BACKGROUND: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) involves an aberrant behavioral response to normal hormone secretion. Pathogenetic theories posit abnormal modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmission in the brain by neuroactive metabolites of progesterone (neurosteroids). In earlier transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies of the motor cortex, we showed that inhibition increases in the luteal phase, consistent with neurosteroid action at the GABA(A) receptor. Here, we studied women with PMS to see if their response to endogenous progesterone differed from that of control subjects. METHODS: We studied nine women with PMS and 14 control subjects during the midfollicular and luteal phases with paired TMS. Subthreshold conditioning TMS was followed by test stimulation that produced a motor evoked potential (MEP) in a hand muscle. We gave pairs at each of seven intervals (2-10 msec) and unconditioned stimuli, measuring the amplitude ratio of the average MEP from the pairs at each interval to that from the unconditioned stimuli (ratio < 1 = inhibition). RESULTS: Both groups showed the same follicular phase response to paired TMS. Control subjects showed more inhibition in the luteal phase. Women with PMS showed relative facilitation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first physiological evidence for an abnormal brain response to progesterone in PMS.
BACKGROUND:Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) involves an aberrant behavioral response to normal hormone secretion. Pathogenetic theories posit abnormal modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmission in the brain by neuroactive metabolites of progesterone (neurosteroids). In earlier transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies of the motor cortex, we showed that inhibition increases in the luteal phase, consistent with neurosteroid action at the GABA(A) receptor. Here, we studied women with PMS to see if their response to endogenous progesterone differed from that of control subjects. METHODS: We studied nine women with PMS and 14 control subjects during the midfollicular and luteal phases with paired TMS. Subthreshold conditioning TMS was followed by test stimulation that produced a motor evoked potential (MEP) in a hand muscle. We gave pairs at each of seven intervals (2-10 msec) and unconditioned stimuli, measuring the amplitude ratio of the average MEP from the pairs at each interval to that from the unconditioned stimuli (ratio < 1 = inhibition). RESULTS: Both groups showed the same follicular phase response to paired TMS. Control subjects showed more inhibition in the luteal phase. Women with PMS showed relative facilitation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first physiological evidence for an abnormal brain response to progesterone in PMS.
Authors: Pedro E Martinez; David R Rubinow; Lynnette K Nieman; Deloris E Koziol; A Leslie Morrow; Crystal E Schiller; Dahima Cintron; Karla D Thompson; Khursheed K Khine; Peter J Schmidt Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Xenia Protopopescu; Hong Pan; Margaret Altemus; Oliver Tuescher; Margaret Polanecsky; Bruce McEwen; David Silbersweig; Emily Stern Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-10-24 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Cynthia Neill Epperson; Brian Pittman; Kathryn Ann Czarkowski; Stephanie Stiklus; John Harrison Krystal; Christian Grillon Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2007-02-21 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Andrea J Rapkin; Steven M Berman; Mark A Mandelkern; Daniel H S Silverman; Melinda Morgan; Edythe D London Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2010-11-18 Impact factor: 13.382