Showing posts with label circadian rhythms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label circadian rhythms. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Editorial: Intrinsic Clocks

reposted from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2018.00068/full  and it suggests how important circadian rhythms are for life.....


EDITORIAL ARTICLE

Front. Neurol., 16 February 2018 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00068

Editorial: Intrinsic Clocks

  • 1Department of Public Health Solutions, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland
  • 2Department of Neurophysiology and Neuropharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Editorial on the Research Topic
The existence of living organisms on our planet has been dependent on and co-evolved with the foreseeable variations in environmental conditions oscillating over recurring periods. All species have responded to these exogenous rhythms by developing endogenous clocks that allow for an approximate, but reliable estimation of the periodic changes and elicit corresponding adaptive processes.
The importance of these mechanisms for health and disease has been highlighted by the 2017 award of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine to Jeffrey C. Hall, Michael Rosbash, and Michael W. Young for their discoveries of the genetic control of the daily biological rhythm. They explained in molecular terms how the gene named as period contributed to the emergence (eclosion from the pupal case) rhythm of a population and to the locomotor activity of individual flies (Drosophila melanogaster). The key to the explanation was the discovery of transcription-translation feedback loops of the so-called “clock genes.”
This research topic on Intrinsic Clocks which appeared earlier comprises a well-balanced collection of original research and review articles on endogenous rhythms from seasonal and monthly to daily and hourly oscillations in different experimental model systems with analytical approaches from systemic to cellular and molecular levels.
Serchov and Heumann in their review focus on the role of Ras, an enzyme which hydrolyzes guanosine triphosphate and dependent intracellular signaling cascades in the regulation of the circadian rhythm in mice. They elegantly summarize how Ras activity forms a molecular bridge between entrainment of the suprachiasmatic nucleus that is the master clock in the brain and synaptic plasticity in dependent brain regions, such as the hippocampus, and corresponding functions. The extensive study by Chiang et al. specifically investigated rhythmic alterations in the murine hippocampus. They characterized the protein phosphorylation using a mass spectrometry approach with which they provided large-scale quantitative analysis of the daily oscillation of hippocampal phosphorylation events over a range of biological pathways. The hippocampus is a key focus also in the review by Urs Albrecht. It features the role of circadian proteins in the control of adult hippocampal neurogenesis, reciprocally implicated in depression and antidepressant responses. He discusses neurobiological mechanisms implicated in the pathogenesis of mood disorders, such as monoaminergic neurotransmission and stress response by the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis. The hypothalamus and the pituitary are further involved in seasonal cycles as highlighted in the review by Lewis and Ebling who elaborate in detail on the role of tanycytes, pituitary radial glial cells, in the regulation of circannual clocks in hamsters. They provide evidence supporting their hypothesis that tanycytes serve as central organizers of seasonal rhythms in the adult hypothalamus. Raible et al. present in their review on marine animals the current insight in the cellular mechanisms in molecular detail the monthly or semi-monthly rhythms. They express their worry about light pollution and further review the relevance of circalunar rhythms to mammalian physiology and reproduction in specific. They speculate that these rhythms may be the remnant of evolutionary ancient clocks, which were uncoupled from a natural entrainment mechanism.
Bourguignon and Storch summarize recent findings of the cellular substrate and mechanism, which generate locomotor activity with periods of 2–6 h. Such rhythms are normally integrated with circadian rhythms, but often lack the period stability and expression robustness. They further review the concept of the dopaminergic ultradian oscillator and show that ultradian locomotor rhythms rely on cells in the brain using dopamine for transmission. Intriguingly, Monje et al. report in their study on interleukin-6 knockout mice that the ultradian locomotor rhythm was impaired under both light-entrained and free-running conditions, whereas the circadian period and the level of locomotor activity as well as the phase shift response to light exposure at night remained normal. During the day, Cry1 and Bhlhe41 expression levels were increased whereas those of Nr1d2 were decreased in the hippocampus. Liu and Zhang first created mutants of cryptochrome circadian clock 1 (Cry1) protein at potential phosphorylation sites and conducted thereafter a screen in Cry1/Cry2 double deficient cells. They targeted at identifying mutations that disrupted circadian rhythms. They found that these single amino acid substitutions changed not only the circadian period, but also repression activity, protein stability, or cellular localization of the protein. Concerning the circadian period, Narasimamurthy and Virshup elucidate in their review the molecular mechanisms that regulate an enigma of the clock. Unlike other chemical reactions, the output of the clock as measured with the period remains nearly constant with fluctuations in ambient temperature. This is called as temperature compensation. The key lies especially in the mechanism that controls the stability of period circadian clock 2 protein. Clock-enhancing small molecules have become of particular interest as candidate chronotherapeutics, since there is a close association of circadian amplitude dampening with progression of chronic diseases, especially that of mood disorders. Gloston et al. present in their review an update of the regulatory mechanisms of circadian amplitude and the current status of these small molecules of therapeutic interest. Millius and Ueda introduce the readers to study of biology which takes advantage of engineering and mathematical tools to model and test the behaviors of the intrinsic clocks. It has evolved through the development of both wet lab and in silico work. The goal here is to understand the clocks that are made up of a range of complex properties of cells, tissues, and organisms.
The cross-section of studies comprised in this research topic on Intrinsic Clocks highlights the vibrant scientific activity in the field of the investigation of endogenous biological rhythms and their relevance for physiology and pathology.

