Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41994626›Full record

ArticleDigital biomarkers

Functional Regression Methods for Estimating 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Parameters in Narcolepsy Type 1.

Marta Karas, Francesco Onorati, Raul Torres, Lucie Barateau, Yves Dauvilliers, Brian Tracey, Dmitri Volfson

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital biomarkers. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04096560 (A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multiple Rising Oral Dose Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of TAK-994 in Patients With Narcolepsy With or Without Cataplexy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04096560 phase2terminatednot on this map

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multiple Rising Oral Dose Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of TAK-994 in Patients With Narcolepsy With or Without Cataplexy (Narcolepsy Type 1 or Narcolepsy Type 2)

TypeinterventionalSponsorTakedaRan2020 to 2021Enrolled97ConditionsNarcolepsy Type 1 (NT1), Narcolepsy Type 2 (NT2)ArmsTAK-994, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marta KarasTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Francesco OnoratiTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Raul TorresTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Lucie BarateauSleep-Wake Disorders Center, Department of Neurology, Gui de Chauliac Hospital, Montpellier, France.
Yves DauvilliersSleep-Wake Disorders Center, Department of Neurology, Gui de Chauliac Hospital, Montpellier, France.
Brian TraceyTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Dmitri VolfsonTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The nocturnal dip, a physiological drop in nocturnal blood pressure (BP), is driven by the autonomic nervous system. A reduction of <10% during nocturnal sleep versus daytime wakefulness is considered a "non-dipping" BP pattern and associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk in the general population. This study aimed to compare different methods for estimating BP and heart rate (HR) nocturnal dip from ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) data in individuals with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1). Methods: Baseline ABPM data were from participants with NT1 in the randomized TAK-994 phase 2 clinical trial (NCT04096560). Sleep period time (SPT) windows were estimated from raw accelerometer data overlapping with baseline and week 3 ABPM visits. Three approaches estimated BP and HR dip: (1) fixed-window, with daytime defined as 06:00 to 22:00, nighttime as 00:00 to 06:00, and dip defined as a drop from the daytime to nighttime window average; (2) 24-h pattern employing a two-component cosinor model to estimate a continuous 24-h pattern of BP and HR, and defining dip as a drop from pattern average to its lowest point; and (3) actigraphy-based, with dip defined as a drop from non-SPT to SPT average of BP and HR, utilizing algorithmically identified SPT aiming to best reflect participants' actual sleep periods. Results: The analytic sample consisted of 31 participants with NT1. Comparing actigraphy-based dip with fixed-window and 24-h pattern dips, the 24-h pattern dip had higher Pearson's correlation than the fixed-window dip across all three parameters (0.91 vs. 0.87, 0.88 vs. 0.68, and 0.88 vs. 0.56 for systolic BP [SBP], diastolic BP [DBP], and HR, respectively). We found substantial between- and within-participant variability in SPT timing and duration. A total of 61% of participants had a fixed-window SBP dip <10%, and 41% had a fixed-window DBP dip <10%. The 30th percentile of SBP/DBP dip varied substantially across calculation methods: 3.8%/8.6% (fixed-window), 6.8%/14.1% (24-h pattern), and 6.7%/12.1% (actigraphy-based). Conclusion: Estimated dip values from the 24-h pattern approach with a two-component cosinor model for BP and HR were strongly correlated with actigraphy-based dip values, which utilized an objective algorithm to identify participants' sleep. The 24-h pattern approach offers a robust alternative to the fixed-window method for assessing dipping, especially in populations with sleep timing variations and disturbances, like NT1, and does not require simultaneous actigraphy measurement. The classification of a "non-dipper" varies depending on both the dip type (SBP vs. DBP) and the dip estimation method.

Indexed as

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoringDiurnal patternNarcolepsy type 1Nocturnal blood pressure dip

Identifiers

PMID41994626
PMCPMC13082773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.