Abstract
Context
Medical therapy for Cushing syndrome (CS) typically aims to reduce daily cortisol output without addressing circadian rhythm restoration. No licensed drugs target this goal.
Objective
We investigated the efficacy and safety of timed, once-daily osilodrostat administration in improving circadian cortisol profiles in CS.
Methods
A prospective, multicenter study evaluated patients with well-controlled CS on a stable twice-daily osilodrostat therapy before and 60 to 90 days after transitioning to a single equivalent daily dose at 19:00 ± 1 hour. Circadian steroid analysis was performed on saliva, serum, and urine using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Additional assessments included cardio-metabolic markers, quality of life, sleep function, and safety outcomes.
Results
Sixteen patients (4 males; 7 pituitary, mean age 53.3 ± 11.8 years) were enrolled. At baseline, CS was well-controlled with a mean osilodrostat dose of 4.2 ± 1.3 mg. After transitioning, salivary cortisol exposure decreased significantly during the afternoon to early morning period (AUC16:00-08:00: −6.1 [−0.15 to −12.1] ng/mL/h, P = .029). Quality of life and sleep improved (CushingQoL: +4.2, P = .029; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: −1.7, P = .049). Serum steroid precursors, including 11-deoxycorticosterone (−3.1 ng/mL/h, P = .008) and 11-deoxycortisol (−17.8 ng/mL/h, P = .005), decreased. Eight patients advancing dosing to 16:00 ± 1 hour showed comparable reductions, with phase shifts in acrophase and nadir. No patients developed adrenal insufficiency, liver toxicity, electrocardiogram abnormalities, or loss of disease control.
Conclusion
Once-daily osilodrostat effectively and safely treats patients with biochemically controlled CS, improving circadian cortisol profiles, quality of life, and sleep. Findings support further exploration of chronotherapy-based approaches in CS management.
Keywords: Cushing's syndrome, hypercortisolism, saliva, salivary cortisol, cortisone, cortisol circadian rhythm, chrono-pharmacology, Cushing's Disease, medical therapy
Cushing syndrome (CS) is a severe endocrine disorder resulting from prolonged exposure to high glucocorticoid levels (1-3). Endogenous hypercortisolism originates from an underlying tumor, most commonly an adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-secreting pituitary adenoma (Cushing disease [CD], 70%), followed by adrenal cortisol-secreting tumors (20%) and ectopic ACTH or, rarely, corticotropin releasing hormone (CRH)-secreting tumors (10%) (4, 5). CS presents with systemic complications such as impaired glucose and lipid metabolism, obesity, sleep disturbances, cognitive decline, bone loss, sarcopenia, and increased risks of infection and cardiovascular disease (1, 6-12), where disruption of circadian rhythmicity plays a role (13-15). In healthy individuals, cortisol levels rise from 2 to 4 Am, peak shortly after awakening, and decline throughout the day, reaching a nadir around midnight (16). Loss of cortisol's circadian rhythm is a hallmark of CS and contributes to systemic adverse effects by disrupting the coordination of peripheral clock genes (14, 17).
Current guidelines recommend medical therapy to normalize cortisol in patients with persistent or recurrent CS or those unsuitable for surgery (18). However, treatments focus on 24-hour cortisol normalization, assessed by urinary free cortisol (UFC), without addressing circadian rhythm restoration (18). Since endogenous cortisol peaks between 4 Am and 4 Pm (19), elevated evening cortisol levels may go unnoticed with UFC alone. Addressing circadian rhythm is increasingly recognized as a crucial and underexplored research topic, with recent studies highlighting its potential impact on long-term patient outcomes (20, 21). Evidence on cortisol rhythm restoration in CS patients undergoing medical therapy remains limited (22-24), and no validated tools exist to monitor this process. Given the need for a non-invasive, low-stress method to assess circadian profiles, saliva offers a convenient and stable alternative for sample collection, including at home or work. Salivary cortisone is increasingly recognized as a reliable surrogate for serum cortisol, with growing evidence supporting its role in diagnosing and managing adrenal disorders, including adrenal insufficiency and CS (25-29).
Osilodrostat, an 11β-hydroxylase inhibitor, is approved by the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration for CS treatment (30, 31). Its remarkable effectiveness has been confirmed in registrative trials, their extensions, several post hoc analyses, and initial real-world experiences, highlighting its ability to lower cortisol levels and relieve CS symptoms and complications (32-41). Osilodrostat primarily acts through reversible, potent CYP11B1 inhibition, reaching peak concentration within 1 hour and having a half-life of ∼4 hours (42). Based on these pharmacokinetics, osilodrostat holds potential for chronotherapy; however, its effects on circadian rhythms and the feasibility of once-daily dosing remain unexplored. Recent in vivo reports from real-world clinical experience suggest that osilodrostat may exert broader effects on the steroidogenic cascade, acting upstream of CYP11B1 and leading to prolonged inhibition persisting for months after treatment discontinuation (43-45), potentially diminishing its impact on circadian rhythm restoration. On these premises, we investigated whether once-daily osilodrostat is a safe and effective alternative for treating CS, aligning steroid secretion with physiological circadian rhythms. Additionally, our study provides a substantial dataset of 24-hour salivary cortisol and cortisone profiles, which could serve as a foundation for developing clinical monitoring tools to evaluate therapeutic adequacy in CS.
Methods
Patients
This prospective pilot study included patients enrolled in the multicenter clinical trial investigating circadian rhythms in glucocorticoid disorders (CHROnOS, NCT04374721). Participants were recruited from endocrinology outpatient clinics at “Sapienza” University of Rome and “Federico II” University of Naples between June 2021 and December 2023.
Eligible patients were aged 18 to 80 years with a confirmed diagnosis of endogenous CS, as per the latest guidelines (18). They were either ineligible or unwilling to undergo surgical treatment and were prescribed osilodrostat as a first-line therapy or transitioned from other medical treatments. Inclusion required achieving disease control with UFC levels below the upper limit of normal for at least 1 month on a stable twice-daily osilodrostat regimen. Exclusion criteria included prolonged QTc interval on electrocardiogram (ECG), clinically significant electrolyte imbalances (eg, severe hypokalemia or hypernatremia), or concurrent exogenous glucocorticoid therapy.
Study Design
Patients were evaluated at baseline (TBID) on a stable twice-daily osilodrostat regimen (7:00 and 19:00 ± 1 hour) and again 60 to 90 days after transitioning to an equivalent once-daily evening dose (TOD) at 19:00 ± 1 hour. The primary outcome was to compare circadian cortisol rhythms between dosing regimens, focusing on late afternoon to early morning exposure (16:00 to 08:00) and an additional window (16:00 to 04:00) to account for the morning cortisol peak (19, 46). Following an interim safety analysis, a third evaluation (TOD2) examined circadian salivary steroid profiles after shifting the once-daily dose to 16:00 ± 1 hour.
Secondary outcomes included patient-reported quality of life and sleep measures, as well as clinical and biochemical assessments of CS comorbidities, such as vital signs, anthropometric measures, and glycolipid metabolism.
Clinical Examination
Patients underwent comprehensive physical examinations, including measurements of vital signs (arterial blood pressure and heart rate) and anthropometric data (body weight, waist circumference, and body mass index [BMI]). Comorbidities were assessed based on current clinical guidelines: arterial hypertension (47); type 2 diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance (48); dyslipidemia (48); and bone health (osteopenia and osteoporosis) (49).
Hormonal and Biochemical Assessment
At each visit, blood samples were collected at 08:00 (fasting), 12:00 (pre-lunch), 16:00, and 20:00 (pre-dinner) from a peripheral vein. Saliva samples were obtained via passive drooling (50) at 08:00, 12:00, 16:00, 20:00, and 00:00, according to the most frequently used sampling (17). Additionally, patients collected 24-hour urine samples.