Author Contributions

TP and DP planned and wrote the manuscript together.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Keywords: circadian rhythm, depression, marine biology, mouse model, plasticity, seasonality, small-molecule, systems biology
Citation: Partonen T and Pollak DD (2018) Editorial: Intrinsic Clocks. Front. Neurol. 9:68. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00068
Received: 04 December 2017; Accepted: 29 January 2018;
Published: 16 February 2018
Edited and Reviewed by: Yves A. Dauvilliers, Hôpital Gui De Chauliac, France
Copyright: © 2018 Partonen and Pollak. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Timo Partonen, timo.partonen@thl.fi

Thursday, November 23, 2017

The Circadian Clock in Your Nose

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/science/nose-smell-circadian-rhythm.html


The Circadian Clock in Your Nose

Image
A new study found that your sense of smell may fluctuate in tune with your circadian clock.CreditBrian Harkin for The New York Times
When people tell you, “wake up and smell the roses,” they might be giving you bad advice. Your sense of smell may fluctuate in sensitivity over the course of 24 hours, in tune with our circadian clocks, with your nose best able to do its job during the hours before you go to sleep, according to a study published last month.
The work, reported in the journal Chemical Senses, is part of a larger push to explore whether adolescents’ senses of taste and smell influence obesity. Rachel Herz, a sensory researcher at Brown University, and her colleagues designed this study to see if there might be times of day when the sense of smell was more powerful — perhaps making food smell particularly inviting.
For the experiment, 37 adolescents ranging in age from 12 to 15 came into a lab for a very long sleepover party. For nine days, they followed a strict schedule to allow researchers to focus on the circadian clock, which helps control wake and sleep, but also influences other processes in the body, including metabolism.
While more research is needed to test whether the results fully apply to adults, Dr. Herz says that as you grow up, the makeup of the smell receptors inside your nose doesn’t seem to change, although there is evidence your body clock may.
ADVERTISEMENT
The team kept track of where the teenagers were in their circadian cycle by measuring their saliva’s levels of melatonin, a hormone that rises and falls regularly over the course of the day. Every few hours, the children took a scent test, sniffing different concentrations of a chemical that smells like roses. The researchers recorded the lowest concentration they could detect at each time point.
When the results were tallied up, the researchers saw a range of responses. “Nobody has the same nose,” Dr. Herz said. Some adolescents had only very mild changes in sensitivity, while sensitivity altered dramatically in others.
You have 9 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
Averaged together, however, the results showed that overall the circadian clock does affect smell, and that the times when the children’s noses were most sensitive tended to correspond to the evening, with an average peak of 9 p.m.
“The results make sense — the circadian clock affects virtually every organ system in the body,” writes Dr. Leslie Vosshall, a researcher at Rockefeller University who studies smell and was not involved in the study, in an email.
Smell was at its lowest ebb, intriguingly, from about 2 a.m. to 10 a.m.
It is already known that when we are asleep, a strong smell won’t disturb us the way a loud noise or a bright light will. Perhaps the biological machinery behind smell shuts itself down for the night, at least in some people. But Dr. Herz speculates that having stronger olfactory abilities as dusk fell might have helped our ancestors survive.
“It really underscores the importance of auditory fire alarms,” she said.
Still, the experiment was designed to test the effect of the circadian clock, and that is not the only factor involved in smell sensitivity. Researchers have already found that another big player is how long someone has been awake and what variety of smells they have been exposed to. It’s likely that all of these have a role in determining when, in real life outside the lab, our sense of smell works best.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page D2 of the New York edition with the headline: Your Nose Knows: Circadian Clocks And Sense of Smell Go Hand in HandOrder Reprints | Today’s PaperSubscribe

