Type 1 narcolepsy is a central hypersomnia due to the loss of hypocretin-producing neurons and characterized by cataplexy, excessive daytime sleepiness, sleep paralysis, hypnagogic hallucinations and disturbed nocturnal sleep. In children, close to the disease onset, type 1 narcolepsy has peculiar clinical features with severe cataplexy and a complex admixture of movement disorders occurring while awake. Motor dyscontrol during sleep has never been systematically investigated. Suspecting that abnormal motor control might affect also sleep, we systematically analysed motor events recorded by means of video polysomnography in 40 children with type 1 narcolepsy (20 females; mean age 11.8 ± 2.6 years) and compared these data with those recorded in 22 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Motor events were classified as elementary movements, if brief and non-purposeful and complex behaviours, if simulating purposeful behaviours. Complex behaviours occurring during REM sleep were further classified as ‘classically-defined’ and ‘pantomime-like’ REM sleep behaviour disorder episodes, based on their duration and on their pattern (i.e. brief and vivid-energetic in the first case, longer and with subcontinuous gesturing mimicking daily life activity in the second case). Elementary movements emerging either from non-REM or REM sleep were present in both groups, even if those emerging from REM sleep were more numerous in the group of patients. Conversely, complex behaviours could be detected only in children with type 1 narcolepsy and were observed in 13 patients, with six having ‘classically-defined’ REM sleep behaviour disorder episodes and seven having ‘pantomime-like’ REM sleep behaviour disorder episodes. Complex behaviours during REM sleep tended to recur in a stereotyped fashion for several times during the night, up to be almost continuous. Patients displaying a more severe motor dyscontrol during REM sleep had also more severe motor disorder during daytime (i.e. status cataplecticus) and more complaints of disrupted nocturnal sleep and of excessive daytime sleepiness. The neurophysiological hallmark of this severe motor dyscontrol during REM sleep was a decreased atonia index. The present study reports for the first time the occurrence of a severe and peculiar motor disorder during REM sleep in paediatric type 1 narcolepsy and confirms the presence of a severe motor dyscontrol in these patients, emerging not only from wakefulness (i.e. status cataplecticus), but also from sleep (i.e. complex behaviours during REM sleep). This is probably related to the acute imbalance of the hypocretinergic system, which physiologically acts by promoting movements during wakefulness and suppressing them during sleep.

To search for discriminating biomarkers, 30 patients with idiopathic rapid‐eye‐movements sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) were compared with 17 patients with RBD within narcolepsy type 1. Both groups underwent extensive examinations, including skin biopsy searching for phosphorylated α‐synuclein deposits and whole‐night video‐polysomnography. Skin biopsy was positive for phosphorylated α‐synuclein deposits in 86.7% of iRBD patients and in none of narcoleptic patients. The analysis of video‐polysomnographic motor events showed differences in their occurrence throughout the night in the two groups. iRBD and RBD due to narcolepsy do have different clinical and pathological findings, confirming a different pathophysiology.

Attentional complaints are common in narcolepsy patients and can overlap with daytime sleepiness features. Few studies attempted to characterize attentional domains in narcolepsy leading to controversial results. We aimed to assess the impact of hypocretin deficiency on attentional functioning by comparing performances on the attention network test (ANT) of narcoleptic patients with hypocretin deficiency (narcolepsy type 1—NT1) versus patients without hypocretin deficiency (narcolepsy type 2—NT2) and healthy controls. We also addressed frequency and severity of psychopathological symptoms and their influence on performances on ANT. Twenty-one NT1 patients, fifteen NT2 patients and twenty-two healthy controls underwent the ANT, which allows assessing three separate attentional processes (alerting, orienting and executive control), and a psychometric assessment including questionnaires on attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), obsessive-compulsive disorder, anxiety and depression symptoms. NT1 and NT2 patients presented with slower reaction times compared to controls. NT1 patients exhibited an impairment of alerting network relative to NT2 and healthy controls, while orienting and executive control networks efficiency were comparable between groups. NT1 and NT2 displayed higher severity of ADHD inattentive domain than controls, NT1 patients also displayed higher severity of ADHD hyperactive domain and depressive symptoms. In NT1, ADHD and depressive symptoms were positively correlated. Despite a shared slowing of reaction times in both NT1 and NT2, a selective impairment of alerting network was present only in hypocretin deficient patients. Clinicians should carefully consider attentional deficits and psychopathological symptoms, including ADHD symptoms, in the clinical assessment and management of patients with narcolepsy.