Steroid hormones were analyzed using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) (51). Salivary cortisol and cortisone were measured, while serum samples were analyzed for cortisol, cortisone, 11-deoxycortisol, 11-deoxycorticosterone, and testosterone. Urinary cortisol, cortisone, and testosterone levels were also quantified. Plasma ACTH levels were measured at 08:00 in EDTA plasma samples preserved on ice and analyzed immediately by centrifugation at 2 to 8 °C and immunoradiometric assay, using Beckman Coulter reagents (ref. IM2030, B89463). Since ACTH is very unstable, plasma samples were stored at −20 °C unless the assay was done immediately. The measurement range (from analytical sensitivity to highest calibrator) is 0.31 to approximately 1500 pg/mL. Elevated specificity of the assay was confirmed by extremely low or undetectable cross-reactivity against related molecules (ACTH 1-24; 1-10; 18-39; 11-24; α-melanocyte-stimulating hormone [αMSH], and pro-opiomelanocortin [POMC]) either in the absence (cross-reactivities) or the presence (interferences) of ACTH.
Fasting blood biochemical tests assessed glucose and lipid metabolism (fasting plasma glucose, insulin, glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein [LDL], high-density lipoprotein [HDL], triglycerides), liver and kidney function (creatinine, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase), complete blood count, and electrolytes. Insulin resistance was calculated using homeostatic model assessment (HOMA-IR) ([fasting insulin × fasting glucose] / 405), with a threshold of ≥2.5 indicating resistance (52). Steroid analysis by UHPLC-MS/MS was centralized at Policlinico Umberto I research facility.
Patient-Reported Measures
Participants completed the CushingQoL questionnaire (53) to evaluate health-related quality of life, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (54) to assess sleep quality and a Global Assessment Questionnaire to evaluate overall treatment regimen preferences, ease of use in daily routine and future choice.
Safety Assessments and Adverse Event Monitoring
Safety assessments were conducted monthly from the TBID to TOD regimen. Adrenal insufficiency was monitored through biochemical tests (morning cortisol, fasting glucose, and electrolytes) and weekly telephone check-ins for symptoms of hypoadrenalism. Liver toxicity was assessed via periodic liver panels, while ECGs with QTc measurements were performed at both study centers and evaluated by a cardiologist.
Statistical Analysis
This exploratory study was designed as a pilot to assess the feasibility, methodology, and potential impact of a once-daily vs a twice-daily dosing regimen of osilodrostat in patients with endogenous CS. The primary objectives were to evaluate circadian hormone profiles, treatment tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes. As a pilot study, the aim was not to test formal hypotheses but to estimate variability in salivary cortisol rhythms (eg, mesor, acrophase, area under the curve [AUC] values) and assess feasibility for future larger-scale studies. Consequently, no formal sample size calculation was performed, consistent with the nature of pilot studies.
The normality of data distribution was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Continuous variables were reported as mean ± SD or standard error of the mean (SEM) or mean (95% CI) for normally distributed data and as median and interquartile range (IQR, 25%-75%) otherwise. Between-group comparisons were performed using independent samples t tests or Mann-Whitney tests, based on data distribution. Differences in binomial proportions for dichotomous variables were analyzed using the chi-square test. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to estimate correlations between normally distributed continuous variables. Serum steroid daily exposure (08:00 to 20:00) was quantified using the trapezoidal rule to calculate the AUC. Intra-patient changes between timepoints were analyzed using paired samples Student t tests or Wilcoxon tests, as appropriate. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using SPSS for Windows (v26, SPSS, Inc.), Jamovi, and GraphPad Prism (v10).
Cosinor-Based Analysis on Salivary Cortisol and Cortisone Curves
Salivary cortisol and cortisone day curves were constructed from samples taken at 08:00, 12:00, 16:00, 20:00, and 00:00. A double harmonic cosinor model was applied to capture the cyclic nature of cortisol secretion, accounting for primary and secondary oscillations, utilizing the Anaconda Python platform for computational analysis. The model is expressed as:
where F(x) and E(x) represent the predicted cortisol (F) or cortisone (E) levels at x time; M is the mesor, an estimate of the mean steroid levels, serving as the midpoint around which daily values oscillate; A1 and A2 represent the amplitudes of the first and second harmonic of the model, indicating the primary and secondary fluctuations within the 24-hour cycle; ϕ1 and ϕ2 are the acrophases of the 2 harmonics, meaning the time of the main and secondary daily peaks of the hormone level across the daily cycle; T is the fundamental period of the harmonics, which was set to 24 hours.
This double harmonic model enabled a more detailed characterization of circadian oscillations in steroid levels throughout the day. The first harmonic, representing the primary daily rhythm, is the most significant and captures the main fluctuations in cortisol and cortisone secretion. The second harmonic adds granularity to the model, allowing for a more precise depiction of the complexity of secretion patterns, particularly relevant in this study. Here, fluctuations in cortisol and cortisone levels are influenced by both the underlying disease and the timing differences in osilodrostat administration. To evaluate changes in cortisol and cortisone exposure, the AUC values for salivary cortisol and cortisone during the 16:00-to-08:00 and 16:00-to-04:00 timespans were extracted from the cosinor plots. These timeframes were chosen as they reflect late afternoon to early morning exposure, where improvements would indicate better alignment with the physiological circadian profile. Collectively, for each patient at each timepoint data on mesor, acrophase, amplitude and nadir of the primary harmonic were calculated, as well as the AUC16:00-08:00 and AUC16:00-04:00 and were compared between TBID and TOD via paired samples T test or Mann-Whitney test based on data distribution.
Results
Baseline Characteristics
Between 2021 and 2023, 16 consecutive patients with endogenous CS treated with twice-daily osilodrostat entered the study (mean age 53.3 ± 11.8 years, 12 female). Of these, 7 patients (43.8%) were diagnosed with CD, while 9 (56.3%) had ACTH-independent CS. Among the latter, 4 had a unilateral adrenal adenoma, 1 had bilateral adrenal hyperplasia, 3 presented with bilateral adrenal adenomas, and 1 had bilateral primary macronodular adrenal hyperplasia (BMAH). The median disease duration was 5 years (2-10). Previous surgery was performed in 7 patients: 1 underwent unilateral adrenalectomy for BMAH, and 6 had transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenoma. Additionally, 1 patient with CD had prior radiotherapy. Five patients directly transitioned to osilodrostat from a previous medical treatment following a washout of at least 4 weeks (range, 4.4-13.9) to avoid pharmacological interference. Three of these patients shifted from ketoconazole, 1 patient from metyrapone and 1 patient from relacorilant.
At baseline (TBID), mean BMI was 29.3 ± 4.4 kg/m2, with half of the patients meeting the criteria for overweight and the other half for obesity. Hypertension was prevalent in 14 patients (87.5%), and glucose metabolism impairment was observed in 9 patients (56.3%), including 2 (12.5%) with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 7 (43.8%) with impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, and/or insulin resistance.
The clinical characteristics of the cohort at baseline (TBID) are summarized in Table 1. Overall, the majority of patients had mild CS, stably treated with a relatively low dose of osilodrostat (mean 4.2 ± 1.3 mg, range 2-22). Specifically, 9 patients were taking 2 mg/day, 6 patients received between 3 and 7 mg/day, and 1 patient with CD was on 22 mg/day (median dose: 2 mg, IQR25-75: 2-4.8). At TBID evaluation, mean osilodrostat treatment duration was 27.7 weeks (range, 8.0-77.6). For the subgroup of 5 patients transitioning from other medical therapies, the mean treatment duration was 59.0 weeks (range, 28.4-77.6).