Monday, October 2, 2017

Giants of Circadian Biology Win Nobel Prize

reposted from

Giants of Circadian Biology Win Nobel Prize

The award in Physiology or Medicine goes to chronobiologists Jeffrey Hall, Michael Rosbash, and Michael Young.
By  | October 2, 2017


Jeffrey Hall, Michael Rosbash, Michael YoungNOBEL MEDIA. III. N. ELMEHEDThe 2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been jointly awarded to Jeffrey HallMichael Rosbash, and Michael Young for their work on circadian rhythms. The trio is recognized for research on the period gene in Drosophila—a central regulator of the circadian clock whose discovery led to the identification of such genes in humans and other animals—plus the protein machinery governing the timing of biological rhythms.
In the course of their research, collaborators Rosbash and Hall at Brandeis University and Young independently at Rockefeller University, “solved the mystery of how an inner clock in most of our cells in our bodies can anticipate daily fluctuations between night and day to optimize our behavior and physiology,” Thomas Perlmann, secretary general for the Nobel Assembly and Nobel Committee, says in a statement.
Russell Foster, head of the Sleep and Circadian Neuroscience Institute at the University of Oxford, tells The Scientist that he’s “thrilled and delighted” by the news. “These are the people who gave us our first working model of how the molecular clock might tick. The three of them . . . have formed the platform of our understanding of the molecular basis of circadian rhythms, not only in flies, but it’s informed the work in mice and humans.”
Retired since 2008, Jeffrey Hall was at Brandeis University from 1974, where he took an early interest in the biology of circadian rhythms in Drosophila. His initial work with period showed that the gene played an important role in regulating the rhythm of courtship song cycles produced by male fruit flies (PNAS, 77:6729-33, 1980).
Hall later began collaborating with Brandeis colleague Michael Rosbash—a neuroscientist he got to know primarily through sport, colleagues say. The pair went on to isolate the period gene—which had been described in the 1970s by Seymour Benzer and Ronald Konopka—and showed that it produced a protein, PER, that cycles on a daily rhythm (Cell, 39:369-76, 1984). Rockefeller’s Michael Young and colleagues simultaneously isolated period, publishing the findings in Nature the same year (312:752-54).
These are the people who gave us our first working model of how the molecular clock might tick.—Russell Foster,
University of Oxford
The research laid the groundwork for other researchers to map similarly essential circadian genes in mice and other animals. “What’s extraordinary is that the basic building blocks of the clock discovered in flies are very similar in mice and humans,” says Foster. “It’s broadly the same genes and broadly the same proteins.”
The trio went on to pin down the details of the protein machinery governing circadian rhythms. Working with postdoctoral researcher Paul Hardin, Hall and Rosbash showed that mRNA transcripts from the period gene also cycle, allowing the PER protein to regulate its own production via a feedback loop (Nature, 343:536-40, 1990). “It was a great experience working as a postdoc,” Hardin tells The Scientist, adding that he is pleased and not overly surprised about today’s news. “Their work for a number of years has merited an award of this magnitude. I was so happy to hear the news this morning.”
Young, meanwhile, discovered a number of other genes influencing period protein dynamics. In 1994, his group identified timeless, a clock gene that produces a protein, TIM, that binds to PER, and is required for the latter’s entry into the nucleus to regulate period gene expression (Science, 263:1603-6). A few years later, the team described another gene, double-time, which regulates the accumulation of the period protein (Cell, 94:83-95, 1998). “He’s just a terrific scientist,” says collaborator Brian Crane, a biochemist at Cornell University. “His impact is huge. I figured that sooner or later this would happen, but it’s nice to see it materialize.”
It’s not the first time the laureate trio has been recognized for contributions to biology and the research into human circadian rhythms that has followed. In 2009, the Gruber Foundation awarded the Neuroscience Prize to Hall, Rosbash, and Young for the establishment of “a direct link between genes and behavior” that could later be extended beyond fruit flies into humans and, indeed, “all living organisms.”
In 2012, the three were recognized again with the Canada Gairdner International Award for pioneering science’s understanding of the circadian rhythm. “The medical relevance of these findings has become apparent as it was found that changes in these clock genes are associated with a series of sleep disorders in humans,” Young said in an interview at the time. “There are strong indications that some forms of depression are linked to the control of circadian rhythms.”
All three have made an impression inside and outside the lab. “Being in the room with them, you realize you have to keep concentration to keep up with the discussion,” notes Michael Hastings, a molecular neurobiologist working on circadian rhythms at the University of Cambridge, who sees both Rosbash and Young frequently at research gatherings. “[They have] an enormous intellectual appetite and curiosity.”
On announcing the prize, Rosbash’s first response to the news of the award this morning was “you are kidding me,” Perlmann told the audience. “That’s a classic Michael response,” Hardin says. “He’s quite the jokester.”
Update (October 2): The article has been updated to include reaction from Brian Crane.

