Ask AI
Back Back1

Beyond Wakefulness: Key Takeaways From SLEEP 2026 on Redefining Communication, Diagnostics, and Therapeutics in Narcolepsy and Idiopathic Hypersomnia

Start Activity
Conference Coverage Clinical Thought
Conference Coverage Clinical Thought Start Activity
See Activity Information

Released: September 22, 2026

See Activity Collection

Step 1 of 2

1 ClinicalThought 2 Complete Activity

Central disorders of hypersomnolence can impose substantial cognitive, functional, and quality-of-life burdens that are not always captured by traditional sleep testing or measures of daytime sleepiness. This expert commentary examines emerging evidence from SLEEP 2026 on narcolepsy type 1, narcolepsy type 2, and idiopathic hypersomnia, including evolving diagnostic approaches, patient-reported outcomes, orexin-targeted therapies, and strategies to address barriers to timely, individualized care.

Maggie Lavender
Maggie Lavender, MSN, APRN, FNP-C
Key Takeaways from SLEEP 2026

Continue

SLEEP 2026 was hosted by the Associated Professional Sleep Societies, a collaboration between the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and Sleep Research Society, in June of this year. This 40th annual national conference drew more than 6000 attendees and over 150 exhibitors. After taking time to review and reflect on everything learned at this conference, it was clear that this meeting highlighted important developments in understanding the scientific basis, clinical management, patient experience, and real-world burden of sleep disorders with a focus on central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH). The scientific presentations and late-breaking clinical trials reflected an important evolution within the sleep medicine community; patient experience and burden need to be at the forefront. This sentiment was highlighted by discussions led by clinical experts, patients, and patient advocacy groups that focused heavily on acknowledging and addressing the communication gap between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients living with CDH and how it increases the burden of these disorders.

Numerous presentations highlighted the evolution of medical treatment for CDH with a focus on narcolepsy type 1 (NT1), narcolepsy type 2 (NT2), and idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). Of particular interest was the introduction of first-in-class orexin 2 receptor (OX2R) agonists. These presentations were complemented by studies examining the structural and systemic challenges patients face, which often lead to diagnostic delays and barriers to initiating or continuing treatment. These discussions addressed the limitations of current recommended diagnostic testing, advocating for modified sleep laboratory protocols and validated patient-report tools to better capture subjective sleepiness and the functional toll of living with CDH.  

Discussions focused on the importance of effective communication in assessing for a potential diagnosis of narcolepsy or IH. Open dialogue helps HCPs better understand a patient’s lived experiences and symptom severity, supporting more accurate assessments and earlier diagnosis and treatment. In addition, there are many terms often used interchangeably in everyday language by both HCPs and patients that may have different interpretations in clinical practice. Clinical experts and patient advocacy groups at SLEEP 2026 emphasized the importance of distinguishing terms that are often used interchangeably and which can result in a patient’s true debilitating symptoms being lost in translation. Keyword examples were “tired”, “sleepy”, “fatigued”, and “drowsy.” Rather than asking the patient “Are you tired?” or “Do you get drowsy during the day?”, HCPs should ask more direct questions, such as: 

  • “Do you have moments during the day when you experience an uncontrollable need or urge to sleep?”  
  • “Do you wake up in the morning feeling unrefreshed despite sleeping for 9 or more hours?” 
  • “Do you feel refreshed and more awake after taking a nap?”  
  • “Do you have difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep?” 
  • “Do you wake up in a confusional state, disoriented with a feeling of sleep drunkenness?”

The more specific the question, the more detailed the conversation may become. This approach can provide a better understanding of the impact of patients’ real-life experiences rather than focusing only on how many hours they slept. Similarly, HCPs should ask direct questions about the actual symptoms of cataplexy, rather than simply asking if cataplexy is present. Assessment should also extend beyond excessive daytime sleepiness to symptoms such as “brain fog,” difficulty concentrating, poor memory, and impaired executive functioning.  

Many advocacy groups stressed the urgent need for HCPs to address these cognitive symptoms in patients with narcolepsy or IH. Of note, 40% of the vocabulary patients use to describe their condition is centered around cognitive brain fog rather than excessive daytime sleepiness. Along with brain fog, patients often described instances of being physically present for situations but unable to mentally or emotionally engage due to cognitive exhaustion. This symptom, known as presentism, can lead to low self-esteem, social isolation, and difficulties in both career and family life, further supporting the need for increased attention to the cognitive impact of these disorders.

Through patient advocacy group meetings with HCPs, it was clear that there is an intentional shift of focus toward the importance of understanding the lived experience and real-world burdens of patients with CDH, rather than relying solely on diagnostic lab data or metrics. During these interactions, there was a strong push for clinical adoption of subjective patient-reported outcome tools such as the Functional Impacts of Narcolepsy Instrument and Idiopathic Hypersomnia Severity Scale in both clinical trials and daily practice. These tools allow HCPs to understand the functional impact of CDH by measuring the clinical efficacy of treatment outcomes, rather than simply defining treatment success by whether a patient has an increased mean sleep latency on a Maintenance of Wakefulness Test. These discussions also pointed out the limitations of the traditional Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT), such as poor test–retest reliability and an inability to capture a patient’s 24-hour sleep volume. These limitations may help explain why this test can be less accurate in detecting NT2 and IH in some patients, particularly those with long sleep duration. In fact, 1 study found that 71% of patients with IH and classic long sleep time “pass” the MSLT. These findings highlight how reliance on tests like the MSLT alone may delay diagnosis and access to care, further demonstrating the need for additional diagnostic and outcome measures.

