| Literature DB >> 30341278 |
L G Hommers1,2,3, J Richter4, Y Yang5, A Raab6,7,8, C Baumann9, K Lang9, M A Schiele10, H Weber9, A Wittmann11, C Wolf9, G W Alpers12, V Arolt13, K Domschke10, L Fehm14, T Fydrich14, A Gerlach15, A T Gloster16, A O Hamm4, S Helbig-Lang17,18, T Kircher5, T Lang17,19, C A Pané-Farré4, P Pauli20, B Pfleiderer21, A Reif22, M Romanos23, B Straube5, A Ströhle11, H-U Wittchen18,24, S Frantz7,25, G Ertl7,25, M J Lohse7,26, U Lueken9,14, J Deckert9,7.
Abstract
Increased sympathetic noradrenergic signaling is crucially involved in fear and anxiety as defensive states. MicroRNAs regulate dynamic gene expression during synaptic plasticity and genetic variation of microRNAs modulating noradrenaline transporter gene (SLC6A2) expression may thus lead to altered central and peripheral processing of fear and anxiety. In silico prediction of microRNA regulation of SLC6A2 was confirmed by luciferase reporter assays and identified hsa-miR-579-3p as a regulating microRNA. The minor (T)-allele of rs2910931 (MAFcases = 0.431, MAFcontrols = 0.368) upstream of MIR579 was associated with panic disorder in patients (pallelic = 0.004, ncases = 506, ncontrols = 506) and with higher trait anxiety in healthy individuals (pASI = 0.029, pACQ = 0.047, n = 3112). Compared to the major (A)-allele, increased promoter activity was observed in luciferase reporter assays in vitro suggesting more effective MIR579 expression and SLC6A2 repression in vivo (p = 0.041). Healthy individuals carrying at least one (T)-allele showed a brain activation pattern suggesting increased defensive responding and sympathetic noradrenergic activation in midbrain and limbic areas during the extinction of conditioned fear. Panic disorder patients carrying two (T)-alleles showed elevated heart rates in an anxiety-provoking behavioral avoidance test (F(2, 270) = 5.47, p = 0.005). Fine-tuning of noradrenaline homeostasis by a MIR579 genetic variation modulated central and peripheral sympathetic noradrenergic activation during fear processing and anxiety. This study opens new perspectives on the role of microRNAs in the etiopathogenesis of anxiety disorders, particularly their cardiovascular symptoms and comorbidities.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30341278 PMCID: PMC6195525 DOI: 10.1038/s41398-018-0278-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Psychiatry ISSN: 2158-3188 Impact factor: 6.222
Fig. 1MicroRNA-mediated regulation of SLC6A2 expression.
Data show mean repression of normalized firefly luciferase activity upon cotransfection of a dual luciferase reporter vector containing the 3’UTR of SLC6A2 with the microRNA as indicated and 95% confidence intervals. Data were normalized to same-well renilla activity as well as to the activity of a no 3’UTR-containing vector (n = 5 technical triplicates). The 95% confidence intervals of all microRNAs shown were outside the 95% confidence interval of the negative control microRNA ath-miR-159a (95% CI [98.2, 109.7]) and thus considered to be significantly regulating SLC6A2
Genetic association analysis in a case–control sample
| SNP | Gene | MAF | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Controls | ||||
| rs1333953 |
| 0.356 | 0.353 | 0.887 | 0.896 |
| rs1760512 |
| 0.395 | 0.400 | 0.478 | 0.832 |
| rs10874892 |
| 0.239 | 0.237 | 0.836 | 0.901 |
| rs11165236 |
| 0.221 | 0.240 | 0.492 | 0.299 |
| rs4847356 |
| 0.233 | 0.231 | 0.490 | 0.902 |
| rs2286755 |
| 0.162 | 0.164 | 0.952 | 0.919 |
| rs7252448 |
| 0.253 | 0.253 | 0.443 | 0.981 |
| rs12050652 |
| 0.422 | 0.463 | 0.111 | 0.065 |
| rs2910931 |
| 0.431 | 0.368 |
|
|
| rs66683138 |
| 0.252 | 0.226 | 0.330 | 0.175 |
| rs522881 |
| 0.441 | 0.423 | 0.517 | 0.420 |
| rs554687 |
| 0.430 | 0.438 | 0.440 | 0.701 |
| rs2582372 |
| 0.146 | 0.183 |
|
|
| rs17384485 |
| 0.361 | 0.348 | 0.616 | 0.531 |
| rs10432476 |
| 0.453 | 0.452 | 0.566 | 0.995 |
| rs1046668 |
| 0.173 | 0.163 | 0.829 | 0.550 |
| rs7194256 |
| 0.139 | 0.139 | 0.658 | 0.382 |
Single-nucleotide polymorphisms flanking genes as indicated were genotyped. Association with the diagnosis of panic disorder was calculated for an additive as well as an allelic genetic model. Nominally significant associations are highlighted in bold letters. Upon correction for multiple testing, association of rs2910931 with panic disorder (pc(allelic) = 0.069) remained at a trend toward significance
Fig. 2Dual luciferase reporter assay for modulation of MIR579 expression by upstream genetic variation and hsa-miR-579-3p-mediated regulation of anxiety candidate gene expression.