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Circadian Rhythms Influence Treatment Effects

reposted from


Circadian Rhythms Influence Treatment Effects

Across many diseases, taking medication at specific times of day may make the therapy more effective.
By  | April 1, 2017
© ISTOCK.COM/BLONDIEGIRL/PROFESSORPHOTOSHOP
For three consecutive winters, starting in 2011, researchers at the University of Birmingham asked healthy men and women over the age of 65 to come in to clinics across the western Midlands in the U.K. for a seasonal influenza vaccination at specific times of day—either between 9 and 11 a.m., or between 3 and 5 p.m. Blood drawn a month later revealed that participants, who totaled nearly 300 over the three years, had higher levels of anti-flu antibodies if they’d received their vaccinations in the morning.1 The results suggested that daily rhythms of people’s bodies tweaked the vaccine’s effectiveness. Lead author Anna Phillips Whittaker had suspected as much, after observing similar trends in her studies on behavioral factors such as exercise that affect vaccination responses, and in the wake of a growing body of literature suggesting that a little timing can go a long way when it comes to health.
Many hormones and immune signals are produced rhythmically in 24-hour cycles. Cortisol, for example, which is known to suppress inflammation and regulate certain T cell–mediated immune responses, peaks early in the morning and ebbs as the day progresses. Other facets of the immune system undergo similar cycles that could underlie the differences in antibody responses Phillips observed among people receiving the flu vaccine. Much more work is required to nail down the immune mechanisms responsible for such variation and exploit them appropriately, she says. But timing flu vaccine delivery would be straightforward to implement. “It’s such a simple, low-risk intervention that’s free to do, and could have massive implications for vulnerable populations.”
Now we have the groundwork to pre­cisely understand a person’s clock and leverage that informa­tion for better health.—John Hogenesch,
Uni­versity of Pennsylvania 
Across diseases, from cancer and cardiac ailments to allergies and arthritis, epidemiological data and clinical trials are revealing that timing medications to the body’s internal clock could improve their effectiveness and reduce side effects. Although this concept, known as chronotherapy, has existed for at least 60 years, it has received little attention from physicians. But as biologists continue to unveil the molecular intricacies of cellular rhythms, they are beginning to realize just how pervasive the circadian clock’s influence is. In a 2014 study of gene expression in mice, for example, researchers found periodic expression in conserved mammalian genes targeted by 56 of the top 100 best-selling drugs in the U.S., including aripiprazole (Abilify, an antipsychotic), esomeprazole (Nexium, for heartburn), and duloxetine (Cymbalta, for depression), even though most are not currently prescribed with suggested dosing times.2
But chronotherapy is gaining clinical traction, says University of Pennsylvania chronobiologist John Hogenesch, senior author on the 2014 study. “Now we have the groundwork to precisely understand a person’s clock and leverage that information for better health,” he says. “Because of the molecular work, we’ve opened new doors here. This [idea] is not coming from left field anymore.”
Even so, researchers and clinicians working on chronotherapy still face skepticism, and implementing a new drug-delivery protocol or gaining regulatory approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for time-of-day indications remains challenging. Thus, while the biomedical research community is starting to take notice of the body’s internal rhythms, timed therapies are still the exception to the rule.

