ArticleNature and science of sleep2026
Rapid Eye Movement Sleep-Related Indicators with Promising Performance in Diagnosing Narcolepsy.
Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The dysregulation of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep is an intrinsic nature of narcolepsy. This study aimed to evaluate the performances of REM sleep-related clinical features and the parallel objective indicators for distinguishing narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and, more specifically, narcolepsy type 2 (NT2) from patients with hypersomnias. Patients and Methods: Drug-free patients with excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) were consecutively recruited between January 2020 and March 2023. All the patients were categorized into three groups, including NT1, NT2, and EDS controls. The REM sleep-related clinical features and REM sleep parameters were compared across these three groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were applied to quantify the diagnostic performances of REM sleep-related indicators in differentiating NT1 and NT2 from patients with hypersomnias, with bootstrap resampling to stabilize cut-offs and related metrics. Results: A total of 206 patients were enrolled in this study (NT1 = 87, NT2 = 27, EDS controls = 92). In the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT), a daytime REM sleep duration of ≥ 11.91 (7.90-18.75) minutes for NT1 (AUC: 0.943 [0.908-0.974], sensitivity: 0.87 [0.76-0.95], specificity: 0.93 [0.84-1.00]) and ≥ 8.41 (3.00-12.50) minutes for NT2 (AUC: 0.922 [0.852-0.973], sensitivity: 0.90 [0.77-1.00], specificity: 0.88 [0.73-0.96]) yielded optimal differentiation from other hypersomnias. Stratified subgroup ROC analyses focusing on NT1 vs IH (AUC: 0.948 [0.897-0.986], cut-off: 12.67 [0.50-18.50] min, sensitivity: 0.85 [0.72-0.99], specificity: 0.97 [0.80-1.00]) and NT2 vs IH (AUC: 0.918 [0.819-0.986], cut-off: 7.18 [1.75-17.50] min, sensitivity: 0.89 [0.60-1.00], specificity: 0.86 [0.67-1.00]) further support the promising discriminatory potential of this marker. Additionally, ROC analyses showed high AUC values for any REM sleep without atonia (RSWA) index during MSLT in discriminating NT1 (AUC: 0.882 [0.826-0.930], cut-off value: 36.61% [3.71-71.81%], sensitivity: 0.91 [0.81-0.98], specificity: 0.80 [0.69-0.89]) and NT2 (AUC: 0.865 [0.796-0.924], cut-off value: 18.83% [7.41-43.85%], sensitivity: 0.99 [0.90-1.00], specificity: 0.75 [0.65-0.85]) from other hypersomnias. Comparable separation performance was also seen in separate NT1 vs IH (AUC: 0.885 [0.772-0.968], cut-off: 42.81% [3.71-82.58%], sensitivity: 0.86 [0.67-0.99], specificity: 0.86 [0.65-1.00]) and NT2 vs IH (AUC: 0.863 [0.701-0.974], cut-off: 20.09% [7.41-82.29%], sensitivity: 0.97 [0.71-1.00], specificity: 0.77 [0.54-1.00]) subgroup analyses. The co-occurrence of REM sleep-related symptoms of sleep paralysis, hypnagogic hallucinations, and REM sleep behavior disorder exhibited a high specificity in diagnosing patients with NT1 (AUC: 0.711 [0.647-0.773], specificity: 0.87 [0.80-0.94]). Conclusion: The daytime REM sleep duration, any RSWA in MSLT, and REM sleep-related symptoms represent promising candidate biomarkers in distinguishing between narcolepsy subtypes and other hypersomnias, with particular utility for identifying NT2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.