A comparison of behavioral and pharmacological interventions to attenuate reactivated fear memories

Long term structural and functional neural changes following a single infusion of Ketamine in PTSD

NMDA receptor antagonists have a vital role in extinction, learning, and reconsolidation processes. During the reconsolidation window, memories are activated into a labile state and can be reconsolidated in an altered form. This concept might have significant clinical implications in treating PTSD. In this pilot study we tested the potential of a single infusion of ketamine, followed by brief exposure therapy, to enhance post-retrieval extinction of PTSD trauma memories. 27 individuals diagnosed with PTSD were randomly assigned to receive either ketamine (0.5 mg/kg 40 min; N = 14) or midazolam (0.045 mg/kg; N = 13) after retrieval of the traumatic memory. 24 h following infusion, participants received a four-day trauma-focused psychotherapy. Symptoms and brain activity were assessed before treatment, at the end of treatment, and at 30-day follow-up. Amygdala activation to trauma scripts (a major biomarker of fear response) served as the main study outcome. Although PTSD symptoms improved equally in both groups, post-treatment, ketamine recipients showed a lower amygdala (-0.33, sd = 0.13, 95%HDI [-0.56,-0.04]) and hippocampus (-0.3 (sd = 0.19), 95%HDI [-0.65, 0.04]; marginal effect) reactivation to trauma memories, compared to midazolam recipients. Post-retrieval ketamine administration was also associated with decreased connectivity between the amygdala and hippocampus (-0.28, sd = 0.11, 95%HDI [-0.46, -0.11]), with no change in amygdala-vmPFC connectivity. Moreover, reduction in fractional anisotropy in bi-lateral uncinate fasciculus was seen in the Ketamine recipients compared with the midazolam recipients (right: post-treatment: -0.01108, 95% HDI [-0.0184,-0.003]; follow-up: -0.0183, 95% HDI [-0.02719,-0.0107]; left: post-treatment: -0.019, 95% HDI [-0.028,-0.011]; follow-up: -0.017, 95% HDI [-0.026,-0.007]). Taken together it is possible that ketamine may enhance post-retrieval extinction of the original trauma memories in humans. These preliminary findings show promising direction toward the capacity to rewrite human traumatic memories and modulate the fear response for at least 30 days post-extinction. When combined with psychotherapy for PTSD, further investigation of ketamine dose, timing of administration, and frequency of administration, is warranted.

Reconsolidation and Fear Extinction: An Update

Fear memories can be updated behaviorally by delivering extinction trials during the reconsolidation window, which results in a persistent attenuation of fear memories (Monfils et al., Science 324:951-955, 2009). This safe and non-invasive paradigm, termed retrieval-extinction (or post-retrieval extinction), has also been found to be successful at preventing the return of fear in healthy fear conditioned humans (Schiller et al., Nature 463:49-53, 2010), and in the time since its discovery, there has been an explosion of research on the use of retrieval-extinction in fear memories in humans and other animals, some of which have found a long-term reduction in conditioned responding, and some who have not. These discrepant findings have raised concerns as to whether retrieval-extinction really results in updating of the original fear memory, or if it simply enhances extinction. We will first review the progress made on elucidating the cellular mechanisms underlying the fear attenuating effects of retrieval-extinction and how they differ from traditional extinction. Special attention will be paid to the molecular events necessary for retrieval-extinction to successfully occur and how these reconsolidated memories are represented in the brain. Next, we will examine the parameters that determine whether or not a memory will be updated via extinction during the reconsolidation window (also known as boundary conditions). These boundary conditions will also be discussed as possible explanations for discrepant findings of the retrieval-extinction effect. Then we will examine the factors that can determine whether an individual's fears will successfully be attenuated by retrieval-extinction. These individual differences include genetics, age, and psychopathology. Finally, we will discuss recent attempts to bring the retrieval-extinction paradigm from the bench to the bedside for the behavioral treatment of anxiety and trauma disorders.

Cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation on the prefrontal cortex applied after reactivation attenuates fear memories and prevent reinstatement after extinction

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, pharmacological strategies targeting reconsolidation after memory retrieval have shown promising efforts to attenuate persistent memories and overcome fear recovery. However, most reconsolidation inhibiting agents have not been approved for human testing. While non-invasive neuromodulation can be considered an alternative approach to pharmacological treatments, there is a lack of evidence about the efficacy of these technologies when modifying memory traces via reactivation/reconsolidation mechanism.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we evaluate the effect of cathodal (c-tDCS) and anodal (a-DCS) transcranial direct current stimulation applied after memory reactivation and extinction in rats.

METHODS

Male Wistar rats were randomly assigned into three groups: one sham group, one anodal tDCS group, and one cathodal tDCS group (500 μA, 20 min). Reconsolidation and extinction of fear memories were evaluated using a contextual fear conditioning.

RESULTS

Our results showed that c-tDCS and a-tDCS after memory reactivation can attenuate mild fear memories. However, only c-tDCS stimulation prevented both fear expression under strong fear learning and fear recovery after a reinstatement protocol without modification of learning rate or extinction retrieval. Nevertheless, the remote memories were resistant to modification through this type of neuromodulation. Our results are discussed considering the interaction between intrinsic excitability promoted by learning and memory retrieval and the electric field applied during tDCS.

CONCLUSION

These results point out some of the boundary conditions influencing the efficacy of tDCS in fear attenuation and open new ways for the development of noninvasive interventions aimed to control fear-related disorders via reconsolidation.

Apparent reconsolidation interference without generalized amnesia

Memories remain dynamic after consolidation, and when reactivated, they can be rendered vulnerable to various pharmacological agents that disrupt the later expression of memory (i.e., amnesia). Such drug-induced post-reactivation amnesia has traditionally been studied in AAA experimental designs, where a memory is initially created for a stimulus A (be it a singular cue or a context) and later reactivated and tested through exposure to the exact same stimulus. Using a contextual fear conditioning procedure in rats and midazolam as amnestic agent, we recently demonstrated that drug-induced amnesia can also be obtained when memories are reactivated through exposure to a generalization stimulus (GS, context B) and later tested for that same generalization stimulus (ABB design). However, this amnestic intervention leaves fear expression intact when at test animals are instead presented with the original training stimulus (ABA design) or a novel generalization stimulus (ABC design). The underlying mechanisms of post-reactivation memory malleability and of MDZ-induced amnesia for a generalization context remain largely unknown. Here, we evaluated whether, like typical CS-mediated (or AAA) post-reactivation amnesia, GS-mediated (ABB) post-reactivation amnesia displays key features of a destabilization-based phenomenon. We first show that ABB post-reactivation amnesia is critically dependent on prediction error at the time of memory reactivation and provide evidence for its temporally graded nature. In line with the known role of GluN2B-NMDA receptor activation in memory destabilization, we further demonstrate that pre-reactivation administration of ifenprodil, a selective antagonist of GluN2B-NMDA receptors, prevents MDZ-induced ABB amnesia. In sum, our data reveal that ABB MDZ-induced post-reactivation amnesia exhibits the hallmark features of a destabilization-dependent phenomenon. Implication of our findings for a reconsolidation-based account of post-reactivation amnesia are discussed.

Reactivation-Dependent Amnesia for Contextual Fear Memories: Evidence for Publication Bias

Research on memory reconsolidation has been booming in the last two decades, with numerous high-impact publications reporting promising amnestic interventions in rodents and humans. However, our own recently-published failed replication attempts of reactivation-dependent amnesia for fear memories in rats suggest that such amnestic effects are not always readily found and that they depend on subtle and possibly uncontrollable parameters. The discrepancy between our observations and published studies in rodents suggests that the literature in this field might be biased. The aim of the current study was to gauge the presence of publication bias in a well-delineated part of the reconsolidation literature. To this end, we performed a systematic review of the literature on reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents, followed by a statistical assessment of publication bias in this sample. In addition, relevant researchers were contacted for unpublished results, which were included in the current analyses. The obtained results support the presence of publication bias, suggesting that the literature provides an overly optimistic overall estimate of the size and reproducibility of amnestic effects. Reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents is thus less robust than what is projected by the literature. The moderate success of clinical studies may be in line with this conclusion, rather than reflecting translational issues. For the field to evolve, replication and non-biased publication of obtained results are essential. A set of tools that can create opportunities to increase transparency, reproducibility and credibility of research findings is provided.