Study data presented at SLEEP 2026 provided evidence of different patterns in sleep–wake regulation between patients with NT1, NT2, and IH, and perhaps some differences between patients within the IH category as well.  In patients living with IH, the body’s natural “sleep pressure” system is dysregulated, failing to reset the way it does in healthy individuals during extended sleep. In addition, for those with IH with long sleep time, this sleep pressure accumulation may be more rapid. This evidence of differences in abnormal buildup of sleep pressure provides support for the calls from some clinical experts who believe a split of IH into 2 distinct phenotypes, IH with long sleep time and IH without long sleep time, would be beneficial. Distinguishing and understanding the 2 phenotypes of IH and how they differ from NT1 and NT2 may allow for fewer diagnostic failures in the sleep lab, provide validation of patients’ lived experiences, and empower HCPs to choose more patient-specific treatment options, making the findings in these areas of great interest.

The much-anticipated news from SLEEP 2026 surrounded new and emerging treatments for patients diagnosed with NT1, NT2, and IH. Phase IV data presented from the DUET study (NCT05875974) showed that low-sodium oxybate was able to produce clinically meaningful improvements in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores and other outcomes, with approximately 95 % of patients with IH and approximately 82% of patients with narcolepsy having a reduction in ESS of 2 or more points. At this time, it remains the only FDA-approved medication specifically indicated for IH.  

A highlight of SLEEP 2026 was the presentation of data for a new class of drugs, orexin 2 receptor (OX2R) agonists, for the treatment of CDH. Rather than acting as traditional stimulants, OX2R agonists work in place of orexin, a chemical messenger responsible for stabilizing wakefulness and regulating sleep–wake transitions, which are deficient in patients with NT1. Essentially, orexin is the messenger responsible for keeping the brain’s “awake switch” on. Although OX2R agonists do not restore orexin in the brain, they can cross the blood–brain barrier and interact with OX2R receptors in place of orexin to help compensate for insufficient orexin signaling. Two phase III trials in patients with NT1 using the OX2R agonist oveporexton, FirstLight and RadiantLight, showed improvement on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and significant drops in ESS, demonstrating a clinically meaningful effect in wakefulness and sleepiness. Although NT2 and IH do not show the same deficiency in orexin seen in NT1, multiple trials are also assessing the potential of OX2R agonists to improve these conditions. The Vibrance-2 phase II trial in patients with NT2 showed that alixorexton, another OX2R agonist, was able to improve sleepiness as measured by MWT and ESS, along with other symptoms. The upcoming availability of this medication class has generated considerable enthusiasm among clinical experts, with many expecting that OX2R agonists may be used in conjunction with proven nighttime medications and some wake-promoting agents. Most experts agree that more long-term data and clinical experience are needed to understand how this treatment strategy will evolve and be incorporated with currently available therapeutics. In an exciting development, shortly after SLEEP 2026, oveporexton was approved by the FDA for treatment of NT1, meaning the first drug of this class may soon be available to patients.

At SLEEP 2026, patients and experts voiced significant concerns about the challenges in access to care. These challenges often focus on insurance coverage issues, especially regarding patient access to both proven and new medications for the treatment of NT1, NT2, and IH, but they extend beyond insurance and frequently stem from medical staffing deficits. One study presented at SLEEP showed that 42% of patients with NT1 had difficulty finding an HCP who is familiar with assessing and treating sleep disorders, which may be due to a shortage of sleep professionals. In addition, approximately 1 in 4 patients reported referral and limited appointments as a barrier, which may delay getting overnight sleep studies or follow-up appointments, potentially due to schedule backlogs.  

To address these gaps, various discussions circulated around:  

  • Utilization of advanced practice providers to fill the physician shortage  
  • Empowering patient advocacy groups to create navigational resources for patients 
  • Encouraging pharmaceutical companies to provide more disease-state education  
  • Partnering with the American Association of Sleep Technologists to reduce administrative and educational bottlenecks for sleep technologists by standardizing, automating, and adapting modern scoring and titration techniques. 

In summary, the insights and breakthroughs shared at SLEEP 2026 emphasize a major turning point in the field of sleep medicine. Researchers and HCPs are moving away from simply masking the symptoms of daytime sleepiness with traditional stimulants. Instead, the sleep medicine community is shifting toward understanding and targeting the root neurologic aspects of these disorders, optimizing specialized therapeutic dosing modalities, rewriting diagnostic frameworks, and directly addressing the invisible daily suffering of patients. A major focus is on addressing systemic barriers to access and bridging the HCP–patient communication gap to help shift the benchmark of treatment success from basic wakefulness to true functional restoration and an improved quality of life.

Your Thoughts
In anticipation of the availability of OX2R agonists for treatment of NT1, how do you see yourself incorporating them into treatment plans? What questions do you have about this new class of pharmacotherapy? Join the discussion by commenting below or learn more via our downloadable slides!

Continue

Poll

1.

Which symptom is most bothersome for your patients with narcolepsy or IH?

Submit