a Data show mean relative firefly luciferase activity under a minimal promoter sequence containing the (A)- and (T)-allele of rs2910931 upstream of MIR579 as indicated. Data were normalized to same-well renilla activity and are shown as mean and standard error (n = 7 technical triplicates, *p < 0.05 using a two-sided t test). b Data show mean repression of normalized firefly luciferase upon cotransfection with hsa-miR-579-3p and ath-miR159a (negative control) as indicated. Dual luciferase reporter assays contained the 3’UTR of the corresponding receptor genes as indicated. Data were normalized to negative-control-3’UTR relative firefly activity for each microRNA as indicated (n = 5 technical triplicates, *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.005)
Genetic imaging analysis of rs2910931
| Contrast/region | Side | Voxels |
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main group effects | |||||||
| Acquisition first phase | No differential activation | ||||||
| Acquisition second phase | |||||||
| Inferior occipital lobe | L | 156 | −12 | −96 | −10 | 17.12 | <0.001 |
| Post hoc | |||||||
| Acquisition second phase: risk>no risk | No differential activation | ||||||
| Acquisition second phase: no risk>risk | |||||||
| Inferior occipital lobe | L | 225 | −12 | −96 | −10 | 4.14 | <0.001 |
| Extinction first phase | No differential activation | ||||||
| Extinction second phase | |||||||
| Midbrain (incl. right hippocampus) | 550 | 0 | −24 | −16 | 16.85 | <0.001 | |
| Inferior parietal lobe | L | 159 | −54 | −42 | 54 | 9.62 | 0.002 |
| Hippocampus (2 mm dev.) | L | 355 | 30 | −4 | −18 | 12.33 | 0.001 |
| Amygdalab | L | 16 | −30 | −2 | −20 | 12.04 | 0.013 |
| Post hoc | |||||||
| Extinction second phase: risk>no risk | |||||||
| Midbrain (incl. right hippocampus) | 1018 | 0 | −24 | −16 | 4.11 | <0.001 | |
| Inferior parietal lobe | L | 272 | −54 | −42 | 54 | 3.10 | 0.001 |
| Hippocampus (2 mm dev.) | L | 737 | 30 | −4 | −18 | 3.51 | <0.001 |
| Amygdalab | L | 36 | −30 | −2 | −20 | 3.47 | 0.007 |
| Lingual gyrus | L | 196 | −4 | −78 | −4 | 3.15 | 0.001 |
| Extinction second phase: no risk>risk | No differential activation | ||||||
| Group × CS interaction effects | |||||||
| Acquisition first phase | |||||||
| Inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis | L | 235 | −44 | 28 | 26 | 13.11 | <0.001 |
| Post hoc | |||||||
| Acquisition first phase: risk>no risk (CS + unpaired > CS−) | No differential activation | ||||||
| Acquisition first phase: no risk>risk (CS + unpaired > CS−) | |||||||
| Inferior frontal gyrus pars triangularis | L | 429 | −44 | 28 | 26 | 3.62 | <0.001 |
| Acquisition second phase | |||||||
| Caudate nucleus | L | 378 | −8 | 14 | 12 | 13.17 | <0.001 |
| Middle temporal gyrus (4.47 mm dev.) | R | 192 | 36 | −60 | 4 | 12.50 | <0.001 |
| Post hoc | |||||||
| Acquisition second phase: risk>no risk (CS + unpaired > CS−) | |||||||
| Caudate nucleus | L | 564 | −8 | 14 | 12 | 4.31 | <0.001 |
| Middle temporal gyrus (4.47 mm dev.) | R | 348 | 36 | −60 | 4 | 3.55 | <0.001 |
| Acquisition second phase: no risk > risk (CS + unpaired > CS−) | No differential activation | ||||||
| Extinction first phase | |||||||
