1.
Reductions in anti-inflammatory gut bacteria are associated with depression in a sample of young adults.
Liu, RT, Rowan-Nash, AD, Sheehan, AE, Walsh, RFL, Sanzari, CM, Korry, BJ, Belenky, P
Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2020;88:308-324
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Alterations to the gut microbiota may be associated with depression and anxiety disorders through a pathway known as the gut-brain axis. Inflammation may be the mediator between the two, as individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) have reported high levels of inflammation, which the gut microbiota may have the capacity to protect against. This observational study of the gut microbiota of 90 young adults with MDD and 47 healthy controls aimed to determine the relationship between inflammatory gut microbiota and symptoms of depression. The results showed changes to several species of gut microbiota in those with MDD and that the level of change was related to MDD symptom severity. These changes were observed even in those taking psychotropic medications. Changes at the taxonomic level indicated that those with higher symptoms of depression had more pronounced differences compared with healthy controls. Although the observed differences were indicative of an inflammatory microbiome, no changes were observed in blood markers of inflammation between those individuals with MDD and healthy controls. It was concluded that the gut microbiome of individuals with MDD was different from healthy individuals in favour of an inflammatory environment. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that the status of the gut microbiota may be an important measure in individuals with MDD and that a treatment plan to ensure gut health is considered may help with symptoms of depression.
Abstract
We assessed the gut microbiota of 90 American young adults, comparing 43 participants with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 47 healthy controls, and found that the MDD subjects had significantly different gut microbiota compared to the healthy controls at multiple taxonomic levels. At the phylum level, participants with MDD had lower levels of Firmicutes and higher levels of Bacteroidetes, with similar trends in the at the class (Clostridia and Bacteroidia) and order (Clostridiales and Bacteroidales) levels. At the genus level, the MDD group had lower levels of Faecalibacterium and other related members of the family Ruminococcaceae, which was also reduced relative to healthy controls. Additionally, the class Gammaproteobacteria and genus Flavonifractor were enriched in participants with MDD. Accordingly, predicted functional differences between the two groups include a reduced abundance of short-chain fatty acid production pathways in the MDD group. We also demonstrated that the magnitude of taxonomic changes was associated with the severity of depressive symptoms in many cases, and that most changes were present regardless of whether depressed participants were taking psychotropic medications. Overall, our results support a link between MDD and lower levels of anti-inflammatory, butyrate-producing bacteria, and may support a connection between the gut microbiota and the chronic, low-grade inflammation often observed in MDD patients.
2.
Immediate and long-term consequences of COVID-19 infections for the development of neurological disease.
Heneka, MT, Golenbock, D, Latz, E, Morgan, D, Brown, R
Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2020;12(1):69
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Covid-19 may cause brain dysfunction evidenced by symptoms individuals experience once they have contracted the disease. Loss of smell, taste and confusion have all been reported by patients and a number of severe cases have reported incidences of stroke. These are all of concern, as Covid-19 can severely affect the elderly who ordinarily are the most likely to suffer from brain disorders. This small review paper of 27 studies stated that there are four possible ways in which Covid-19 may affect the brain, which put Covid-19 sufferers at an increased risk of long-term brain disorders. This was supported by findings, which showed one third of Covid-19 patients leave hospital with evidence of brain dysfunction. Inflammation was heavily reviewed by the authors as a possible causal factor. It was concluded that patients who survive Covid-19 infection are at an increased risk for developing brain disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, however it was acknowledged that further studies are required. Clinicians could use this study to understand the possible need for both short-term and long-term monitoring of brain function in individuals who have survived Covid-19, especially if they are elderly.
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests that infection with Sars-CoV-2 causes neurological deficits in a substantial proportion of affected patients. While these symptoms arise acutely during the course of infection, less is known about the possible long-term consequences for the brain. Severely affected COVID-19 cases experience high levels of proinflammatory cytokines and acute respiratory dysfunction and often require assisted ventilation. All these factors have been suggested to cause cognitive decline. Pathogenetically, this may result from direct negative effects of the immune reaction, acceleration or aggravation of pre-existing cognitive deficits, or de novo induction of a neurodegenerative disease. This article summarizes the current understanding of neurological symptoms of COVID-19 and hypothesizes that affected patients may be at higher risk of developing cognitive decline after overcoming the primary COVID-19 infection. A structured prospective evaluation should analyze the likelihood, time course, and severity of cognitive impairment following the COVID-19 pandemic.
