2
|
Madison AA, Bailey MT. Stressed to the Core: Inflammation and Intestinal Permeability Link Stress-Related Gut Microbiota Shifts to Mental Health Outcomes. Biol Psychiatry 2024; 95:339-347. [PMID: 38353184 PMCID: PMC10867428 DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2023.10.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Revised: 10/02/2023] [Accepted: 10/22/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024]
Abstract
Stress levels are surging, alongside the incidence of stress-related psychiatric disorders. Perhaps a related phenomenon, especially in urban areas, the human gut contains fewer bacterial species than ever before. Although the functional implications of this absence are unclear, one consequence may be reduced stress resilience. Preclinical and clinical evidence has shown how stress exposure can alter the gut microbiota and their metabolites, affecting host physiology. Also, stress-related shifts in the gut microbiota jeopardize tight junctions of the gut barrier. In this context, bacteria and bacterial products can translocate from the gut to the bloodstream, lymph nodes, and other organs, thereby modifying systemic inflammatory responses. Heightened circulating inflammation can be an etiological factor in stress-related psychiatric disorders, including some cases of depression. In this review, we detail preclinical and clinical evidence that traces these brain-to-gut-to-brain pathways that underlie stress-related psychiatric disorders and potentially affect their responsivity to conventional psychiatric medications. We also review evidence for interventions that modulate the gut microbiota (e.g., antibiotics, probiotics, prebiotics) to reduce stress responses and psychiatric symptoms. Lastly, we discuss challenges to translation and opportunities for innovations that could impact future psychiatric clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annelise A Madison
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
| | - Michael T Bailey
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Department of Pediatrics, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Center for Microbial Pathogenesis and the Oral and Gastrointestinal Microbiology Research Affinity Group, Abigail Wexner Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Madison AA, Andridge R, Kantaras AH, Renna ME, Bennett JM, Alfano CM, Povoski SP, Agnese DM, Lustberg M, Wesolowski R, Carson WE, Williams NO, Reinbolt RE, Sardesai SD, Noonan AM, Stover DG, Cherian MA, Malarkey WB, Kiecolt-Glaser JK. Depression, Inflammation, and Intestinal Permeability: Associations with Subjective and Objective Cognitive Functioning throughout Breast Cancer Survivorship. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4414. [PMID: 37686689 PMCID: PMC10487080 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174414] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 08/26/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
About one-in-three breast cancer survivors have lingering cognitive complaints and objective cognitive impairment. Chronic inflammation and intestinal permeability (i.e., leaky gut), two risk factors for cognitive decline, can also fuel depression-another vulnerability for cognitive decline. The current study tested whether depression accompanied by high levels of inflammation or intestinal permeability predicted lower subjective and objective cognitive function in breast cancer survivors. We combined data from four breast cancer survivor studies (n = 613); some had repeated measurements for a total of 1015 study visits. All participants had a blood draw to obtain baseline measures of lipopolysaccharide binding protein-a measure of intestinal permeability, as well as three inflammatory markers that were incorporated into an inflammatory index: C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α. They reported depressive symptoms on the Center for Epidemiological Studies depression scale (CES-D), and a binary variable indicated clinically significant depressive symptoms (CES-D ≥ 16). The Kohli (749 observations) and the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (591 observations) scales assessed subjective cognitive function. Objective cognitive function tests included the trail-making test, Hopkins verbal learning test, Conners continuous performance test, n-back test, FAS test, and animal-naming test (239-246 observations). Adjusting for education, age, BMI, cancer treatment type, time since treatment, study visit, and fatigue, women who had clinically elevated depressive symptoms accompanied by heightened inflammation or intestinal permeability reported poorer focus and marginally poorer memory. However, poorer performance across objective cognitive measures was not specific to inflammation-associated depression. Rather, there was some evidence of lower verbal fluency; poorer attention, verbal learning and memory, and working memory; and difficulties with visuospatial search among depressed survivors, regardless of inflammation. By themselves, inflammation and intestinal permeability less consistently predicted subjective or objective cognitive function. Breast cancer survivors with clinically significant depressive symptoms accompanied by either elevated inflammation or intestinal permeability may perceive greater cognitive difficulty, even though depression-related objective cognitive deficits may not be specific to inflammation- or leaky-gut-associated depression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annelise A Madison
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Rebecca Andridge
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Division of Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Anthony H Kantaras
- Department of Neuroscience, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Megan E Renna