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics
| Whole cohort (n = 16) | |
|---|---|
| General characteristics | |
| Sex (M/F) | 4/12 |
| Mean age (years) | 53.3 ± 11.8 |
| Disease duration (time from first diagnosis, years) | 5 [2-10] |
| Mean osilodrostat daily dose (mg) | 4.2 ± 1.3 |
| CS etiology | |
| Cushing disease | 7 (43.8) |
| Adrenal CS | 9 (56.3) |
| Previously treated with | |
| Surgical approach | 7 (43.8) |
| Medical approach | 8 (50.0) |
| Comorbidities | |
| Overweight | 6 (37.5) |
| Obesity | 8 (50.0) |
| Hypertension | 14 (87.5) |
| Diabetes mellitus (%) | 2 (12.5) |
| Glucose metabolism impairment (IFG/IGT/IR) | 7 (43.8) |
| Dyslipidemia | 10 (62.5) |
| Osteopenia | 9 (56.3) |
| Osteoporosis | 2 (12.5) |
| Fragility fractures | 3 (18.8) |
| Concomitant medications | |
| 1-2 antihypertensive drugs | 11 (68.5) |
| 3-4 antihypertensive drugs | 3 (18.8) |
| Antidiabetic drugs | 3 (18.8) |
| Hypolipidemic drugs | 7 (43.8) |
| Antiresorptive drugs | 4 (25.0) |
Clinical characteristics of the cohort of patients with CS, well-controlled under twice-daily osilodrostat. Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD or median [IQR, 25-75] according to distribution while categorical variables as n (%).
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CS, Cushing syndrome; IFG, impaired fasting glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; IR, insulin resistance.
At baseline, salivary cortisol and cortisone day curves revealed similar patterns. Figure 1 illustrates the aggregate salivary cortisol curve for the entire cohort. The acrophase and nadir times were similar between cortisol (acrophase: 06:36 [95% CI: 05:11-08:01]; nadir: 21:03 [95% CI: 18:04-00:03]) and cortisone day curves (acrophase: 06:31 [95% CI: 04:47-08:16]; nadir: 21:45 [95% CI: 15:41-02:16]) (Table 2). The peak-to-trough ratio was considered indicative of daily fluctuation in cortisol and cortisone levels.
Figure 1.
Salivary cortisol curves before and after shifting to once-daily osilodrostat administration. Comparison of TBID and TOD regimens. Data are mean ± SD.
Table 2.
Longitudinal evaluation of hormone profile after osilodrostat shift to evening single administration
| Twice-daily osilodrostat (TBID, N = 16) |
Once-daily osilodrostat at 19:00 (TOD, N = 16) |
P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| UFC/ULN (nmol/24 hours) | 0.59 (0.36-0.74) | 0.55 (0.34-0.73) | .820 |
| ACTH (pg/mL) | 75.3 (38.0-136.0) | 84.3 (43.0-177.0) | .910 |
| Morning cortisol (ng/mL) | 112.4 (94.2-130.5) | 109.5 (93.5-125.6) | .697 |
| Renin (pg/mL) | 19.2 (9.5-35.8) | 21.0 (9.0-66.9) | .594 |
| Aldosterone (pg/mL) | 100.0 (68.6-131.4) | 70.1 (50.2-90.0) | .265 |
| Salivary cortisol profile | |||
| Acrophase time (hh:mm) | 06:36 (05:11-08:01) | 07:46 (06:31-09:01) | .135 |
| Acrophase level (ng/mL) | 1.96 [1.46-3.39] | 1.71 [1.03-3.25] | .836 |
| Nadir time (hh:mm) | 21:03 (18:04-00:03) | 21:03 (16:46-01:19) | .995 |
| Nadir level (ng/mL) | 0.42 [0.28-0.82] | 0.35 [0.20-0.71] | .918 |
| Mesor (ng/mL) | 1.23 [0.93-1.74] | 1.03 [0.73-1.39] | .134 |
| Peak-to-trough ratio | 4.93 [3.04-9.47] | 3.91 [2.64-10.00] | .865 |
| Amplitude (ng/mL) | 0.61 [0.28-0.80] | 0.47 [0.28-0.75] | 1.000 |
| Salivary cortisone profile | |||
| Acrophase time (hh:mm) | 06:31 (04:47-08:16) | 07:52 (06:25-09:19) | .158 |
| Acrophase level (ng/mL) | 15.22 [12.91-22.22] | 11.95 [9.40-18.13] | .650 |
| Nadir time (hh:mm) | 21:45 [15:41-02:16] | 00:00 [22:32-02:22] | .320 |
| Nadir level (ng/mL) | 2.99 [0.96-8.38] | 2.48 [0.38-6.24] | .683 |
| Mesor (ng/mL) | 9.35 [7.57-12.52] | 7.55 [5.39-11.57] | .307 |
| Peak-to-trough ratio | 3.59 [2.08-6.93] | 7.75 [3.24-13.34] | .033 |
| Amplitude (ng/mL) | 6.73 [2.97-8.61] | 4.72 [2.68-7.05] | .650 |
| Serum day curves (8 Am to 8 Pm, ng/mL/h) | |||
| Cortisol AUC | 1040.4 [795.5-1331.6] | 937.4 [767.4-1153.0] | .191 |
| Cortisone AUC | 175.7 (158.5-192.9) | 166.6 (146.6-186.6) | .235 |
| DOC AUC | 8.47 [7.39-12.46] | 5.25 [2.71-10.41] | .008 |
| 11-deoxycortisol AUC | 53.8 [21.41-75.51] | 22.6 [15.78-32.91] | .005 |
| Testosterone AUCa | 4.33 [2.35-7.40] | 3.51 [2.06-4.96] | .039 |
| 24-hours urine steroids (µg/24 hours) | |||
| Urinary cortisone | 10.1 (7.4-12.7) | 11.4 (7.0-15.9) | .359 |
| Urinary testosteronea | 0.93 (0.51-1.36) | 0.91 (0.38-1.43) | .998 |
Data are expressed as mean (IC95) or median [IQR, 25-75] according to distribution. Values in bold indicate statistically significant results (P < .05)
Abbreviations: ACTH, adrenocorticotropic hormone; AUC, area under the curve; DOC, 11-deoxycorticosterone; UFC, urinary free cortisol; ULN, upper limit of normal.
a Reported only for female patients.
Chronopharmacological Intervention
All enrolled patients completed the study protocol, and the main results of the longitudinal evaluation are presented in Table 2 and Table 3, while questionnaire scores are detailed in Table 4.
Table 3.
Longitudinal evaluation of anthropometric parameters and metabolism following the shift to once-daily, evening osilodrostat
| Twice-daily osilodrostat (TBID) N = 16 |
Once-daily osilodrostat at 19:00 (TOD) N = 16 |
P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vital signs and anthropometric measures | |||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 29.3 (26.9-31.6) | 29.3 (27.3-31.3) | .174 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 104.0 (96.2-112.0) | 103.5 (97.7-109.3) | .209 |
| Visceral adiposity index | 5.29 (3.32-7.26) | 5.31 (2.89-7.74) | .185 |
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 133 (122-145) | 131 (120-141) | .669 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 88 (80-95) | 83 (77-88) | .234 |
| Mean BP (mmHg) | 104 (96-111) | 98 (92-104) | .164 |
| Pulse rate (bpm) | 76 (71-81) | 75 (70-80) | .684 |
| Glycolipid metabolism | |||
| Fasting plasma glucose (mg/dL) | 86.6 (78.3-95.0) | 84.0 (73.3-94.8) | .820 |
| Fasting insulin (µUI/mL) | 10.4 [5.0-17.2] | 11.3 [7.0-14.0) | .333 |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.6 (5.4-5.8) | 5.5 (5.3-5.8) | .838 |
| HOMA index | 1.78 [1.02-3.53] | 1.45 [1.16-2.7] | .594 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 181 (164-197) | 166 (140-192) | .344 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 43 [39-52] | 47 (40-64) | .169 |
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 101 [83-115] | 91 [77-110] | .328 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 127 (97-157) | 115 (83-147) | .268 |
| Safety lab assessments | |||
| Sodium (mmol/L) | 141.9 (140.9-142.8) | 141.4 (139.9-142.8) | .236 |
| Potassium (mmol/L) | 4.4 (4.2-4.7) | 4.4 (4.1-4.7) | .543 |
| GOT (U/L) | 17.5 [15.0-25.0] | 20.0 [14.75-26.25] | .801 |
| GPT (U/L) | 22.0 [11.3-30.3] | 20.0 [12.75-30.25] | .484 |
| γ-GT (U/L) | 20.0 [14.5-46.8] | 16.0 [11.5-20.0] | .446 |
Data are expressed as mean (IC95) or median [IQR, 25-75] according to distribution.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; GOT, aspartate aminotransferase; GPT, alanine aminotransferase; γ-GT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; HDL, high-density lipoproteins; HOMA, homeostatic model assessment; LDL, low-density lipoproteins.
