Immunomodulation by conditioning: recent developments

Learned placebo responses in neuroendocrine and immune functions

The phenomenon of learned placebo responses in neuroendocrine and immune functions is a fascinating example of communication between the brain and both the endocrine and peripheral immune systems. In this chapter, we will give a short overview of afferent and efferent communication pathways, as well as the central mechanisms, which steer the behavioral conditioned immune response. Subsequently, we will focus on data that provides evidence for learned immune responses in experimental animals and learned neuroendocrine and immune placebo responses in humans. Finally, we will take a critical look at these learning protocols, to determine whether or not they can be considered a viable additional treatment option to pharmacological regimens in clinical routine. This is fundamental, since there are still a number of issues, which need to be solved, such as the potential reproducibility, predictability, and extinction of the learned neuroendocrine and immune responses. Together, these findings not only provide an excellent basis to increase our understanding of human biology but may also have far reaching clinical implications. They pave the way for the ultimate aim of employing associative learning protocols as supportive treatment strategies in pharmacological regimens. As a result, medication levels may be reduced, as well as their unwanted side effects, providing a maximized therapeutic outcome to the benefit of the patient.

The learned immune response: Pavlov and beyond

The ability to associate physiological changes with a specific flavor was most likely acquired during evolution as an adaptive strategy aimed at protecting the organism while preparing it for danger. The behaviorally conditioned or learned immune response is an exquisite example of the bidirectional communication between the central nervous system (CNS) and the peripheral immune system. How is it possible that specific immuno-modulating properties of a drug or substance (unconditioned stimulus) can be re-enlisted just by the mere re-exposure to a particular taste, odor or environment (conditioned stimulus)? To answer this key question, we review the neurobiological mechanism mediating this type of associative learning, as well as the pathways and mechanisms employed by the brain to harness the immune system during the execution of the conditioned immune response. Finally, we focus on the potential therapeutic relevance of such learned immune responses, and their re-conceptualization within the framework of "learned placebo effects".

Expectations and associations that heal: Immunomodulatory placebo effects and its neurobiology

The use of placebo may have accompanied healing and medical practices since their origins (Plato; Charmides, 155-156). Recent experimental data indicate that we would be well advised to further consider placebo effects in future therapeutic strategies, with a better knowledge of their potency, psychological basis and underlying neurobiological mechanisms. Current research in the areas of pain, depression and Parkinson's disease has uncovered some of the potential neurobiological mechanisms of placebo effects. These data indicate that conscious expectation and unconscious behavioral conditioning processes appear to be the major neurobiological mechanisms capable of releasing endogenous neurotransmitters and/or neurohormones that mimic the expected or conditioned pharmacological effects. To date, research on placebo responses affecting immune-related diseases is scarce, but there are consistent indications that skin and mucosal inflammatory diseases, in particular, are strongly modulated by placebo treatments. However, the brain's capability to modulate peripheral immune reactivity has been impressively demonstrated by paradigms of behavioral conditioning in animal experiments and human studies. Thus, placebo effects can benefit end organ functioning and the overall health of the individual through positive expectations and behavioral conditioning processes.

NK cell and CTL activities can be raised via conditioning of the CNS with unrelated unconditioned stimuli

Poly I:C, an inducer of interferon alpha and beta, and arecoline, a cholinergic muscarinic agonist, were used as unconditioned stimuli in conjunction with camphor odor to condition the augmentation of natural killer (NK) cell and cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) activities. This observation suggested that two unrelated unconditioned stimuli might be used to associate the signals, and induce mediators at recall that can raise natural killer cell activity. In animals stimulated with an alloantigen to induce CTL, we observed that either poly I:C or arecoline conditioned association, and recall with the same CS raised CTL activity. It appears that conditioning with different substrates can raise either native (NK cell activity) or acquired (CTL activity) immunity. The studies suggest that communication between the CNS and NK cells or CTL appear to take place through a common pathway(s).

