Rules for body fat interventions based on an operating point mechanism

Major depressive disorder and bistability in an HPA-CNS toggle switch

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the most common psychiatric disorder. It has a complex and heterogeneous etiology. Most treatments take weeks to show effects and work well only for a fraction of the patients. Thus, new concepts are needed to understand MDD and its dynamics. One of the strong correlates of MDD is increased activity and dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis which produces the stress hormone cortisol. Existing mathematical models of the HPA axis describe its operation on the scale of hours, and thus are unable to explore the dynamic on the scale of weeks that characterizes many aspects of MDD. Here, we propose a mathematical model of MDD on the scale of weeks, a timescale provided by the growth of the HPA hormone glands under control of HPA hormones. We add to this the mutual inhibition of the HPA axis and the hippocampus and other regions of the central nervous system (CNS) that forms a toggle switch. The model shows bistability between euthymic and depressed states, with a slow timescale of weeks in its dynamics. It explains why prolonged but not acute stress can trigger a self-sustaining depressive episode that persists even after the stress is removed. The model explains the weeks timescale for drugs to take effect, as well as the dysregulation of the HPA axis in MDD, based on gland mass changes. This understanding of MDD dynamics may help to guide strategies for treatment.

Excitable dynamics of flares and relapses in autoimmune diseases

Many autoimmune disorders exhibit flares in which symptoms erupt and then decline, as exemplified by multiple sclerosis (MS) in its relapsing-remitting form. Existing mathematical models of autoimmune flares often assume regular oscillations, failing to capture the stochastic and non-periodic nature of flare-ups. We suggest that autoimmune flares are driven by excitable dynamics triggered by stochastic events auch as stress, infection and other factors. Our minimal model, involving autoreactive and regulatory T-cells, demonstrates this concept. Autoimmune response initiates antigen-induced expansion through positive feedback, while regulatory cells counter the autoreactive cells through negative feedback. The model explains the decrease in MS relapses during pregnancy and the subsequent surge postpartum, based on lymphocyte dynamics. Additionally, it identifies potential therapeutic targets, predicting significant reduction in relapse rate from mild adjustments of regulatory T cell activity or production. These findings indicate that excitable dynamics may underlie flare-ups across various autoimmune disorders, potentially informing treatment strategies.

Models of body weight and fatness regulation

Body weight and fatness appear to be regulated phenomena. Several different theoretical models are available to capture the essence of this idea. These include the set-point, dynamic equilibrium, adiposity force, control theory-settling point, Hall-Guo, operation point and dual intervention point (DIP) models. The set-point model posits a single reference point around which levels of fat are regulated. The dynamic equilibrium model suggests that the apparent regulation of body fat around a reference point is an illusion owing to the necessary impacts of weight change on energy expenditure. Control theory focuses on the importance of feedback gain and suggests set-point and dynamic equilibrium are ends of a continuum of feedback gain. Control theory models have also been called 'settling point' models. The Hall-Guo, operation point and DIP models also bring together the set-point and dynamic equilibrium ideas into a single framework. The DIP proposes a zone of indifference where dynamic equilibrium 'regulation' predominates, bounded by upper and lower intervention points beyond which physiological mechanisms are activated. The drifty gene hypothesis is an idea explaining where this individual variation in the upper intervention point might come from. We conclude that further experiments to test between the models are sorely required. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Causes of obesity: theories, conjectures and evidence (Part II)'.