Table 4.
Longitudinal evaluation of quality of life and sleep after osilodrostat shift to once-daily, evening administration
| Twice-daily osilodrostat (TBID) |
Once-daily osilodrostat (TOD) |
P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sleep quality | |||
| PSQI total score | 9.9 ± 4.7 | 8.2 ± 4.8 | .049 |
| PSQI 1 (subjective sleep quality) | 1.5 ± 1.1 | 1.8 ± 1.1 | .804 |
| PSQI 2 (sleep latency) | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 0.9 ± 1.1 | .024 |
| PSQI 3 (sleep duration) | 1.8 ± 1.2 | 1.1 ± 1.1 | .024 |
| PSQI 4 (sleep efficiency) | 0.9 ± 1.1 | 0.7 ± 1.0 | .295 |
| PSQI 5 (sleep disturbance) | 1.9 ± 0.6 | 1.7 ± 0.8 | .212 |
| PSQI 6 (use of sleep medication) | 1.5 ± 1.5 | 0.8 ± 1.3 | .085 |
| PSQI 7 (daytime dysfunction) | 1.4 ± 0.9 | 1.2 ± 1.0 | .283 |
| Quality of life | |||
| CushingQoL total score | 43.7 ± 15.9 | 47.9 ± 17.6 | .029 |
Data are expressed as mean ± SD. Statistically significant values are shown in bold.
Abbreviations: PSQI, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.
Changes in Salivary Cortisol Profile With Once-daily Osilodrostat Administration
Figure 1 illustrates the salivary cortisol curve estimated by cosinor analysis under TBID (baseline, twice-daily) and TOD (intervention, once-daily). After 2 months of TOD, the AUC for cortisol exposure during the 16:00 to 08:00 timeframe significantly decreased (AUC16:00-08:00 18.9 [14.7-32.2] vs 13.6 [11.0-21.6] ng/mL/h, P = .029). A similar significant reduction was observed for the 16:00 to 04:00 timeframe (AUC16:00-04:00 13.1 [8.6-22.5] vs 9.9 [6.1-15.3] ng/mL/h, P = .009), indicating a drop in cortisol exposure during the late afternoon to early morning (Figs. 1 and 2).
Figure 2.
Change in the exposure to cortisone and cortisone in afternoon through early morning (1600-0800 and 1600-0400) measured as estimated AUC of the daily cosinor-based salivary analysis. Data are mean ± SD.
For salivary cortisone, similar but nonsignificant reductions in AUC were observed (Fig. 2). Cortisol and cortisone mesor, acrophase and nadir levels did not change at TOD, and acrophase showed a nonsignificant shift to later in the morning. Cortisol and cortisone nadir time remained stable across timepoints (cortisol 21:03 [95% CI: 18:04-00:33] vs 21:03 [95% CI: 16:46-01:19], P = .995; cortisone 21:45 [IC95 15:41-02:16] vs 00:00 [IC95 22:32-02:22], P = .320). Interestingly, the peak-to-trough ratio of salivary cortisone increased at TOD (3.6 [2.1-6.9] vs 7.8 [3.2-13.3], P = .033). (Table 2)
Changes in Serum and Urinary Steroid Analysis With Once-Daily Osilodrostat Administration
The changes in serum steroid day curves are illustrated in Fig. 3 and summarized in Table 2. Under TOD, serum day curves (08:00-20:00) for cortisol and cortisone showed similar levels at 08:00 but a more pronounced, albeit nonsignificant, decrease throughout the day. No significant changes were observed in overall day exposure for cortisol (cortisol AUC08:00-20:00 1040.4 [795.5-1331.6] vs 937.4 [767.4-1153.0] ng/mL/h, P = .191) or cortisone (AUC08:00-20:00 175.7 [IC95 158.5-192.9] vs 166.6 [IC95 146.6-186.6] ng/mL/h, P = .235).
Figure 3.
Change in serum steroid day curves and overall exposure (AUC8-20) across TBID and TOD. Data are mean ± standard error of the mean.
Serum steroid precursors demonstrated significant reductions with TOD, specifically for 11-deoxycorticosterone (AUC08:00-20:00 8.47 [7.39-12.46] vs 5.25 [2.71-10.41] ng/mL/h, P = .008) and 11-deoxycortisol (AUC08:00-20:00 53.8 [21.41-75.51] vs 22.6 [15.78-32.91] ng/mL/h, P = .005). Noticeably, testosterone levels in women also showed a significant decrease (AUC08:00-20:00 4.33 [2.35-7.40] vs 3.51 [2.06-4.96] ng/mL/h, P = .039).
The shift to once-daily osilodrostat did not impact on the ratio of UFC levels compared to the upper limit of normal (UFC/ULN = 0.59 [IC95 0.36-0.74] vs 0.55 [IC95 0.34-0.73], P = .820), confirming equivalence of efficacy. Similarly, no significant changes were observed in urinary cortisone (10.1 [IC95 7.4-12.7] vs 11.4 [7.0-15.9] µg/24 hours, P = .359) and, in women, urinary testosterone (0.93 [IC95 0.51-1.36] vs 0.91 [IC95 0.38-1.43] µg/24 hours, P = .998).
Changes in Cardio-Metabolic Parameters and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Once-Daily Osilodrostat Administration
After shifting to once-daily osilodrostat, blood pressure levels did not change, with respect to systolic (133 [95% CI 122-145] vs 131 [95% CI 120-141] mmHg, P = .669), diastolic (88 [95% CI 80-95] vs 83 [95% CI 77-88] mmHg, P = .234) and mean blood pressure levels (104 [95% CI 96-111] vs 98 [95% CI 92-104] mmHg, P = .164). Similarly, lipid profile, waist circumference, and HOMA index remained unchanged (Table 3), confirming that patients were already well controlled under the twice-daily regimen.
Table 4 summarizes the changes in patient-reported measures. A significant increase in CushingQoL total score was observed with TOD (43.7 ± 15.9 vs 47.9 ± 17.6, P = .029), reflecting improved perceived quality of life in disease-specific domains. Sleep quality also improved significantly, as evidenced by a reduction in the PSQI total score (9.9 ± 4.7 vs 8.2 ± 4.8, P = .049).
Notably, significant improvements were observed in PSQI component scores, specifically component 2 (sleep latency: 1.4 ± 1.3 vs 0.9 ± 1.1, P = .024) and component 3 (sleep duration: 1.8 ± 1.2 vs 1.1 ± 1.1, P = .024), indicating shorter sleep latency and longer sleep duration (Table 4). The improvement in sleep quality (PSQI total score) was significantly correlated with the reduction in late afternoon to early morning salivary cortisol exposure (AUC16:00-04:00, ρ = .654, P = .015). According to the Global Assessment Questionnaire results, 15 patients (93.4%) expressed a clear preference for a once-daily regimen in terms of overall appeal, ease of use, and future treatment choice.