- School of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS 39406, USA
| | - Jeanette M Bennett
- Department of Psychological Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28213, USA
| | | | - Stephen P Povoski
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Doreen M Agnese
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Maryam Lustberg
- Center for Breast Cancer, Yale Cancer Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06519, USA
| | - Robert Wesolowski
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - William E Carson
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Nicole O Williams
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Raquel E Reinbolt
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Sagar D Sardesai
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Anne M Noonan
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Daniel G Stover
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Mathew A Cherian
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - William B Malarkey
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Janice K Kiecolt-Glaser
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Characteristics of the gut microbiota in women with premenstrual symptoms: A cross-sectional study. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0268466. [PMID: 35622782 PMCID: PMC9140228 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2021] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Premenstrual symptoms can negatively impact the quality of life of women through a range of mood, behavioral, and physical symptoms. The association between the microbiota and brain function has been extensively studied. Here, we examined the characteristics of the microbiota in women with premenstrual disorders (PMDs) and the association between premenstrual symptoms and the microbiota. Materials and methods In this single center cross-sectional pilot study, we recruited 27 women reporting premenstrual symptoms and 29 women with no serious premenstrual symptoms. Among them, we further selected 21 women experiencing premenstrual symptoms resulting in interference to their social life (PMDs group) and 22 women with no serious premenstrual symptoms and thereby no interference to their social life (control group). The severity of symptoms was evaluated by a premenstrual symptoms questionnaire (PSQ). Inflammatory markers were analyzed in blood samples, including C reactive protein, soluble CD14, and lipopolysaccharide binding protein. Sequencing of 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid genes was performed on stool samples. Results Inflammatory markers in blood samples did not differ significantly between the PMDs and control groups. A difference in beta, but not alpha diversity, was detected for the gut microbiotas of the PMDs and control groups. The relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes phylum was lower in the PMDs group. At the genus level, the prevalence was decreased for Butyricicoccus, Extibacter, Megasphaera, and Parabacteroides and increased for Anaerotaenia in the PMDs group, but after false discovery rate correction, these differences were no longer significant. Linear discriminant effect size analysis revealed a decrease in Extibacter, Butyricicoccus, Megasphaera, and Parabacteroides and an increase in Anaerotaenia in the PMDs group. The PSQ total score correlated with Anaerotaenia, Extibacter, and Parabacteroides. Multiple regression analysis showed that Parabacteroides and Megasphaera negatively predicted the PSQ total score. Conclusion The properties of the gut microbiota are associated with premenstrual symptoms.
Collapse
|
5
|
Shrout MR, Madison AA, Renna ME, Alfano CM, Povoski SP, Lipari AM, Agnese DM, Carson WE, Malarkey WB, Bailey MT, Kiecolt-Glaser JK. The gut connection: Intestinal permeability as a pathway from breast cancer survivors' relationship satisfaction to inflammation across treatment. Brain Behav Immun 2022; 100:145-154. [PMID: 34808291 PMCID: PMC8769505 DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2021.11.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2021] [Revised: 11/07/2021] [Accepted: 11/13/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer survivors are prone to weakened gut barriers, allowing bacteria to migrate into the blood stream. Gut permeability fuels inflammation, which, among survivors, can elevate risk for comorbid disease development, cancer recurrence, and a poor quality of life; however, survivors' satisfying relationships can provide health benefits. This longitudinal study used a conceptual model addressing how intimate relationships is associated with health through changes in gut permeability and inflammation. METHOD Breast cancer survivors (n = 139, stages 0-IIIC) completed a baseline visit before treatment and two follow-up visits 6 and 18 months after treatment ended. Women who had an abnormal breast cancer test followed by a benign diagnosis completed visits within a comparable timeframe (noncancer patient controls; n = 69). All women completed questionnaires assessing their relationship satisfaction and provided blood samples to assess two bacterial endotoxin biomarkers, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) and soluble CD14 (sCD14), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin 6 (IL-6). RESULTS Within-person multilevel mediation analyses showed that when a survivor's relationship satisfaction was higher than usual, her own LBP and LBP/sCD14 were lower, which was associated with lower than her own average CRP and IL-6 (95% CIs [-0.0104, -0.0002]). IL-6 was also higher when older survivors, but not younger survivors, experienced higher than usual intestinal permeability (p = .001). These effects of satisfying relationships held after accounting for cancer-related and behavioral factors. Post-hoc analyses showed LBP, sCD14, and LBP/sCD14 were associated with CRP for the cancer survivors, but only LBP and LBP/sCD14 were linked to CRP among the noncancer control patients. CONCLUSION The gut environment is a new promising candidate for understanding a relationship's long-term health impact, particularly among those with elevated health risks. Survivors may reap multiple physiological benefits from satisfying relationships.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Rosie Shrout
- Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA; Center on Aging and the Life Course, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
| | - Annelise A Madison
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Megan E Renna
- School of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA
| | | | - Stephen P Povoski
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Adele M Lipari
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Doreen M Agnese
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - William E Carson
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - William B Malarkey
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Michael T Bailey
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Center for Microbial Pathogenesis, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA; Oral and Gastrointestinal Microbiology Research Affinity Group, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Janice K Kiecolt-Glaser
- Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Remes O, Mendes JF, Templeton P. Biological, Psychological, and Social Determinants of Depression: A Review of Recent Literature. Brain Sci 2021; 11:1633. [PMID: 34942936 PMCID: PMC8699555 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11121633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 11/08/2021] [Accepted: 11/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Depression is one of the leading causes of disability, and, if left unmanaged, it can increase the risk for suicide. The evidence base on the determinants of depression is fragmented, which makes the interpretation of the results across studies difficult. The objective of this study is to conduct a thorough synthesis of the literature assessing the biological, psychological, and social determinants of depression in order to piece together the puzzle of the key factors that are related to this condition. Titles and abstracts published between 2017 and 2020 were identified in PubMed, as well as Medline, Scopus, and PsycInfo. Key words relating to biological, social, and psychological determinants as well as depression were applied to the databases, and the screening and data charting of the documents took place. We included 470 documents in this literature review. The findings showed that there are a plethora of risk and protective factors (relating to biological, psychological, and social determinants) that are related to depression; these determinants are interlinked and influence depression outcomes through a web of causation. In this paper, we describe and present the vast, fragmented, and complex literature related to this topic. This review may be used to guide practice, public health efforts, policy, and research related to mental health and, specifically, depression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olivia Remes
- Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0FS, UK
| | | | - Peter Templeton
- IfM Engage Limited, Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0FS, UK;
- The William Templeton Foundation for Young People’s Mental Health (YPMH), Cambridge CB2 0AH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Madison AA, Kiecolt-Glaser JK. The gut microbiota and nervous system: Age-defined and age-defying. Semin Cell Dev Biol 2021; 116:98-107. [PMID: 33422403 PMCID: PMC8257779 DOI: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2020.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2020] [Revised: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 12/21/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Even healthy older adults experience gastrointestinal (GI) and neurological changes. In fact, the aging process of these two systems are interrelated due the extensive, multifaceted communication network connecting them, termed the gut-brain axis. Age-related modification of the GI environment can influence the bacterial species that survive and thrive there. Additionally, the lifestyle common to older adults in the West, including sedentariness, polypharmacy, and a poor diet, can compound the effect of aging on the GI tract, gut microbiota, and nervous system. Emerging animal and human findings suggest that GI organisms play a major role in gut-brain communication, ultimately shaping neurological aging trajectories by either helping to maintain nervous system function into late life or promoting pathology. Aging and age-related behaviors help to define the gut microbiota's composition and function, but, conversely, the gut microbiota may help to determine late-life functionality and may be harnessed to limit the prevalence of steep neurological decline and diseases. Focusing primarily on clinical research, this review first defines the gut-brain axis, then details age-related GI and nervous system changes, and discusses the impact of age-related lifestyle factors on the GI and nervous systems. The remainder of this review describes cutting-edge research that positions the gut microbiota as an arbiter of age-related neurological decline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annelise A Madison
- The Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, USA; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, USA
| | - Janice K Kiecolt-Glaser
- The Institute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, USA.
| |
Collapse
|