The body’s clock

By the 1970s, experimental data were piling up to support the idea that timing of exposure to toxins, X-rays, or drugs could alter the effects of these agents.3 Researchers found that the rate-limiting enzyme regulating the synthesis of cholesterol in rats was most active at night, for example.4 Within the next few years, researchers were examining cholesterol regulation in humans and testing the effects of administering cholesterol-lowering drugs at different times of day. Short-acting drugs such as simvastatin, which is still prescribed today, are most effective when taken at bedtime.5 Accordingly, the FDA has long recommended taking such medications in the evening.
BY DAY OR BY NIGHT: The human body undergoes daily cycles in gene expression, protein levels, enzymatic activity, and overall function. The suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), the seat of the brain’s timekeeping machinery, sets the pace for neuronal and hormonal signals that regulate body temperature, feeding behavior, rest or activity, immune cell functions, and other daily activities.
See full infographic: WEB | PDF
© EVAN OTO/SCIENCE SOURCE
In the past 20 years, a slew of studies using genetic screens and genome-wide expression analyses have begun to establish the reasons for these and similar observations.6 A group of approximately 20,000 neurons in a region of the hypothalamus called the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) acts as a central timekeeper, while clock genes expressed around the body form self-regulating feedback loops that allow the body to keep time at the level of individual organs, tissues, or cells. Nerve impulses and hormonal cues initiated by SCN activity relay central timing information to peripheral clocks, and external cues including light, mealtimes, or temperature can alter peripheral clocks, which then send feedback to other systems in the body.

See “Go To Bed” 

Mounting evidence indicates that keeping the body’s cells synced up matters to the health of an organism. In 2007, based on epidemiological studies, the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared shift work, which causes circadian disruption, a carcinogen. Other studies have elucidated a link between immune cell activity and glucocorticoids—which are secreted in circadian patterns and regulate peripheral clocks—as well as a role for chronic stress in perturbing daily cycles in gene expression, which can alter immune, endocrine, and other functions.7 This more precise knowledge is beginning to infiltrate the clinic, finally coming to the aid of physicians trying to more effectively time therapeutic interventions.
“There are thousands of studies since the 1970s, but little of that work was done in a mechanistic fashion,” says Hogenesch. “Now we have a relatively complete picture of clock networks across the organism, and we can see actual genetic targets that are oscillating, so we can begin investigating the mechanisms underlying those observations.”