Exploratory Analysis of Salivary Circadian Rhythm With Once-daily Osilodrostat at 16:00
Following the initial evaluation of TOD's safety and efficacy, an exploratory analysis was conducted to assess the effects of an earlier administration. The once-daily osilodrostat dosing was shifted from 19:00 ± 1 (TOD) to 16:00 ± 1 hour (TOD2).
Eight patients (mean age 58.8 ± 11.8 years, 2 male patients) completed this additional evaluation and were included in the TOD2 analysis. Reasons for non-inclusion included surgery (3 patients), drug withdrawal (2 patients), and refusal to change dosing time for compliance reasons (3 patients). Among the 8 participants, 3 had CD, 5 had adrenal CS, the median disease duration was 4 (2-8.8) years, and the BMI was 30.8 (29.5-33.0). Similar to the main cohort, the majority of patients had mild CS, and achieved disease control under TBID (mean UFC/ULN 0.6 ± 0.4) with a mean dose of 5 ± 2.5 mg. Osilodrostat dose remained unchanged across TBID, TOD, and TOD2, with only the timing of administration being modified.
The results (Supplementary Table S1 and Supplementary Fig. S1) (55) confirmed a reduction in late afternoon to early morning salivary cortisol at both TOD and TOD2 compared to TBID. Specifically, cortisol AUC16:00-08:00 significantly decreased with TOD2 compared to TBID (20.2 [15.0-35.5] ng/mL/h at TBID vs 19.3 [11.8-24.0] ng/mL/h at TOD2, P = .036), while cortisol AUC16:00-04:00 showed a borderline significant reduction (13.1 [8.5-25.4] ng/mL/h at TBID vs 12.2 [8.7-14.0] ng/mL/h at TOD2, P = .050). No significant differences were observed between TOD and TOD2 (P = .396 for cortisol AUC16:00-08:00 and P = .293 for cortisol AUC16:00-04:00), and similar nonsignificant trends were noted for salivary cortisone AUCs (Supplementary Fig. S1) (55).
Changes in acrophase, mesor, amplitude, and nadir levels of salivary cortisol and cortisone were not significant between TOD and TOD2. However, shifting the timing of osilodrostat had a significant phase effect on cosinor cycles. In this set, the 19:00 TOD administration delayed cortisol acrophase (from 05:58 [03:53-08:04] to 08:46 [07:19-10:12], P = .025), as was cortisone acrophase (from 05:30 [02:36-08:23] to 08:38 [06:59-10:17], P = .025). Shifting the administration to 16:00 slightly anticipated the acrophase but did not fully restore it to TBID levels (P = .043 for cortisol). Cortisone acrophase followed a similar pattern (Supplementary Table S1) (55).
The nadir time at TOD showed a trend toward delay, more evident for cortisone (from 20:10 [15:06-01:13] to 00:14 [21:10-03:18], P = .069). With TOD2, the nadir times returned to levels similar to TBID for both cortisol and cortisone (Supplementary Table S1) (55). The peak-to-trough ratio of salivary cortisone significantly increased at TOD compared to TBID (3.46 [1.80-5.12] vs 11.73 [0.59-24.05], P = .028), but this was not observed at TOD2 (3.46 [1.80-5.12] vs 4.71 [2.7-6.71], P = .225).
Across the 3 timepoints, UFC remained stable and within the normal range, indicating that osilodrostat total daily dose is the primary determinant of disease control (UFC/ULN 0.5 [0.3-0.9] at TOD and 0.2 [0.1-0.8] at TOD2).
Safety Assessments
Once-daily osilodrostat was generally well-tolerated. Liver safety exams remained stable throughout the study (Table 3). No significant ECG alterations were detected, and QTc intervals stayed within the normal range (data not shown). Although 2 patients under TOD had morning cortisol levels below the lower limit of normal, this was not associated with clinical or biochemical signs of adrenal insufficiency (no symptoms, normal electrolytes, and blood pressure). Additionally, no female patients developed clinical signs of hyperandrogenism.
Discussion
This pilot study demonstrates for the first time that a once-daily administration of osilodrostat, particularly in the evening, is safe, effective, and capable of restoring a more physiological circadian cortisol profile in patients with Cushing syndrome (CS). Compared to the standard twice-daily regimen, once-daily dosing resulted in significantly reduced late afternoon to early morning cortisol exposure (AUC16:00-08:00 and AUC16:00-04:00) without altering morning peak levels, reflecting an improved alignment with the natural circadian rhythm of glucocorticoids.
These changes were associated with improved patient-reported outcomes, including significant enhancements in quality of life and sleep, 2 critical aspects often impaired in CS (56-59). The correlation between reduced late-night cortisol exposure and improved sleep highlights the potential of this chronotherapy approach to address key clinical pitfalls of hypercortisolism.
Safety assessments confirmed that once-daily osilodrostat was well tolerated, with no cases of adrenal insufficiency, liver toxicity, or QTc prolongation. Blood pressure, lipid profile, and glucose metabolism showed trends toward improvement, reinforcing the potential cardio-metabolic benefits of restoring circadian cortisol rhythms. Importantly, all patients had well-controlled UFC levels at baseline, ensuring that observed benefits were attributable solely to changes in the timing of administration.
Surprisingly, once-daily dosing also led to a significant reduction in steroid precursors (11-deoxycortisol and 11-deoxycorticosterone) and total testosterone levels in women despite stable day cortisol levels. This suggests that osilodrostat, when administered as a single dose, may exert a broader inhibition of the steroidogenic cascade, possibly through higher peak drug concentrations inhibiting enzymes upstream of CYP11B1, such as CYP11A1 (60, 61). These findings align with previous observations that osilodrostat exhibits dose-overproportional kinetics, with higher single doses potentially affecting additional steroidogenic enzymes (62), usually unaffected at lower peak concentrations. Furthermore, recent reports of prolonged adrenocortical blockade after treatment withdrawal suggest that osilodrostat's in vivo actions are more complex than observed in vitro. The LINC-3 trial first documented this phenomenon, showing a delayed UFC rebound after switching from osilodrostat to placebo (63). In 2023, Poirier et al (43) reported sustained adrenal insufficiency lasting 6 weeks to 9 months in 3 patients who discontinued osilodrostat. Similarly, in 2024, Ferriere et al (44) and Tejani et al (45) described 3 additional cases. This “remnant” effect appeared independent of osilodrostat dose, occurring, for an unpredictable duration, in some but not all patients. Notably, affected patients had low or normal 11-deoxycortisol and low DHEA-S despite elevated ACTH. Given these findings, we speculate that osilodrostat may act through 2 distinct mechanisms: a “canonical,” rapid, reversible CYP11B1 inhibition and a long-term effect, potentially involving broader upstream steroidogenesis inhibition or other yet-to-be-explored mechanisms, such as adrenal cytotoxicity. The well-controlled, stable disease on low-dose osilodrostat, along with a long run-in period and extended observation in our cohort of CS, suggests that our circadian findings are primarily attributable to the canonical effect.
Cortisol rhythm restoration has been largely overlooked as an outcome measure in medical treatment for CS, with most clinical trials focusing on overall cortisol production (UFC). However, a few pioneering studies have explored this aspect. Findling et al (23) and Newell-Price et al (24) highlighted late-night salivary cortisol as a marker of circadian rhythm recovery during pasireotide therapy in 2 large phase 3 trials. While these studies advanced alternative monitoring approaches beyond UFC, a single midnight measurement may not fully capture cortisol fluctuations, providing only a partial snapshot rather than a complete profile. In 2013, van der Pas et al (22) evaluated cortisol rhythm in 17 CD patients undergoing stepwise medical therapy (pasireotide, cabergoline, and ketoconazole), observing improvement in 50% of those with an initially disrupted profile. However, this cannot be considered a pure chronotherapy study, as dosing followed routine clinical practice.
