participated in speaking engagements for Valeant Pharmaceutical, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Sanofi-Aventis, and GlaxoSmithKline. Ms. Pennestri has indicated no financial conflicts of interest. Thank you for your comment on our recent study. In this work, we documented that periodic leg movements during sleep (PLMS) of subjects with narcolepsy with cataplexy (NC) were associated with a lower amplitude of tachycardia and bradycardia than PLMS of normal control subjects.1 We suggested that this attenuation could be explained by an impairment in both sympathetic and parasympathetic activities due to the hypocretin-deficient condition. In a letter to the editor, Ferri et al.2 addressed some considerations that, in their opinion, confound the results and conclusions of our results. First, they pinpointed that the subjects we used as normal controls had an abnormally high PLMS index. As stated in our paper, we selected control subjects with high levels of PLMS in order to have enough PLMS to be further analyzed and compared with a carefully age- and gender-matched population without any disease or medication interference, to avoid any effect related to these variables. However, to verify if a high PLMS index could influence the amplitude of heart rate changes, we checked for a relationship between the magnitude of the cardiac activation associated with PLMS and PLMS index in both patients and controls but could not find any correlation. These authors also argued that a high PLMS index is likely a precursor of RLS and that our control subjects could eventually develop RLS symptoms. As noted by these authors, a recent study found an association between the RLS gene variant (BDBD9) and subjects with PLMS without RLS, but importantly such an association was absent in subjects with RLS without PLMS.3 In our opinion, this supports the hypothesis that PLMS and RLS are actually at least partially distinct phenomena, especially in the elderly, but does not necessarily support the idea that our control subjects with high PLMS indexes will develop RLS in the future. We agree that large longitudinal studies including the selection of genetic polymorphisms (such as BDBD9 and Meis 1 gene variants) are needed to better answer this question. Ferri et al. also claimed that PLMS are associated with sympathetic activation, and probably cardiovascular consequences, irrespective of the presence or absence of RLS. However, to our knowledge, cardiovascular changes associated with PLMS have only been studied in patients with RLS, with periodic leg movement disorder (PLMD) and with REM behavior disorder. In contrast, we clearly documented that our control subjects did not present any complaint of daytime sleepiness, insomnia, or RLS symptoms, which excludes a PLMD or RLS diagnosis even in the presence of high PLMS indices. The authors also argued that the difference we observed in the amplitude of heart rate changes between narcoleptic patients and control subjects could be caused not only by a reduction in narcoleptics patients, but also by higher values in our controls. As our NC patients also had a high PLMS index, it would be hard to understand why a high PLMS index in controls could have this different impact. Furthermore, we have to emphasize that heart rate changes associated with PLMS observed in our control subjects are about of the same amplitude as heart rate changes already reported in RLS or PLMD,4–6 strongly arguing that the decreased activation observed in the group of patients is indeed related to the narcolepsy/hypocretin deficiency. Controlled studies are however needed to better compare the amplitude of heart rate changes between RLS patients and healthy normal subjects with low or high PLMS index. Ferri et al. also suggested that heightened metrics of sympathetic outflow in RLS/PLMS may be due to increased CSF hypocretin-1 levels previously described in RLS.7 This is a good point. Nonetheless, we mentioned that despite high PLMS indexes none of our controls presented a RLS diagnosis. Moreover, we note that the findings of increased CSF hypocretin-1 in RLS were only found in the evening, not replicated in other settings, and could be due to increased motor activity and wakefulness associated with RLS. For this reason, we felt this explanation to be too speculative. Finally, these authors recommended caution before concluding on an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity in narcolepsy. We fully concur as to date no study has shown an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in narcolepsy with or without PLMS. In fact, our paper only stated that several previous studies have shown an association between a decrease in HR variability and increased risk of mortality due to cardiovascular diseases8,9 and that patients affected with NC often present with obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome,10,11 conditions also known to be associated with higher risk of cardiovascular diseases. Patients with NC are often treated with psychostimulants like methylphenidate for years; these medications are known for their impacts on the autonomic nervous system and cardiovascular function.12 Altogether, we believe that patients with NC are at especially high risk for cardiovascular diseases, and that autonomic activation with PLM, a frequent co-occurrence in patients with narcolepsy, could be an additional burden. This reasonable hypothesis expends on a parallel suggestion that has been previously made for RLS patients with PLMs. These hypotheses do indeed still need to be tested. Work was performed at the Sleep Disorders Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur, Montreal, Canada. This work has been supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Studentship to M.H. Pennestri; grants to J. Montplaisir) and the Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Québec.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0340.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207