Timing for tumors

Genes involved in cell division were among the earliest identified as being rhythmically expressed in both rodent models and human cells. In 1987, researchers studying ovarian cancers found that tumor cells synthesized DNA on a daily rhythm that typically peaked in the late morning hours, nearly 12 hours out of sync with nontumor cells.8 This led the team to suggest that timing chemotherapy doses that target cells actively replicating their DNA might improve the drugs’ effectiveness while reducing healthy-cell death.
TIMING TREATMENTS TO THE CLOCK: Regulated by peripheral clocks and interactions with other organs, many metabolic pathways in the body peak and ebb in specific circadian patterns. As a result, drugs targeting these pathways can work better when taken at particular times of day. Here are a few examples.
See full infographic: WEB | PDF
© EVAN OTO/SCIENCE SOURCE
Sure enough, over the past 30 years, experimental models and clinical trials have found that timing chemo regimens can significantly affect their toxicity and effectiveness. In animal studies of nearly 30 chemo drugs, tailoring dosing time to the medication’s mode of action has been found to decrease toxic side effects and increase effectiveness. In one study, rats that received the chemotherapy drug cisplatin at the time of day when their urinary output was highest (a correlate of other timed cycles in kidney metabolism) had fewer nephrotoxic effects, as measured in kidney function tests, than animals that received the doses at the time of minimum urinary output.9 In another study, oxaliplatin chemotherapy caused fewer intestinal lesions and less bone marrow suppression in mice when given at night, possibly because DNA synthesis in murine bone marrow is highest during the day.10
Because rodents are nocturnal, however, the appropriate schedule changes as the experiments move into humans. And timing drug administration becomes even more complicated when patients are treated with combination therapies. But researchers are seeing success in human studies testing chronotherapy for cancer. In multiple clinical trials, they have found that patients with ovarian, endometrial, or metastatic bladder cancer who received doxorubicin at 6:00 a.m. and cisplatin 12 hours later experienced less toxicity and greater tumor response and survival than those who received the drugs in the reverse sequence.11 Oncologist and biomedicine professor Francis Levi, a pioneer of chronobiology research now at the University of Warwick, has also shown repeatedly that patients experience better responses and fewer side effects from toxicity when drugs are administered at specific times of day.12 “At this point we have conducted about 30 clinical trials,” he says. “We have found that chronotherapy can improve survival up to fivefold and shrink tumors twice as much when compared to conventionally administered chemotherapy.”
But circadian-timed chemotherapy only shows benefits for approximately half of patients in trials, Levi notes. One possible influence is gender, he says. In a meta-analysis of data from three Phase 3 trials, he and his colleagues found that nighttime chemotherapy improved survival in men but not women.13 Phillips has also noticed gender-specific effects in studies of morning versus afternoon vaccinations, but only in younger populations, not among the elderly, so age may also play a role.
Another factor could be genetics. In 2014, a group of Israeli scientists found that in mice, glucocorticoid signaling—mediated by hormones that peak at night and taper off in the morning—suppressed levels of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which has been linked to tumor growth and migration. EGFR signals were stronger during the day when glucocorticoid levels were lowest; correspondingly, tumors in mice that were driven by EGFR mutations grew faster at this time. An EGFR inhibitor used to treat breast cancer slowed tumor growth more when given to the animals in the daytime than when the same dose was administered at night.14
The core clock genes themselves may also differ among individuals. In wild-type mice, researchers found a timing-dependent response to the chemo drug cyclophosphamide, but they also found that animals lacking a circadian rhythm because of mutations in the clock genes BMAL1 and CLOCK did not show a time-dependent response.15 Another study by Levi and colleagues, using circadian gene expression data for 27 genes from mouse liver and human colon cancer cell lines, found that the optimal time to administer the chemotherapy agent irinotecan could be predicted based on a gene regulatory loop controlled by clock genes BMAL1 and REV-ERBα. When BMAL1 was silenced in vitro, irinotecan’s timing-dependent effects vanished.16
Whatever the cause of the variation, researchers must now deal with it in a systematic way, Levi says. “Until a few years ago, our working hypothesis was to deliver chronotherapy to an average rhythmic pattern in a population, so all patients receive the exact same protocol,” he says. “But interpatient differences could result in a marked improvement in some cases and none in others. This clearly indicates that we need to identify individual rhythms, analogous to what we’re doing in personalized medicine now.” (See “Getting Personal,” The Scientist, February 2017.)