The application of chronotherapy in CS is innovative but underexplored. Previous studies in related fields, such as modified-release hydrocortisone for adrenal insufficiency, demonstrated that aligning glucocorticoid therapy with physiological rhythms reduces metabolic complications and restores immune cell circadian profiles (64, 65). Chronotherapy has also been successfully employed in other conditions, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, and neuropsychiatric disorders (66-68).
In hypercortisolism, however, limited evidence of chronotherapy-based approaches is available. Yoshida et al (69) highlighted the role of multiple salivary cortisol measurements as a tool to optimize daily cortisol rhythm in 6 patients with CS. In this study, metyrapone dosing was adjusted based on cortisol profile, resulting in a more physiological rhythm. Debono et al adjusted metyrapone dosing to align with cortisol circadian rhythm, leading to improvement in inflammatory markers (29). In this pioneering phase 1/2a prospective study, 6 patients with adrenal incidentaloma and mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS), naïve to medical therapy, were treated with the steroidogenesis inhibitor metyrapone. The timing of dose administration was tailored based on cortisol and cortisone day curves, achieving a reset circadian rhythm associated with a reduction in interleukin-6 levels (29). Our study builds upon Debono's and Yoshida's findings in several ways. First, it includes a larger cohort, nearly 3 times the size, comprising patients with CD and adrenal CS, who were excluded in Debono's study. Second, we evaluated a different CYP11B1 inhibitor (osilodrostat) and tested its effects at different administration times. Finally, we accounted for changes in quality of life and sleep, identifying an overall positive clinical impact of chronotherapy in CS, extending beyond purely biochemical outcomes. All our patients were also well-controlled on standard medical therapy before the study began. Chronopharmacology analyses were performed after 60 to 90 days following the shift in administration timing, ensuring steady-state conditions and enhancing the applicability of our findings to clinical practice. This steady-state design also explains why significant changes in metabolic or biochemical parameters were not observed.
Our results align with clinical experience reported in a recent case series (70), where a higher evening dose was proposed as a strategy for patients with mild CS. Our study lays the groundwork for a dedicated dataset of patients treated with an individualized chronotherapy approach, as recently advocated (71).
Emerging evidence highlights the disruption of circadian transcriptomics and persistent immune alterations in CS even after biochemical remission (17). Rapid restoration of circadian cortisol rhythms should, therefore, be a therapeutic priority, as it may address lingering morbidity and mortality risks associated with CS (17, 18).
This study has limitations. The small sample size, inherent to pilot studies and the rarity of CS, limits the statistical power and generalizability of our findings. Additionally, the lack of a control group of healthy subjects precludes direct comparisons of circadian dynamics. Since all patients were biochemically controlled, and most of them were treated with relatively low doses, this could naturally limit the generalizability of our findings. Indeed, the efficacy of first-line, once-daily osilodrostat treatment in patients with uncontrolled disease and/or naïve to medical treatment was not assessed. For all the above, at this stage, once-daily osilodrostat chronotherapy should be offered to patients with mild CS that is biochemically controlled. Nevertheless, patients under moderate dosages and 1 patient with severe CS on a high dose of 22 mg safely transitioned to the once-daily regimen, achieving improved cortisol rhythm without experiencing any adverse events. Lastly, although no patients in our study developed adrenal insufficiency, we cannot entirely exclude a potential carryover effect. Yet, the observed circadian improvements—particularly the timed reduction in cortisol exposure from afternoon to early morning—are more likely due to the short-term inhibition of CYP11B1 by osilodrostat rather than other mechanisms of action.
The study's strengths include its use of multi-matrix steroid assessment, providing unprecedented insights on steroids fluctuations under medical therapy that could set the basis for novel monitoring strategies in the management of CS. The study is further reinforced by its execution in specialized centers and its pioneering focus on circadian rhythms in CS treated with osilodrostat.
Conclusions
Our findings demonstrate that once-daily osilodrostat is a feasible, safe, and well-tolerated treatment option for patients with biochemically controlled CS, effectively restoring circadian cortisol rhythms. By achieving lower evening cortisol exposures, this regimen improves sleep quality and overall quality of life. Over the long term, these changes may translate into potential cardiovascular benefits. These results lay the groundwork for future large-scale, long-term studies to fully explore the potential of chronotherapy approach in the management of CS.
Abbreviations
- ACTH
adrenocorticotropic hormone
- AUC
area under the curve
- BMI
body mass index
- CD
Cushing disease
- CS
Cushing syndrome
- ECG
electrocardiogram
- IQR
interquartile range
- PSQI
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
- TBID
stable twice-daily osilodrostat regimen
- TOD
once-daily osilodrostat regimen
- UFC
urinary free cortisol
- UHPLC-MS/MS
ultra-high performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry
Contributor Information
Davide Ferrari, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Ilaria Bonaventura, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Chiara Simeoli, Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Chirurgia, Sezione di Endocrinologia, Diabetologia, Andrologia e Nutrizione, Università Federico II di Napoli, Naples 80131, Italy.
Alessandra Tomaselli, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Ludovica Vincenzi, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Dario De Alcubierre, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Francesca Sciarra, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Flavio Rizzo, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Lorenzo Cerroni, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Nicola Di Paola, Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Chirurgia, Sezione di Endocrinologia, Diabetologia, Andrologia e Nutrizione, Università Federico II di Napoli, Naples 80131, Italy.
Marianna Minnetti, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Emilia Sbardella, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Mary Anna Venneri, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Riccardo Pofi, Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Churchill Hospital, Oxford OX3 7LE, UK.
Rosario Pivonello, Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Chirurgia, Sezione di Endocrinologia, Diabetologia, Andrologia e Nutrizione, Università Federico II di Napoli, Naples 80131, Italy.
Daniele Gianfrilli, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Valeria Hasenmajer, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy.
Andrea M Isidori, Department of Experimental Medicine, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome 00161, Italy; Centre for Rare Diseases (Endo-ERN Accredited), Policlinico Umberto I, Rome 00161, Italy.
Funding
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union—NextGenerationEU through the Italian Ministry of University and Research under PNRR - M4C2-I1.3 Project PE_00000019 “HEAL ITALIA” to A.M.I. CUP B53C22004000006. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Commission. Neither the European Union nor the European Commission can be held responsible for them. The initial analyses were also supported by the Italian Ministry of University and Research PRIN2020ERLB52.
Author Contributions
D.F. did the literature search and contributed to data collection, laboratory analysis, data analysis, data interpretation, and writing of the report; I.B., C.S., A.T., L.V., and D.D.A. contributed to data collection, data analysis, and writing of the report; F.S. and F.R. contributed to laboratory analysis; L.C. and N.D.P. contributed to data collection; M.M. and E.S. contributed to data interpretation; R.Po. contributed to data analysis and writing the report; M.A.V., R.Pi., and D.G. contributed to study oversight and data interpretation, V.H. contributed to study design, study oversight, data interpretation and writing of the report; A.M.I. contributed to study design, was responsible for study oversight, and contributed to data analysis, data interpretation, and writing of the report. All authors contributed to the research project and approved its submission.
