Sleep Phenotypes of α-Synucleinopathies and Tauopathies with Parkinsonism
Briel, N.; Marti, C.; Werth, E.; Poryazova, R.; Valko, P.; Baumann-Vogel, H.; Baumann, C. R.; Schreiner, S. J.
Show abstract
IntroductionIn neurodegenerative Parkinsonism, biomarkers of -synucleinopathy (Syn) or tauopathy (Tau) are an unmet need. Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD) strongly indicates Syn. However, it remains unknown if sleep features other than RBD could reflect underlying neuropathology. Here we assess sleep phenotypes of Syn or Tau in neurodegenerative Parkinsonism and explore their properties as potential biomarkers. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed polysomnography recordings from 198 patients with clinically diagnosed Parkinsonism (20 DLB, 100 PD, 45 MSA, 27 PSP, 6 CBS). We compared sleep features between clinical diagnoses and between Syn (DLB + PD + MSA) and Tau (PSP+CBS) patients. We established linear discriminant analysis-informed parsimonious logistic regression models for differentiating Syn and Tau proteinopathies. ResultsSleep architecture was more disturbed in Tau compared to Syn patients, with less REM and non-REM stage 2 sleep, lower sleep efficiency, and more wake after sleep onset. Stridor was unique to MSA, with a prevalence of 42%. Parsimonious modeling identified sleep features sufficient to differentiate Tau from Syn patients; Diagnostic accuracy was robust with RBD (AUC=0.78) but even higher after adding more polysomnography features (AUC=0.83) and demographic variables to the model (AUC=0.9). The best classification model of Syn vs. Tau is available online for exploration and custom data input at SynTauSleepTool. ConclusionDistinct sleep phenotypes characterize neurodegenerative Parkinsonism with Syn or Tau. Pending pathological confirmation, our data suggests that neurodegeneration could affect sleep-wake regulatory brain systems in a proteinopathy-dependent manner. Sleep phenotypes hold promise as non-invasive biomarkers of Syn or Tau in Parkinsonism. Highlights- Polysomnography in 198 patients with neurodegenerative Parkinsonism. - Sleep features vary by suspected underlying proteinopathy (Syn or Tau). - More sleep disturbance in Tau than Syn patients (reduced REM and N2 sleep, more wakefulness). - Sleep features and demographics accurately differentiate Tau from Syn. - Sleep phenotypes may have potential as biomarkers of Tau and Syn in Parkinsonism. Statement of SignificanceThis study highlights how routine polysomnography can reveal distinct sleep phenotypes in neurodegenerative Parkinsonian disorders linked to different underlying pathologies, -synuclein or tau. By integrating multiple sleep features and demographics instead of relying on isolated well-established sleep biomarkers, such as REM sleep behavior disorder, our approach improves disease classification. These findings underscore the promise of sleep phenotypes as non-invasive biomarkers with potential to guide earlier, more targeted interventions. Future directions include validating these phenotypes in prospectively followed cohorts with confirmed neuropathology.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Ambulatory detection of isolated REM sleep behavior disorder combining actigraphy and questionnaire 94%
- A comprehensive analysis of dominant and recessive parkinsonism genes in REM sleep behavior disorder 93%
- Validation of Serum Neurofilament Light Chain as a Biomarker of Parkinson's Disease Progression 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- White matter microstructure in Parkinson’s disease with and without elevated REM sleep muscle tone 92%
- Reduction of spontaneous cortical beta bursts in Parkinson’s disease is linked to symptom severity 91%
- CSF and PET biomarkers for noradrenergic dysfunction in neurodegenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.