Destabilizing Different Strengths of Fear Memories Requires Different Degrees of Prediction Error During Retrieval

Reactivation of consolidated memories can induce a labile period, in which these reactivated memories might be susceptible to change and need reconsolidation. Prediction error (PE) has been recognized as a necessary boundary condition for memory destabilization. Moreover, memory strength is also widely accepted as an essential boundary condition to destabilize fear memory. This study investigated whether different strengths of conditioned fear memories require different degrees of PE during memory reactivation in order for the memories to become destabilized. Here, we assessed the fear-potentiated startle and skin conductance response, using the post-retrieval extinction procedure. A violation of expectancy (PE) was induced during retrieval to reactivate enhanced (unpredictable-shock) or ordinary (predictable-shock) fear memories that were established the day before. Results showed that a PE retrieval before extinction can prevent the return of predictable-shock fear memory but cannot prevent the return of unpredictable-shock fear memory, indicating that a single PE is insufficient to destabilize enhanced fear memory. Therefore, we further investigated whether increasing the degree of PE could destabilize enhanced fear memory using different retrieval strategies (multiple PE retrieval and unreinforced CS retrieval). We found that spontaneous recovery of enhanced fear memory was prevented in both retrieval strategies, but reinstatement was only prevented in the multiple PE retrieval group, suggesting that a larger amount of PE is needed to destabilize enhanced fear memory. The findings suggest that behavioral updating during destabilization requires PE, and the degree of PE needed to induce memory destabilization during memory retrieval depends on the strength of fear memory. The study indicates that memory reconsolidation inference can be used to destabilize stronger memories, and the findings shed lights on the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorders and anxiety disorders.

Generalization and recovery of post-retrieval amnesia

Selective amnesia for previously established memories can be induced by administering drugs that impair protein synthesis shortly after memory reactivation. Competing theoretical accounts attribute this selective post-retrieval amnesia to drug-induced engram degradation (reconsolidation blockade) or to incorporation of sensory features of the reactivation experience into the memory representation, hampering later retrieval in a drug-free state (memory integration). Here we present evidence that critically challenges both accounts. In contextual fear conditioning in rats, we find that amnesia induced by administration of midazolam (MDZ) after reexposure to the training context A generalizes readily to a similar context B. Amnesia is also observed when animals are exposed to the similar context B prior to MDZ administration and later tested for fear to context B but recovers when instead testing for fear to the original training context A or an equally similar but novel context C. Next to their theoretical implications for the nature of forgetting, our findings raise important questions about the viability of reconsolidation-based interventions for the treatment of emotional disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Investigating the efficacy of the reminder-extinction procedure to disrupt contextual threat memories in humans using immersive Virtual Reality

Upon reactivation, consolidated memories can enter a temporary labile state and require restabilisation, known as reconsolidation. Interventions during this reconsolidation period can disrupt the reactivated memory. However, it is unclear whether different kinds of memory that depend on distinct brain regions all undergo reconsolidation. Evidence for reconsolidation originates from studies assessing amygdala-dependent memories using cue-conditioning paradigms in rodents, which were subsequently replicated in humans. Whilst studies providing evidence for reconsolidation of hippocampus-dependent memories in rodents have predominantly used context conditioning paradigms, studies in humans have used completely different paradigms such as tests for wordlists or stories. Here our objective was to bridge this paradigm gap between rodent and human studies probing reconsolidation of hippocampus-dependent memories. We modified a recently developed immersive Virtual Reality paradigm to test in humans whether contextual threat-conditioned memories can be disrupted by a reminder-extinction procedure that putatively targets reconsolidation. In contrast to our hypothesis, we found comparable recovery of contextual conditioned threat responses, and comparable retention of subjective measures of threat memory, episodic memory and exploration behaviour between the reminder-extinction and standard extinction groups. Our result provide no evidence that a reminder before extinction can prevent the return of context conditioned threat memories in humans.