Disclosures
C.S. has served as a consultant for Recordati Rare Diseases and Neurocrine Biosciences; R.Pi. has received research funding from Corcept Therapeutics, Neurocrine Biosciences, Recordati AG, Spruce Bioscience, and Xeris Pharmaceuticals (Strongbridge Biopharma), and has served as a consultant for Corcept Therapeutics, Crinetics Pharmaceuticals, H Lundbeck A/S, and Recordati Rare Diseases; V.H. has served as a consultant for Recordati Rare Diseases Pharma; A.M.I. reports research funding from Corcept Therapeutics and Recordati Rare Diseases Pharma, principal investigator for Recordati Rare Diseases, Corcept Therapeutics, Neurocrine, and Crinetics Pharma, and has served as a consultant for Recordati Rare Diseases Pharma, Esteve Healthcare, and HRA Pharma. All the other authors have nothing to disclose.
Data Availability
Upon reasonable request, deidentified participant data and code used in the analyses can be shared with other researchers. Data will be made available after the ethics committee approves a study proposal and a data access agreement is signed. For further information, please contact the corresponding author (andrea.isidori@uniroma1.it).
Clinical Trial Information
Clinical trial registration number: NCT04374721.
Ethical Approval and Research Involving Human Participants
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sapienza University in Rome (reference number 4945).
Consent to Participate
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and all participants gave their written informed consent.
References
- 1. Pivonello R, Isidori AM, De Martino MC, Newell-Price J, Biller BM, Colao A. Complications of Cushing's syndrome: state of the art. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(7):611‐629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Gadelha M, Gatto F, Wildemberg LE, Fleseriu M. Cushing's syndrome. Lancet. 2023;402(10418):2237‐2252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Reincke M, Fleseriu M. Cushing syndrome: a review. JAMA. 2023;330(2):170‐181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Tritos NA, Miller KK. Diagnosis and management of pituitary adenomas: a review. JAMA. 2023;329(16):1386‐1398. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Bertagna X. MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: can we cure Cushing's disease? A personal view. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;178(5):R183‐R200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Mondin A, Ceccato F, Voltan G, et al. Complications and mortality of Cushing's disease: report on data collected over a 20-year period at a referral centre. Pituitary. 2023;26(5):551‐560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Isidori AM, Graziadio C, Paragliola RM, et al. The hypertension of Cushing's syndrome: controversies in the pathophysiology and focus on cardiovascular complications. J Hypertens. 2015;33(1):44‐60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Hasenmajer V, Sbardella E, Sciarra F, Minnetti M, Isidori AM, Venneri MA. The immune system in Cushing's syndrome. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2020;31(9):655‐669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Minnetti M, Hasenmajer V, Sbardella E, et al. Susceptibility and characteristics of infections in patients with glucocorticoid excess or insufficiency: the ICARO tool. Eur J Endocrinol. 2022;187(5):719‐731. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Karttunen P, Tukiainen H, Nykanen S, Saano V. Night-time pharmacokinetics of once a day theophylline: a steady state comparison of three preparations. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1985;23(3):161‐165. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Varlamov EV, Langlois F, Vila G, Fleseriu M. MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: cardiovascular risk assessment, thromboembolism, and infection prevention in Cushing's syndrome: a practical approach. Eur J Endocrinol. 2021;184(5):R207‐R224. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Barbot M, Ceccato F, Scaroni C. The pathophysiology and treatment of hypertension in patients with Cushing's syndrome. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Moreira AC, Antonini SR, de Castro M. MECHANISMS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY: a sense of time of the glucocorticoid circadian clock: from the ontogeny to the diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;179(1):R1‐R18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Minnetti M, Hasenmajer V, Pofi R, Venneri MA, Alexandraki KI, Isidori AM. Fixing the broken clock in adrenal disorders: focus on glucocorticoids and chronotherapy. J Endocrinol. 2020;246(2):R13‐R31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Soares VR, Silva Martins C, Martinez EZ, et al. Peripheral clock system circadian abnormalities in Cushing's disease. Chronobiol Int. 2020;37(6):867‐876. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Clow A, Hucklebridge F, Thorn L. The cortisol awakening response in context. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2010;93:153‐175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Hasenmajer V, Sbardella E, Sciarra F, et al. Circadian clock disruption impairs immune oscillation in chronic endogenous hypercortisolism: a multi-level analysis from a multicentre clinical trial. EBioMedicine. 2024;110:105462. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Fleseriu M, Auchus R, Bancos I, et al. Consensus on diagnosis and management of Cushing's disease: a guideline update. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9(12):847‐875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Alexandraki KI, Grossman AB. Is urinary free cortisol of value in the diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome? Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2011;18(4):259‐263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Pivonello R, De Leo M, Cozzolino A, Colao A. The treatment of Cushing's disease. Endocr Rev. 2015;36(4):385‐486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Ferriere A, Tabarin A. Cushing's syndrome: treatment and new therapeutic approaches. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;34(2):101381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. van der Pas R, de Bruin C, Pereira AM, et al. Cortisol diurnal rhythm and quality of life after successful medical treatment of Cushing's disease. Pituitary. 2013;16(4):536‐544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Findling JW, Fleseriu M, Newell-Price J, et al. Late-night salivary cortisol may be valuable for assessing treatment response in patients with Cushing's disease: 12-month, phase III pasireotide study. Endocrine. 2016;54(2):516‐523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Newell-Price J, Pivonello R, Tabarin A, et al. Use of late-night salivary cortisol to monitor response to medical treatment in Cushing's disease. Eur J Endocrinol. 2020;182(2):207‐217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Harrison RF, Debono M, Whitaker MJ, Keevil BG, Newell-Price J, Ross RJ. Salivary cortisone to estimate cortisol exposure and sampling frequency required based on serum cortisol measurements. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(3):765‐772. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Debono M, Elder CJ, Lewis J, et al. Home waking salivary cortisone to screen for adrenal insufficiency. NEJM Evid. 2023;2(2):EVIDoa2200182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Issa BG, Hanna FWF, Fryer AA, et al. The utility of salivary cortisone in the overnight dexamethasone suppression test in adrenal incidentalomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2023;108(10):e937‐e943. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Kannankeril J, Carroll T, Findling JW, et al. Prospective evaluation of late-night salivary cortisol and cortisone by EIA and LC-MS/MS in suspected Cushing syndrome. J Endocr Soc. 2020;4(10):bvaa107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Debono M, Harrison RF, Chadarevian R, Gueroult C, Abitbol JL, Newell-Price J. Resetting the abnormal circadian cortisol rhythm in adrenal incidentaloma patients with mild autonomous cortisol secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102(9):3461‐3469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Perosevic M, Tritos NA. Clinical utility of osilodrostat in Cushing's disease: review of currently available literature. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2023;17:1303‐1312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Pivonello R, Simeoli C, Di Paola N, Larocca A, Crescenzo EM, Colao A. Osilodrostat: a novel potent inhibitor of 11-Beta-hydroxylase for the treatment of Cushing's syndrome. touchREV Endocrinol. 2024;20(1):43‐51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Bertagna X, Pivonello R, Fleseriu M, et al. LCI699, a potent 11β-hydroxylase inhibitor, normalizes urinary cortisol in patients with Cushing's disease: results from a multicenter, proof-of-concept study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(4):1375‐1383. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Fleseriu M, Pivonello R, Newell-Price J, et al. Osilodrostat improves blood pressure and glycemic control in patients with Cushing's disease: a pooled analysis of LINC 3 and LINC 4 studies. Pituitary. 2025;28(1):22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Pivonello R, Fleseriu M, Newell-Price J, et al. Improvement in clinical features of hypercortisolism during osilodrostat treatment: findings from the phase III LINC 3 trial in Cushing's disease. J Endocrinol Invest. 