Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24825774›Full record

ReviewImmunologic research2014

History of narcolepsy at Stanford University.

Emmanuel J M Mignot

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Immunologic research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. To sleep and dream: Unraveling narcolepsy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Portrayals of narcolepsy from 1980 to 2020: a descriptive analysis of stigmatizing content in newspaper articles.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The Development of Sleep Medicine: A Historical Sketch.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2016
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emmanuel J M MignotStanford University Center for Sleep Sciences, 3165 Porter Drive, #2178, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA, mignot@stanford.edu.
Stanford University · US

Funding

SPECTRUM OF NARCOLEPSY AND ITS SYMPTOMSP50NS023724 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MIGNOT, EMMANUEL J · 1986 to 2016
$18.9M
CENTER FOR NARCOLEPSY AND RELATED DISORDERSP01NS023724 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DEMENT, WILLIAM C · 1987 to 1988
–
NINDS NIH HHS NS-23724NINDS NIH HHS P50 NS023724
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although narcolepsy was first described in the late nineteenth century in Germany and France, much of the research on this disorder has been conducted at Stanford University, starting with Drs. William C. Dement and Christian Guilleminault in the 1970s. The prevalence of narcolepsy was established, and a canine model discovered. Following the finding in Japan that almost all patients with narcolepsy carry a specific HLA subtype, HLA-DR2, Hugh Mac Devitt, F. Carl Grumet, and Larry Steinman initiated immunological studies, but results were generally negative. Using the narcoleptic canines, Dr. Nishino and I established that stimulants increased wakefulness by stimulating dopaminergic transmission while antidepressants suppress cataplexy via adrenergic reuptake inhibition. A linkage study was initiated with Dr. Grumet in 1988, and after 10 years of work, the canine narcolepsy gene was cloned by in 1999 and identified as the hypocretin (orexin) receptor 2. In 1992, studying African Americans, we also found that DQ0602 rather than DR2 was a better marker for narcolepsy across all ethnic groups. In 2000, Dr. Nishino and I, in collaboration with Dr. Lammers in the Netherlands, found that hypocretin 1 levels in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were undetectable in most cases, establishing hypocretin deficiency as the cause of narcolepsy. Pursuing this research, our and Dr. Siegel's group, examining postmortem brains, found that the decreased CSF hypocretin 1 was secondary to the loss the 70,000 neurons producing hypocretin in the hypothalamus. This finding revived the autoimmune hypothesis but attempts at demonstrating immune targeting of hypocretin cells failed until 2013. At this date, Dr. Elisabeth Mellins and I discovered that narcolepsy is characterized by the presence of autoreactive CD4(+) T cells to hypocretin fragments when presented by DQ0602. Following reports that narcolepsy cases were triggered by vaccinations and infections against influenza A 2009 pH1N1, a new pandemic strain that erupted in 2009, our groups also established that a small epitope of pH1N1 resembles hypocretin and is likely involved in molecular mimicry. Although much remains to be done, these achievements, establishing hypocretin deficiency as the cause of narcolepsy, demonstrating its autoimmune basis, and showing molecular mimicry between hypocretin and sequences derived from a pandemic strain of influenza, are likely to remain classics in human immunology.

Indexed as

NarcolepsyResearchSchools, MedicalUniversitiesAllelesAnimalsCaliforniaDisease Models, AnimalDogsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome-Wide Association StudyHistocompatibility AntigensHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansHCRT protein, humanHistocompatibility AntigensIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsNeuropeptidesOrexinsReceptors, Antigen, T-Cell

Identifiers

PMID24825774
PMCPMC4028550
OpenAlexW2091345402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.