Brigham Research Institute Poster Session Site logo-1
Search
Close this search box.

Jessica Love, BA

Job Title

Research Assistant II

Academic Rank

Staff/Research Assistant

Department

Medicine

Authors

Jessica Love, Meneena Bright, Christopher Cano, Lawrence Epstein, Jacqueline Lane

Principal Investigator

Jacqueline Lane

Categories

Tags

A comparative study of US-based melatonin assay companies - Solidphase vs Salimetrics

Scientific Abstract

Solidphase and Salimetrics are two companies providing saliva melatonin analysis for researchers and clinicians. Solidphase has been said to be more accurate, whereas Salimetrics is less demanding. Salimetrics has updated their technology, therefore we decided to test both companies head-to-head for DLMO assays. Each participant (N=4) collected saliva samples starting 6 hours before their self-reported habitual bedtime and 2 hours after, for a total of 9 samples over 8 hours. To ensure there was enough saliva for both assays, each sample was collected approximately 10 minutes apart, with the Salimetrics samples taken first followed by Solidphase. To obtain a dim-light environment to facilitate accurate saliva sample collection, participants used materials provided by the Circadia Study. Both companies were able to measure melatonin concentrations in all saliva samples (range <0.5 – 34 pg/ml). DLMO measurements across companies were within 30 minutes of each other (avg.= 18.5 min.) The per sample cost for Solidphase was $20.63 whereas Salimetrics was $21.00. Overall, we found no clinically significant differences in DLMOs assayed by Solidphase vs. Salimetrics. The Salimetrics assay kit is a streamlined process amenable to clinical use, although more rigor is needed in their provided instructions.

Lay Abstract

Solidphase and Salimetrics are two companies providing saliva melatonin analysis for researchers and clinicians. Melatonin analysis is required for diagnosing circadian rhythm disorders. Solidphase is known to be more accurate, whereas Salimetrics is less demanding. Salimetrics has updated their technology, therefore we decided to test both companies head-to-head. Each participant (N=4) collected saliva samples starting 6 hours before their self-reported habitual bedtime and 2 hours after, for a total of 9 samples over 8 hours. To ensure there was enough saliva for both assays, each sample was collected approximately 10 minutes apart, with the Salimetrics taken first followed by Solidphase. To obtain a dim-light environment to facilitate accurate saliva sample collection, participants used materials provided by the Lane Lab from kits used in their Circadia Pilot study. Both companies were able to measure melatonin concentrations in all saliva samples. DLMO measurements across companies were within 30 minutes of each other (avg.= 18.5 min.) The per sample cost for Solidphase was $20.63 whereas Salimetrics was $21.00. Overall, we found no clinically significant differences in DLMOs assayed by Solidphase vs. Salimetrics. The Salimetrics seems more appropriate for clinical purposes, but their instruction packet needs to be updated.

Clinical Implications

To educate clinicians and researchers on the most appropriate company to work with when conducting research and diagnosing patients with circadian rhythm disorder. We want to show others our preliminary data so that DLMOs can be conducted appropriately.