2024;47(10):2437‐2448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Shimatsu A, Biller BM, Fleseriu M, et al. Osilodrostat treatment in patients with Cushing's disease of Asian or non-Asian origin: a pooled analysis of two phase III randomized trials (LINC 3 and LINC 4). Endocr J. 2024;71(12):1103‐1123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Newell-Price J, Fleseriu M, Pivonello R, et al. Improved clinical outcomes during long-term osilodrostat treatment of Cushing disease with normalization of late-night salivary cortisol and urinary free cortisol. J Endocr Soc. 2024;9(1):bvae201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Fleseriu M, Biller BMK. Treatment of Cushing's syndrome with osilodrostat: practical applications of recent studies with case examples. Pituitary. 2022;25(6):795‐809. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Fleseriu M, Pivonello R, Young J, et al. Osilodrostat, a potent oral 11beta-hydroxylase inhibitor: 22-week, prospective, phase II study in Cushing's disease. Pituitary. 2016;19(2):138‐148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Gadelha M, Bex M, Feelders RA, et al. Randomized trial of osilodrostat for the treatment of Cushing disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(7):e2882‐e2895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Dormoy A, Haissaguerre M, Vitellius G, et al. Efficacy and safety of osilodrostat in paraneoplastic Cushing syndrome: a real-world multicenter study in France. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2023;108(6):1475‐1487. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Scheyer N, Bertherat J, Decoudier B, et al. 12275 effect of osilodrostat on cardiovascular and metabolic manifestations of hypercortisolism in patients with non-pituitary Cushing's syndrome: findings from A retrospective observational study (LINC 7). J Endocr Soc. 2024;8(Supplement_1):bvae163.171. [Google Scholar]
- 42. Creemers SG, Feelders RA, de Jong FH, et al. Osilodrostat is a potential novel steroidogenesis inhibitor for the treatment of Cushing syndrome: an in vitro study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(8):3437‐3449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Poirier J, Bonnet-Serrano F, Thomeret L, Bouys L, Bertherat J. Prolonged adrenocortical blockade following discontinuation of osilodrostat. Eur J Endocrinol. 2023;188(6):K29‐K32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Ferriere A, Salenave S, Puerto M, Young J, Tabarin A. Prolonged adrenal insufficiency following discontinuation of osilodrostat treatment for intense hypercortisolism. Eur J Endocrinol. 2024;190(1):L1‐L3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Tejani S, Abramowitz J, Tritos NA, Hamidi O, Mirfakhraee S. Prolonged adrenal insufficiency after osilodrostat exposure with eventual recovery of adrenal function. JCEM Case Rep. 2024;2(6):luae088. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Carroll TB, Findling JW. The diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2010;11(2):147‐153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Mancia G, Kreutz R, Brunström M, et al. 2023 ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension the task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension: Endorsed by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) and the European Renal Association (ERA). J Hypertens. 2023;41(12):1874‐2071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Cosentino F, Grant PJ, Aboyans V, et al. 2019 ESC guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(2):255‐323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Krueger D, Tanner SB, Szalat A, et al. DXA reporting updates: 2023 official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry. J Clin Densitom. 2024;27(1):101437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Nicolaides NC, Charmandari E, Chrousos GP, Kino T. Circadian endocrine rhythms: the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and its actions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014;1318(1):71‐80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Iannone M, Dima AP, Sciarra F, Botrè F, Isidori AM. Development and validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the simultaneous analysis of androgens, estrogens, glucocorticoids and progestagens in human serum. Biomed Chromatogr. 2022;36(5):e5344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, Naylor BA, Treacher DF, Turner RC. Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and beta-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia. 1985;28(7):412‐419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Webb SM, Badia X, Barahona MJ, et al. Evaluation of health-related quality of life in patients with Cushing's syndrome with a new questionnaire. Eur J Endocrinol. 2008;158(5):623‐630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF 3rd, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res. 1989;28(2):193‐213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Ferrari D, Bonaventura I, Simeoli C, et al. Supplementary Data for “Chronotherapy with Once-Daily Osilodrostat Improves Circadian Cortisol Profile, Quality of Life, and Sleep in Cushing's Syndrome” Online Resouce. figshare. doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28334354. Date of deposit 2 February 2025. [DOI]
- 56. Pivonello R, Simeoli C, De Martino MC, et al. Neuropsychiatric disorders in Cushing's syndrome. Front Neurosci. 2015;9:129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Webb SM, Valassi E. Quality of life impairment after a diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome. Pituitary. 2022;25(5):768‐771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Santos A, Webb SM, Resmini E. Psychological complications of Cushing's syndrome. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2021;28(3):325‐329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Fernandes MA, Hickle SD, Penna S, Ioachimescu AG, Tone EB. Comparative analysis of cognitive and psychiatric functioning in people with Cushing's disease in biochemical remission and people with nonfunctioning adenomas. Behav Neurol. 2024;2024(1):4393169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Valentín-Goyco J, Liu J, Peng HM, Oommen J, Auchus RJ. Selectivity of osilodrostat as an inhibitor of human steroidogenic cytochromes P450. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2023;231:106316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Bonnet-Serrano F, Poirier J, Vaczlavik A, et al. Differences in the spectrum of steroidogenic enzyme inhibition between Osilodrostat and Metyrapone in ACTH-dependent Cushing syndrome patients. Eur J Endocrinol. 2022;187(2):315‐322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Menard J, Watson C, Rebello S, Zhang YM, Dole WP. Hormonal and electrolyte responses to the aldosterone synthase inhibitor Lci699 in sodium depleted healthy subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(10):A61.E583. [Google Scholar]
- 63. Pivonello R, Fleseriu M, Newell-Price J, et al. Efficacy and safety of osilodrostat in patients with Cushing's disease (LINC 3): a multicentre phase III study with a double-blind, randomised withdrawal phase. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8(9):748‐761. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Isidori AM, Venneri MA, Graziadio C, et al. Effect of once-daily, modified-release hydrocortisone versus standard glucocorticoid therapy on metabolism and innate immunity in patients with adrenal insufficiency (DREAM): a single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;6(3):173‐185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Venneri MA, Hasenmajer V, Fiore D, et al. Circadian rhythm of glucocorticoid administration entrains clock genes in immune cells: a DREAM trial ancillary study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(8):2998‐3009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Vallée A, Lecarpentier Y, Guillevin R, Vallée JN. The influence of circadian rhythms and aerobic glycolysis in autism spectrum disorder. Transl Psychiatry. 2020;10(1):400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Martino TA, Tata N, Simpson JA, et al. The primary benefits of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition on cardiac remodeling occur during sleep time in murine pressure overload hypertrophy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57(20):2020‐2028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Nainwal N. Chronotherapeutics--a chronopharmaceutical approach to drug delivery in the treatment of asthma. J Control Release. 2012;163(3):353‐360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Yoshida K, Fukuoka H, Odake Y, et al. Multiple salivary cortisol measurements are a useful tool to optimize metyrapone treatment in patients with Cushing's syndromes treatment: case presentations. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2017;8:375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Fleseriu M, Auchus RJ, Bancos I, Biller BMK. Osilodrostat treatment for adrenal and ectopic Cushing syndrome: integration of clinical studies with case presentations. J Endocr Soc. 2025;9(4):bvaf027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Fleseriu M, Varlamov EV, Hinojosa-Amaya JM, Langlois F, Melmed S. An individualized approach to the management of Cushing disease. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2023;19(10):581‐599. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Citations
- Ferrari D, Bonaventura I, Simeoli C, et al. Supplementary Data for “Chronotherapy with Once-Daily Osilodrostat Improves Circadian Cortisol Profile, Quality of Life, and Sleep in Cushing's Syndrome” Online Resouce. figshare. doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28334354. Date of deposit 2 February 2025. [DOI]
Data Availability Statement
Upon reasonable request, deidentified participant data and code used in the analyses can be shared with other researchers. Data will be made available after the ethics committee approves a study proposal and a data access agreement is signed. For further information, please contact the corresponding author (andrea.isidori@uniroma1.it).