Psychoneuroendocrine immunology: perception of stress can alter body temperature and natural killer cell activity

Psychoimmunology has been credited with using the mind as a way to alter immunity. The problem with this concept is that many of the current psychoimmunology techniques in use are aimed at alleviating stress effects on the immune system rather than at direct augmentation of immunity by the brain. Studies in animals provide a model that permits us to approach the difficulties associated with gaining an understanding of the CNS-immune system connection. A particular advantage of using animals over humans is that psychological and social contributions play a less prominent role for animals than for human subjects, since the animals are all inbred and reared under identical controlled conditions. If the insightful information provided by animal studies is correct, then psychotherapy for the treatment of diseases might be made more effective if some aspect of this knowledge is included in the design of the treatment. We emphasize conditioning as a regimen and an acceptable way to train the brain to remember an output pathway to raise immunity. We propose that a specific drug or perception (mild stress, represented by rotation, total body heating or handling) could substitute and kindle the same output pathway without the need for conditioning. If this view is correct, then instead of using conditioning, it may be possible to use an antigen to activate desired immune cells, and substitute a drug or an external environmental sensory stimulus (perception) to energize the output pathway to these cells. Alternatively, monitoring alterations of body temperature in response to a drug or perception might allow us to follow how effectively the brain is performing in altering immunity. Studies with animals suggest that there are alternative ways to use the mind to raise natural or acquired immunity in man.

Psychoneuroendocrine immunology: site of recognition, learning and memory in the immune system and the brain

How the interaction between the brain and immune system takes place has not been clearly defined. Because multiple changes are occurring simultaneously in all organ systems (e.g., cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, reproductive, renal, respiratory, immune, CNS), how many single systems interacts with the brain becomes extraordinarily difficult to understand. The problem boils down to developing an approach that not only allows one to study the whole organism and define the mediators of the interacting systems, but also permit one to establish the connection and physiologic relevance of the responses that are being evaluated. Conditioning, a phenomenon made popular by the work of Pavlov (1906, 1927), may provide insight into the pathways of communication between the brain and possibly any organ system of the body. Conditioning allows one to separate the afferent from the efferent circuits. That is, signals from the immune system to the CNS (IS-->CNS) can be effectively separated from signals from the CNS to immune system (CNS-->IS). This permits one to study each pathway individually. Simple, single association trial models to condition fever, natural killer (NK) cell and cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) activities have been developed to evaluate the pathways. Single trial learning is not new. Pavlov has observed that "The electric buzzer set going before administration of food established a conditioned alimentary reflex after only a single combination," whereas the reverse order of presentation failed to condition the animal (Pavlov 1927 p. 27). Thus, conditioning can be used to train the brain to activate the immune system and other organ systems participating in the response. During the course of the conditioned response, presumably the CNS via the hypothalamus integrates in a cohesive orderly fashion all input and output signals and coordinates the responses made by the brain to the organ systems. The odor of camphor, the conditioned stimulus (CS) can be associated with the response produced by an unconditioned stimulus (US). The unconditioned stimuli used are poly I:C to raise fever and nonimmunospecific NK cell activity or alloantigens to raise immunospecific CTL activity. The unconditioned stimulus serves only as a means to activate the immune system and unbalance the homeostasis so that a transient but new bidirectional communication loop can be established between the immune system and the CNS (IS<-->CNS). The expression of the conditioned response (i.e., elevation of fever, NK cell, or CTL activity) induced with the CS (odor stimulus) is an outcome of neural activity (CNS-->IS). This infers that during conditioning, the signals generated by the CS and US imprints a neural pathway located within the central nervous system and leaves behind a CS/US memory of the association. The immune activity (NK cell or CTL activity) which is modulated indicate that the memory pathway was activated in the brain of the animal expressing the conditioned response. The immune cells that are modulated can be considered to be casual bystander cells. These cells however must be in the proper (ready) state of activation to receive salient signals from the brain. Along with changes in the indicator cell population, other complex physiological processes are altered by the brain via sympathetic and neuroendocrine pathways to raise the fever response. These observations suggest that the physiological changes which are being evaluated such as fever, NK cell or CTL activities or perhaps blood pressure, heart rate, fat metabolism, oxygen consumption serve only as indicators (readouts), and infer that the CNS has made a coordinated reply in response to the CS signal.