Limited replicability of drug-induced amnesia after contextual fear memory retrieval in rats

With the ultimate goal of investigating boundary conditions for post-reactivation amnesia, we set out to replicate studies in which systemic, post-reactivation administration of midazolam, propranolol, or cycloheximide resulted in amnesia for contextual fear memories. Our experiments involved conceptual as well as exact replications of previously published studies. In most of our experiments, we adopted a procedure that conformed to the standard 3-day protocol typically used in the literature, with contextual fear conditioning on day 1, unreinforced re-exposure to the conditioning context followed by systemic injection of the amnestic drug on day 2, and a memory retention test on day 3. Given the plethora of successful studies with large effects sizes and the absence of any failed replications in the literature, we were surprised to find that we were generally unable to replicate those findings. Our results suggest that post-reactivation amnesia by systemic drug administration in rats is more difficult to obtain than what would be expected based on published empirical reports. At present, it remains unclear which conditions determine the success of this procedure.

Post-weaning housing conditions influence freezing during contextual fear conditioning in adult rats

The present study aimed to investigate the influence of housing conditions on contextual fear memory malleability. Male Wistar rats were housed in enriched, standard, or impoverished conditions after weaning and remained in these conditions throughout the entire experiment. After six weeks into those housing conditions, all animals underwent a 3-day protocol including contextual fear conditioning (day 1), memory reactivation followed by systemic administration of midazolam or vehicle (day 2), and a retention test (day 3). Percentage freezing was used as a behavioral measure of contextual fear. There was no evidence for an effect of housing conditions on the sensitivity of contextual fear memory to amnestic effects of post-reactivation midazolam administration, and no indication for amnestic effects of post-reactivation midazolam overall (including in the standard group). The inability to replicate previous demonstrations of post-reactivation amnesia using the same protocol underscores the subtle nature of post-reactivation pharmacological memory interference. Notably, impoverished housing resulted in a decrease in contextual freezing during contextual fear conditioning, reactivation and retention testing, compared to enriched and standard housing conditions. This observation warrants caution when interpreting the results from experiments regarding effects of housing on fear memory processes, particularly when freezing is used as a measure of fear.

Reminder duration determines threat memory modification in humans

Memory reminders can return a memory into an unstable state such that it will decay unless actively restabilized into long-term memory through reconsolidation. Exposure to a memory reminder, however, does not always lead to destabilization. The 'trace dominance' principle posits that the extent of exposure to memory reminders governs memory susceptibility to disruption. Here, we provide a first systematic investigation of reminder duration effects on threat memory modification in humans. Reminder duration was parametrically varied across 155 participants in a three-day protocol. We found that short reminders (1 s and 4 s) made the memory prone to interference from post-retrieval extinction, suggesting that the memory had been updated. In contrast, no reminder or long reminders (30 s and 3 min) made the memory resistant to such interference, and robustly return. Reminder duration therefore influences memory stability and may be a critical determinant of therapeutic efficacy.

Transcriptional Regulation Involved in Fear Memory Reconsolidation

Memory reconsolidation has been demonstrated to offer a potential target period during which the fear memories underlying fear disorders can be disrupted. Reconsolidation is a labile stage that consolidated memories re-enter after memories are reactivated. Reactivated memories, induced by cues related to traumatic events, are susceptible to strengthening and weakening. Gene transcription regulation and protein synthesis have been suggested to be required for fear memory reconsolidation. Investigating the transcriptional regulation mechanisms underlying reconsolidation may provide a therapeutic method for the treatment of fear disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the therapeutic effect of treating a fear disorder through interfering with reconsolidation is still contradictory. In this review, we summarize several transcription factors that have been linked to fear memory reconsolidation and propose that transcription factors, as well as related signaling pathways can serve as targets for fear memory interventions. Then, we discuss the application of pharmacological and behavioral interventions during reconsolidation that may or not efficiently treat fear disorders.