Clocking other conditions

Even as chronotherapy was gaining recognition in the oncology research community, investigators realized that cancer was not the only disease likely to be affected by circadian cycles. Clinical trials in 1985 found that antihistamines were most effective when taken at night or early in the morning. Subsequent studies established that inhaling corticosteroids at bedtime, or using delayed-release prednisone formulations that allocated the medication to the body pre-dawn, were most effective at combating allergy symptoms.17 Cardiovascular events were also recognized early on to cycle throughout the day, as doctors noticed that most patients admitted for heart attacks tended to experience their symptoms between 6:00 a.m. and noon.18
Across diseases, from cancer and cardiac ailments to allergies and arthritis, epidemiological data and clinical trials
are revealing that timing medications to the body’s internal clock could improve their effectiveness and reduce side effects.
More recently, researchers have begun to capitalize on the body’s link to the clock. In 2009, for example, after finding that blood pressure declines at bedtime and starts to rise early in the morning—in part because the angiotensin-2 receptor is maximally expressed at night—scientists discovered that patients with high blood pressure were better able to control their blood pressure and cardiovascular symptoms by taking angiotensin receptor blockers at night instead of in the morning.19
But the benefits of a bedtime dose don’t extend to all blood pressure medications, St. Louis College of Pharmacy’s Amy Drew points out. In 2014, pulling data from approximately 30 studies, Drew and her colleagues evaluated a range of hypertension medications for time-dependent effects. While angiotensin-2 receptor blockers were significantly more effective if taken at bedtime, other drugs, such as certain calcium channel and β-adrenergic blockers, didn’t seem to have a clear benefit from being administered at a particular time of day.20 Some treatments have a diuretic effect, which might disturb patients’ sleep and make the medicine less effective, Drew says.
Nevertheless, the data for a time effect of angiotensin-2 receptor blockers is compelling, she adds. “Going through all this evidence, it allows you a certain comfort and confidence to say that if I do dose [angiotensin-2 receptor blockers] at bedtime, it’s going to be more effective.”

Implementing chronotherapy

© KUDRYASHKA/SHUTTERSTOCK.COM; ISTOCK.COM/RHOON
Synchronizing medications to the circadian clock is easier said than done, as not everyone’s rhythms are the same. And for patients who suffer poor sleep, reduced appetite, or fatigue that reduces their physical activity—common symptoms of many diseases—the clock itself often runs awry.
Researchers are now working to figure out how to normalize patients’ circadian rhythms. In a small study of 32 patients with metastatic breast cancer, over-the-counter melatonin—often used to cope with jet lag or insomnia—was found to improve sleep quality and morning expression of circadian genes.21 And preliminary results from an ongoing trial at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York suggest that exposure to bright white light can reduce disease-related fatigue in patients with breast cancer.22
Psychosocial support may also prove beneficial. In 1989, Stanford University psychiatrist David Spiegel and his colleagues reported that women with breast cancer who participated in group therapy sessions lived an average of 18 months longer than patients who didn’t receive psychosocial support to cope with their diagnosis.23 Spiegel’s team reported in a follow-up study that the effect was likely mediated by the endocrine stress response; when levels of cortisol followed a normal curve, cresting in the morning and ebbing by nightfall, patients lived longer.24In 2012, another group reported that breast cancer patients who received eight weeks of group therapy were more likely to have improved diurnal cortisol rhythms than those who received a single educational session.25
“We’ve learned enough now to know that there are relatively easy-to-do, low-risk things that may have an effect on disease outcomes,” Spiegel says. “If you normalize your circadian rhythms, you’ll certainly feel better, and you might just help your body,” he adds. “I’d be surprised if there were any disease that didn’t have some circadian component.”
The trick now is to understand how time of day affects disease outcomes and treatment effects, and to respond accordingly—which may not be a slam dunk, says Hogenesch. “Many of these observations are in the scientific literature but not on drug labels.” He and others aim to change that, beginning with the clinical trials necessary to demonstrate daily variations in a drug’s effectiveness. A little timing could even rescue drugs that fell off the path to the clinic somewhere along the way, says Hogenesch, who consults with drug companies interested in putting chronotherapy into practice. “In the past when trials were done, time-of-day information was often not captured. It’s very likely that drugs have failed not because they didn’t work or the mechanisms were wrong, but simply because time of administration wasn’t taken into account.”
To chronobiologists, time is an often-overlooked aspect of precision medicine’s mantra of finding the right drug for the right patient at the right dose. “The discussion is almost entirely focused on genetic precision, and not on all these aspects of physiology and behavior that are products of [the circadian] genetic network,” says Hogenesch. “Time offers another way to be precise, and now the groundwork exists to precisely understand a person’s clock and leverage that information for better health.”

Jyoti Madhusoodanan is a freelance writer based in San Jose, California.