3.
The Sleep-Immune Crosstalk in Health and Disease.
Besedovsky, L, Lange, T, Haack, M
Physiological reviews. 2019;99(3):1325-1380
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The interaction between sleep and immunity is an established phenomena. This thorough review article summarises sleep changes in response to both infectious and non-infectious immune system challenges and describes the role of sleep in supporting the immune system. Details are provided of how sleep affects the innate immune system (first line, rapid defence against infection) as well as the adaptive immune system (second line, delayed defence against infection), using a feedback system which promotes host defence. Sleep is associated with reduced infection risk and can improve infection outcome and vaccination responses. Sleep deprivation is also associated with chronic, low-grade inflammation. Nutrition Practitioners wishing to support immunity can focus on sleep as a simple lifestyle measure to enhance resilience.
Abstract
Sleep and immunity are bidirectionally linked. Immune system activation alters sleep, and sleep in turn affects the innate and adaptive arm of our body's defense system. Stimulation of the immune system by microbial challenges triggers an inflammatory response, which, depending on its magnitude and time course, can induce an increase in sleep duration and intensity, but also a disruption of sleep. Enhancement of sleep during an infection is assumed to feedback to the immune system to promote host defense. Indeed, sleep affects various immune parameters, is associated with a reduced infection risk, and can improve infection outcome and vaccination responses. The induction of a hormonal constellation that supports immune functions is one likely mechanism underlying the immune-supporting effects of sleep. In the absence of an infectious challenge, sleep appears to promote inflammatory homeostasis through effects on several inflammatory mediators, such as cytokines. This notion is supported by findings that prolonged sleep deficiency (e.g., short sleep duration, sleep disturbance) can lead to chronic, systemic low-grade inflammation and is associated with various diseases that have an inflammatory component, like diabetes, atherosclerosis, and neurodegeneration. Here, we review available data on this regulatory sleep-immune crosstalk, point out methodological challenges, and suggest questions open for future research.
4.
Pharmaceutical Interventions in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Literature-based Commentary.
Richman, S, Morris, MC, Broderick, G, Craddock, TJA, Klimas, NG, Fletcher, MA
Clinical therapeutics. 2019;41(5):798-805
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Myalgic encephalomyelitis, also known as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/ CFS), is a disease characterized by an inability to exert oneself physically, often coupled with a combination of other symptoms, including sleep disorders, severe unpredictable pain, and compromised cognitive abilities. The aim of this review was to delineate a number of the more prominent treatments for ME/CFS into different categories and evaluate the methods and results of corresponding drug trials. Results indicate that: • antiviral drugs appear to show limited efficacy in treating ME/CFS over a broad demographic. • there is a lack of clinical research focusing on the use of specific cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors [analgesic] to treat ME/CFS. • antidepressants may be of use in delivering improvements in the quality of life of patients with ME/CFS. • recalibration of endocrine-immune regulation may be involved in supporting the persistence of ME/CFS and may be responsible at least in part for its resistance to single agent interventions. Authors conclude that there is a great need for larger, longitudinal studies focused on a more clearly defined subset of ME/CFS as well as a greater consideration of potential synergies between interventions and the suitability of combination therapies.
Abstract
Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a debilitating disorder characterized by prolonged periods of fatigue, chronic pain, depression, and a complex constellation of other symptoms. Currently, ME/CFS has no known cause, nor are the mechanisms of illness well understood. Therefore, with few exceptions, attempts to treat ME/CFS have been directed mainly toward symptom management. These treatments include antivirals, pain relievers, antidepressants, and oncologic agents as well as other single-intervention treatments. Results of these trials have been largely inconclusive and, in some cases, contradictory. Contributing factors include a lack of well-designed and -executed studies and the highly heterogeneous nature of ME/CFS, which has made a single etiology difficult to define. Because the majority of single-intervention treatments have shown little efficacy, it may instead be beneficial to explore broader-acting combination therapies in which a more focused precision-medicine approach is supported by a systems-level analysis of endocrine and immune co-regulation.