Odds Ratio Product as a Biological Marker of Phenotypes of Insomnia.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Kari Lambing, Veronica Guadagni, Bethany Gerardy, Amy Bender, Magdy Younes, Célyne H Bastien
{"title":"Odds Ratio Product as a Biological Marker of Phenotypes of Insomnia.","authors":"Kari Lambing, Veronica Guadagni, Bethany Gerardy, Amy Bender, Magdy Younes, Célyne H Bastien","doi":"10.1111/jsr.70169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study investigated differences in objective markers of sleep depth and identified phenotypes of insomnia. Participants were screened with the Insomnia-Severity-Index and clinical interviews and assigned to control (n = 50) or insomnia (n = 69) groups. They completed three nights of in-laboratory overnight polysomnography. We measured the Odds Ratio Product (ORP), a continuous measure of sleep depth (0 = deep sleep, 2.5 = full wakefulness) and calculated: (a) ORP in stages Wake, NREM, REM, (b) percentage of TRT in deep sleep (ORP < 0.5) and full-wakefulness (ORP > 2.25), (c) number/hour of sleep of transient increases in ORP to wake levels (Wake Intrusion Index [WII]), (d) gamma power, (e) frequency of alpha intrusions, (f) speed of return to deep sleep after arousals (ORP-9). We used Latent Class Analysis to differentiate two insomnia groups with 'Objectively Normal' and 'Objectively Poor' metrics. The Objectively Poor group had higher ORP<sub>wake</sub>, ORP<sub>NREM</sub>, ORP<sub>REM</sub>, %TRT > 2.25, gamma power, alpha intrusion, WII and ORP-9 than good sleeper (GSC) and the Objectively Normal group, illustrating evidence of hyperarousal, while the Objectively Normal group was comparable to GSC. The Objectively Poor group had higher %awake and lower TST. Both insomnia groups reported worse sleep and underestimated TST relative to GSC, despite similar objective sleep metrics in the Objectively Normal group. Using novel objective sleep metrics, we identified a subgroup of insomnia with abnormalities consistent with hyperarousal and another with no difference from GSC. Future research should test if these groups benefit from different treatment pathways and thus improve outcomes and time to determine appropriate treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":17057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sleep Research","volume":" ","pages":"e70169"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sleep Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.70169","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study investigated differences in objective markers of sleep depth and identified phenotypes of insomnia. Participants were screened with the Insomnia-Severity-Index and clinical interviews and assigned to control (n = 50) or insomnia (n = 69) groups. They completed three nights of in-laboratory overnight polysomnography. We measured the Odds Ratio Product (ORP), a continuous measure of sleep depth (0 = deep sleep, 2.5 = full wakefulness) and calculated: (a) ORP in stages Wake, NREM, REM, (b) percentage of TRT in deep sleep (ORP < 0.5) and full-wakefulness (ORP > 2.25), (c) number/hour of sleep of transient increases in ORP to wake levels (Wake Intrusion Index [WII]), (d) gamma power, (e) frequency of alpha intrusions, (f) speed of return to deep sleep after arousals (ORP-9). We used Latent Class Analysis to differentiate two insomnia groups with 'Objectively Normal' and 'Objectively Poor' metrics. The Objectively Poor group had higher ORPwake, ORPNREM, ORPREM, %TRT > 2.25, gamma power, alpha intrusion, WII and ORP-9 than good sleeper (GSC) and the Objectively Normal group, illustrating evidence of hyperarousal, while the Objectively Normal group was comparable to GSC. The Objectively Poor group had higher %awake and lower TST. Both insomnia groups reported worse sleep and underestimated TST relative to GSC, despite similar objective sleep metrics in the Objectively Normal group. Using novel objective sleep metrics, we identified a subgroup of insomnia with abnormalities consistent with hyperarousal and another with no difference from GSC. Future research should test if these groups benefit from different treatment pathways and thus improve outcomes and time to determine appropriate treatments.

优势比乘积作为失眠表型的生物学标记。
该研究调查了睡眠深度客观标记的差异,并确定了失眠的表型。参与者通过失眠严重程度指数和临床访谈进行筛选,并被分配到对照组(n = 50)和失眠症组(n = 69)。他们在实验室完成了三晚的夜间多导睡眠描记术。我们测量了比值比产品(ORP),这是一种睡眠深度的连续测量(0 =深度睡眠,2.5 =完全清醒),并计算出:(a) Wake、NREM、REM阶段的ORP, (b)深度睡眠中TRT的百分比(ORP 2.25), (c) ORP短暂增加到清醒水平的睡眠数/小时(Wake Intrusion Index [WII]), (d)伽马功率,(e) α侵入频率,(f)唤醒后返回深度睡眠的速度(ORP-9)。我们使用潜类分析来区分两个失眠症组与“客观上正常”和“客观上差”的指标。客观睡眠不良组的ORPwake、ORPNREM、ORPREM、%TRT bbb2.25、γ功率、α侵入、WII和ORP-9均高于客观睡眠良好组和客观睡眠正常组,说明存在过度觉醒的证据,而客观睡眠正常组与客观睡眠正常组相当。客观差组清醒率较高,TST较低。尽管客观正常组的客观睡眠指标相似,但两组失眠患者均报告睡眠质量较差,且相对于GSC低估了TST。使用新的客观睡眠指标,我们确定了一个失眠亚组与过度觉醒一致的异常,另一个与GSC没有区别。未来的研究应该测试这些群体是否从不同的治疗途径中受益,从而改善结果和确定适当治疗的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Sleep Research
Journal of Sleep Research 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
6.80%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sleep Research is dedicated to basic and clinical sleep research. The Journal publishes original research papers and invited reviews in all areas of sleep research (including biological rhythms). The Journal aims to promote the exchange of ideas between basic and clinical sleep researchers coming from a wide range of backgrounds and disciplines. The Journal will achieve this by publishing papers which use multidisciplinary and novel approaches to answer important questions about sleep, as well as its disorders and the treatment thereof.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信