References

  1. J.E. Long et al., “Morning vaccination enhances antibody response over afternoon vaccination: A cluster-randomised trial,” Vaccine, 34:2679-85, 2016.
  2. R. Zhang et al., “A circadian gene expression atlas in mammals: Implications for biology and medicine,” PNAS, 11:16219-24, 2014.
  3. F. Halberg et al., “Toward a chronotherapy of neoplasia: Tolerance of treatment depends upon host rhythms,” Experientia, 29:909-34, 1973.
  4. P.A. Edwards et al., “In vivo demonstration of the circadian rhythm of cholesterol biosynthesis in the liver and intestine of the rat,” J Lipid Res, 13:396-401, 1972.
  5. R.H. Knopp, “Drug treatment of lipid disorders,” New Engl J Med, 341:498-511, 1999.
  6. J.A. Mohawk et al., “Central and peripheral circadian clocks in mammals,” Annu Rev Neurosci, 35: 445-62, 2012.
  7. R. Dumbell et al., “Circadian clocks, stress, and immunity,” Front Endocrinol, 7:37, doi:10.3389/fendo.2016.00037, 2016.
  8. R.R. Klevecz et al., “Circadian gating of S phase in human ovarian cancer,” Cancer Res, 47:6267-71, 1987.
  9. F.A. Levi et al., “Reduction of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum nephrotoxicity in rats by optimal circadian drug timing,” Cancer Res, 42:950-55, 1982.
  10. N. Boughattas et al., “Circadian rhythm in toxicities and tissue uptake of 1,2-diaminocyclohexane oxalatoplatinum in mice,” Cancer Res, 49:3362–68, 1989.
  11. M. Kobayashi et al., “Circadian chemotherapy for gynecological and genitourinary cancers,” Chronobiol Int, 19:237-51, 2002.
  12. F. Lévi et al., “Implications of circadian clocks for the rhythmic delivery of cancer therapeutics,” Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 59:1015-35, 2007.
  13. S. Giacchetti et al., “Sex moderates circadian chemotherapy effects on survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis,” Ann Oncol, 23:3110-16, 2012.
  14. M. Lauriola et al., “Diurnal suppression of EGFR signalling by glucocorticoids and implications for tumour progression and treatment,” Nat Comm, 5:5073, doi:10.1038/ncomms6073, 2014.
  15. V.Y. Gorbacheva et al., “Circadian sensitivity to the chemotherapeutic agent cyclophosphamide depends on the functional status of the CLOCK/BMAL1 transactivation complex,” PNAS, 102:3407-12, 2005.
  16. S. Dulong et al., “Identification of circadian determinants of cancer chronotherapy through in vitro chronopharmacology and mathematical modeling,” Mol Cancer Ther, 14: 2154-64, doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0129, 2015.
  17. F. Buttgereit, A. Gibofsky, “Delayed-release prednisone – A new approach to an old therapy,” Expert Opin Pharmacother, 14:1097-106, 2013.
  18. J.E. Muller et al., “Circadian variation in the frequency of onset of acute myocardial infarction,” New Engl J Med, 313:1315-22, 1985.
  19. R.C. Hermida et al., “Administration-time-dependent effects of olmesartan on the ambulatory blood pressure of essential hypertension patients,” Chronobiol Int, 26:61-79, 2009.
  20. P.M. Stranges et al., “Treatment of hypertension with chronotherapy: Is it time of drug administration?” Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 49:323-34, 2015.
  21. P.F. Innominato et al., “The effect of melatonin on sleep and quality of life in patients with advanced breast cancer,” Support Care Cancer, 24:1097-105, 2016.
  22. W.H. Redd et al., “Systematic light exposure in the treatment of cancer-related fatigue: A preliminary study,” Psycho-Oncology, 23:1431-34, 2014.
  23. D. Spiegel et al., “Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer,” Lancet, 334:888-91, 1989.
  24. S.E. Sephton et al., “Diurnal cortisol rhythm as a predictor of breast cancer survival,” J Natl Cancer Inst, 92:994-1000, 2000.
  25. F.-H. Hsiao et al., “The effects of psychotherapy on psychological well-being and diurnal cortisol patterns in breast cancer survivors,” Psychother Psychosom, 81:173-82, 2012.