| Supplementary motor area | L | 735 | −2 | 22 | 60 | 22.76 | <0.001 |
| Caudate nucleus (4.90 mm dev.) | R | 219 | 20 | 12 | 28 | 12.92 | <0.001 |
| Middle frontal gyrus (3.46 mm dev.) | L | 218 | −26 | 16 | 32 | 12.65 | <0.001 |
| Post hoc | |||||||
| Extinction first phase: risk>no risk (CS +> CS−) | |||||||
| Supplementary motor area | L | 1599 | −2 | 22 | 60 | 4.77 | <0.001 |
| Middle cingulate gyrus | L | 543 | −4 | −14 | 42 | 3.30 | 0.001 |
| Caudate nucleus (4.90 mm dev.) | R | 432 | 20 | 12 | 28 | 3.59 | <0.001 |
| Extinction first phase: no-risk > risk (CS +> CS−) | No differential activation | ||||||
| Extinction second phase | No differential activation | ||||||
Main genotype effect of rs2910931 and genotype × CS interaction effects on brain activation patterns during fear acquisition and extinction are given as cluster peak voxels. Risk group status was defined as carrying at least one minor (T)-allele. During the acquisition, only CS+ trials that were not paired with the US were used for analyses
L left, R right, voxel number of voxels per cluster, x, y, z MNI coordinates, dev deviation (in mm) from the identified anatomical structure using anatomic automatic labeling (aal). CS+ conditioned stimulus followed by the unconditioned stimulus (US) in 50% of trials during acquisition, CS− conditioned stimulus never followed by the US
aUncorrected p values of whole-brain results with a minimum cluster size of 142 contiguous voxels are given, indicating p < 0.05 upon correction for multiple comparisons
bSmall volume correction using aal masks (FWE correction at p < 0.05) with a cluster forming threshold of p < 0.001 was applied
Fig. 3Neurofunctional activation patterns of fear-related brain structures in healthy controls during fear conditioning and extinction.
Healthy controls (n = 40) were subjected to an experimental fear conditioning and extinction task. Activation of brain regions was analyzed by means of fMRI as a function of minor (T)-alleles of rs2910931 (TT+AT: n = 25; AA: n = 15). Beta values from significant clusters were extracted and used for bar graph visualization (a.u.). a Activation of midbrain/periaqueductal gray, amygdala, and hippocampus regardless of conditioned stimulus presented during the second half of the extinction phase as a function of rs2910931 genotype group. b Interaction of rs2910931 genotype group with the conditioned stimulus presented during the first half of the extinction phase. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001. CS+ conditioned stimulus that was followed by the unconditioned stimulus (US); CS− conditioned stimulus that was never followed by the US
Fig. 4Increase of heart rate in PD patients during the behavioral avoidance test.
Patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia (n = 276: n(AA) = 95, n(AT) = 129, n(TT) = 52) were subjected to experimental panic exposition using the behavioral avoidance test. Data show the mean difference with standard error of heart rates between the last minute of the anticipation phase and the first minute of the exposure phase during the behavioral avoidance test as a function of rs2910931 genotype. *p < 0.05