Managing Circadian Disruption due to Hospitalization: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the CircadianCare Inpatient Management System

The objective of the present study was to test the effects of an inpatient management system (CircadianCare) aimed at limiting the negative impact of hospitalization on sleep by enhancing circadian rhythmicity. Fifty inpatients were randomized to either CircadianCare (n = 25; 18 males, 62.4 ± 1.9 years) or standard of care (n = 25; 14 males, 64.5 ± 2.3 years). On admission, all underwent a full sleep-wake evaluation; they then completed daily sleep diaries and wore an actigraph for the whole length of hospitalization. On days 1 (T0), 7 (T1), and 14 (T2, if still hospitalized), salivary melatonin for dim light melatonin onset (DLMO) and 24-h skin temperature were recorded. In addition, environmental noise, temperature, and illuminance were monitored. Patients in the CircadianCare arm followed 1 of 3 schedules for light/dark, meal, and physical activity timings, based on their diurnal preference/habits. They wore short-wavelength-enriched light-emitting glasses for 45 min after awakening and short-wavelength light filter shades from 18:00 h until sleep onset. While the first, primary registered outcome (reduced sleep-onset latency on actigraphy or diary) was not met, based on sleep diaries, there was a trend (0.05 < p < 0.1) toward an advance in bedtime for CircadianCare compared to standard of care patients between T0 and T1. Similarly, DLMO time significantly advanced in the small group of patients for whom it could be computed on both occasions, with untreated ones starting from earlier baseline values. Patients sleeping near the window had significantly higher sleep efficiency, regardless of treatment arm. As noise fluctuation increased, so did the number of night awakenings, regardless of treatment arm. In conclusion, the CircadianCare management system showed positive results in terms of advancing sleep timing and the circadian rhythm of melatonin. Furthermore, our study identified a combination of environmental noise and lighting indices, which could be easily modulated to prevent hospitalization-related insomnia.

Melatonin as a chronobiotic/cytoprotective agent in bone. Doses involved

Because the chronobiotic and cytoprotective molecule melatonin diminishes with age, its involvement in postmenopausal and senescence pathology has been considered since long. One relevant melatonin target site in aging individuals is bone where melatonin chronobiotic effects mediated by MT1 and MT2 receptors are demonstrable. Precursors of bone cells located in bone marrow are exposed to high quantities of melatonin and the possibility arises that melatonin acts a cytoprotective compound via an autacoid effect. Proteins that are incorporated into the bone matrix, like procollagen type I c-peptide, augment after melatonin exposure. Melatonin augments osteoprotegerin, an osteoblastic protein that inhibits the differentiation of osteoclasts. Osteoclasts are target cells for melatonin as they degrade bone partly by generating free radicals. Osteoclast activity and bone resorption are impaired via the free radical scavenger properties of melatonin. The administration of melatonin in chronobiotic doses (less than 10 mg daily) is commonly used in clinical studies on melatonin effect on bone. However, human equivalent doses allometrically derived from animal studies are in the 1-1.5 mg/kg/day range for a 75 kg human adult, a dose rarely used clinically. In view of the absence of toxicity of melatonin in phase 1 pharmacological studies with doses up to 100 mg in normal volunteers, further investigation is needed to determine whether high melatonin doses have higher therapeutic efficacy in preventing bone loss.

Melatonin as a Chronobiotic with Sleep-promoting Properties

The use of exogenous melatonin (exo-MEL) as a sleep-promoting drug has been under extensive debate due to the lack of consistency of its described effects. In this study, we conduct a systematic and comprehensive review of the literature on the chronobiotic, sleep-inducing, and overall sleep-promoting properties of exo-MEL. To this aim, we first describe the possible pharmacological mechanisms involved in the sleep-promoting properties and then report the corresponding effects of exo-MEL administration on clinical outcomes in: a) healthy subjects, b) circadian rhythm sleep disorders, c) primary insomnia. Timing of administration and doses of exo-MEL received particular attention in this work. The exo-MEL pharmacological effects are hereby interpreted in view of changes in the physiological properties and rhythmicity of endogenous melatonin. Finally, we discuss some translational implications for the personalized use of exo-MEL in the clinical practice.

Treatment of isolated REM sleep behavior disorder using melatonin as a chronobiotic

Melatonin is recommended as a first-line treatment in isolated REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD), although no large patient group has been reported. To assess effects, time course and confounding factors in the treatment of patients with iRBD using melatonin, 209 consecutive patients were included in this single-center, observational cohort study. A total of 171 patients had taken melatonin according to our chronobiotic protocol (2 mg, ≥6 months, always-at-the-same-clock time, 10-11pm, corrected for chronotype), 13 had applied melatonin for about 1-3 months, and 25 underwent mixed treatments. In total, 1529 clinical evaluations were performed, including Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and a newly developed RBD symptom severity scale (Ikelos-RS), analyzed using linear mixed models. Validation of Ikelos-RS showed excellent inter-rater reliability (ρ = 0.9, P < .001), test-retest reliability (ρ = 0.9, P < .001) and convergent validity (ρ = 0.9, P < .001). With melatonin, RBD symptom severity gradually improved over the first 4 weeks of treatment (Ikelos-RS: 6.1 vs. 2.5; CGI Severity: 5.7 vs. 3.2) and remained stably improved (mean follow-up 4.2 ± 3.1years; range: 0.6-21.7years). Initial response was slowed to up to 3 months with melatonin-suppressing (betablockers) or REM sleep spoiling co-medication (antidepressants) and failed with inadequately timed melatonin intake. When melatonin was discontinued after 6 months, symptoms remained stably improved (mean follow-up after discontinuation of 4.9 ± 2.5years; range: 0.6-9.2). When administered only 1-3 months, RBD symptoms gradually returned. Without any melatonin, RBD symptoms persisted and did not wear off over time. Clock-timed, low-dose, long-term melatonin treatment in patients with iRBD appears to be associated with the improvement of symptoms. The outlasting improvement over years questions a pure symptomatic effect. Clock-time dependency challenges existing prescription guidelines for melatonin.

Melatonin and Cancer: A Polyhedral Network Where the Source Matters

Melatonin is one of the most phylogenetically conserved signals in biology. Although its original function was probably related to its antioxidant capacity, this indoleamine has been “adopted” by multicellular organisms as the “darkness signal” when secreted in a circadian manner and is acutely suppressed by light at night by the pineal gland. However, melatonin is also produced by other tissues, which constitute its extrapineal sources. Apart from its undisputed chronobiotic function, melatonin exerts antioxidant, immunomodulatory, pro-apoptotic, antiproliferative, and anti-angiogenic effects, with all these properties making it a powerful antitumor agent. Indeed, this activity has been demonstrated to be mediated by interfering with various cancer hallmarks, and different epidemiological studies have also linked light at night (melatonin suppression) with a higher incidence of different types of cancer. In 2007, the World Health Organization classified night shift work as a probable carcinogen due to circadian disruption, where melatonin plays a central role. Our aim is to review, from a global perspective, the role of melatonin both from pineal and extrapineal origin, as well as their possible interplay, as an intrinsic factor in the incidence, development, and progression of cancer. Particular emphasis will be placed not only on those mechanisms related to melatonin’s antioxidant nature but also on the recently described novel roles of melatonin in microbiota and epigenetic regulation.