Carla Nasca1, Caroline Menard2, Georgia Hodes3, Benedetta Bigio4, Catherine Pena3, Zachary Lorsch3, Danielle Zelli5, Anjali Ferris5, Veronika Kana3, Immanuel Purushothaman3, Josh Dobbin5, Marouane Nassim6, Paolo DeAngelis5, Miriam Merad7, Natalie Rasgon8, Michael Meaney9, Eric J Nestler3, Bruce S McEwen5, Scott J Russo3. 1. Harold and Margaret Milliken Hatch Laboratory of Neuroendocrinology, the Rockefeller University, New York, New York. Electronic address: cnasca@rockefeller.edu. 2. Fishberg Department of Neuroscience, Friedman Brain Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Department of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, CERVO Brain Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada. 3. Fishberg Department of Neuroscience, Friedman Brain Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 4. Harold and Margaret Milliken Hatch Laboratory of Neuroendocrinology, the Rockefeller University, New York, New York; Biostatistics, Center for Clinical and Translational Science, the Rockefeller University, New York, New York. 5. Harold and Margaret Milliken Hatch Laboratory of Neuroendocrinology, the Rockefeller University, New York, New York. 6. Sackler Program for Epigenetics and Psychobiology, Douglas Research Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 7. Department of Oncological Sciences, Tisch Cancer Institute and Immunology Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 8. Harold and Margaret Milliken Hatch Laboratory of Neuroendocrinology, the Rockefeller University, New York, New York; Center for Neuroscience in Women's Health, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 9. Sackler Program for Epigenetics and Psychobiology, Douglas Research Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada; Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies identified several separate risk factors for stress-induced disorders. However, an integrative model of susceptibility versus resilience to stress including measures from brain-body domains is likely to yield a range of multiple phenotypic information to promote successful adaptation to stress. METHODS: We used computational and molecular approaches to test whether 1) integrative brain-body behavioral, immunological, and structural domains characterized and predicted susceptibility or resilience to social defeat stress (SDS) in mice and 2) administration of acetyl-L-carnitine promoted resilience at the SDS paradigm. RESULTS: Our findings identified multidimensional brain-body predictors of susceptibility versus resilience to SDS. The copresence of anxiety, decreased hippocampal volume, and elevated systemic interleukin-6 characterized a susceptible phenotype that developed behavioral and neurobiological deficits after exposure to SDS. The susceptible phenotype showed social withdrawal and impaired transcriptomic-wide changes in the ventral dentate gyrus after SDS. At the individual level, a computational approach predicted whether a given animal developed SDS-induced social withdrawal, or remained resilient, based on the integrative in vivo measures of anxiety and immune system function. Finally, we provide initial evidence that administration of acetyl-L-carnitine promoted behavioral resilience at the SDS paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings of multidimensional brain-body predictors of susceptibility versus resilience to stress provide a starting point for in vivo models of mechanisms predisposing apparently healthy individuals to develop the neurobiological and behavioral deficits resulting from stress exposure. This framework can lead to novel therapeutic strategies to promote resilience in susceptible phenotypes.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies identified several separate risk factors for stress-induced disorders. However, an integrative model of susceptibility versus resilience to stress including measures from brain-body domains is likely to yield a range of multiple phenotypic information to promote successful adaptation to stress. METHODS: We used computational and molecular approaches to test whether 1) integrative brain-body behavioral, immunological, and structural domains characterized and predicted susceptibility or resilience to social defeat stress (SDS) in mice and 2) administration of acetyl-L-carnitine promoted resilience at the SDS paradigm. RESULTS: Our findings identified multidimensional brain-body predictors of susceptibility versus resilience to SDS. The copresence of anxiety, decreased hippocampal volume, and elevated systemic interleukin-6 characterized a susceptible phenotype that developed behavioral and neurobiological deficits after exposure to SDS. The susceptible phenotype showed social withdrawal and impaired transcriptomic-wide changes in the ventral dentate gyrus after SDS. At the individual level, a computational approach predicted whether a given animal developed SDS-induced social withdrawal, or remained resilient, based on the integrative in vivo measures of anxiety and immune system function. Finally, we provide initial evidence that administration of acetyl-L-carnitine promoted behavioral resilience at the SDS paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings of multidimensional brain-body predictors of susceptibility versus resilience to stress provide a starting point for in vivo models of mechanisms predisposing apparently healthy individuals to develop the neurobiological and behavioral deficits resulting from stress exposure. This framework can lead to novel therapeutic strategies to promote resilience in susceptible phenotypes.
Authors: Paul D Thomas; Michael J Campbell; Anish Kejariwal; Huaiyu Mi; Brian Karlak; Robin Daverman; Karen Diemer; Anushya Muruganujan; Apurva Narechania Journal: Genome Res Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Mario F Fraga; Esteban Ballestar; Maria F Paz; Santiago Ropero; Fernando Setien; Maria L Ballestar; Damia Heine-Suñer; Juan C Cigudosa; Miguel Urioste; Javier Benitez; Manuel Boix-Chornet; Abel Sanchez-Aguilera; Charlotte Ling; Emma Carlsson; Pernille Poulsen; Allan Vaag; Zarko Stephan; Tim D Spector; Yue-Zhong Wu; Christoph Plass; Manel Esteller Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-07-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Vaishnav Krishnan; Ming-Hu Han; Danielle L Graham; Olivier Berton; William Renthal; Scott J Russo; Quincey Laplant; Ami Graham; Michael Lutter; Diane C Lagace; Subroto Ghose; Robin Reister; Paul Tannous; Thomas A Green; Rachael L Neve; Sumana Chakravarty; Arvind Kumar; Amelia J Eisch; David W Self; Francis S Lee; Carol A Tamminga; Donald C Cooper; Howard K Gershenfeld; Eric J Nestler Journal: Cell Date: 2007-10-19 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Carmen Sandi; M Isabel Cordero; Annarosa Ugolini; Emilio Varea; Laura Caberlotto; Charles H Large Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: Ashley M Cunningham; Deena M Walker; Aarthi Ramakrishnan; Marie A Doyle; Rosemary C Bagot; Hannah M Cates; Catherine J Peña; Orna Issler; Casey Lardner; Caleb Browne; Scott J Russo; Li Shen; Eric J Nestler Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 6.167