| Literature DB >> 34248487 |
Marie Sprengell1, Britta Kubera1, Achim Peters1.
Abstract
This work joins a series that methodically tests the predictions of the Selfish-Brain theory. The theory postulates a vital ability of the mammalian brain, namely to give priority to its own energy metabolism. The brain behaves "selfishly" in this respect. For the cerebral artery occlusion studied here, the theory predicts an increase in blood glucose concentration, what becomes the hypothesis to be tested. We conducted a systematic review of cerebral-artery-occlusion papers to test whether or not the included studies could confirm this hypothesis. We identified 239 records, screened 231 works by title or abstract, and analyzed 89 by full text. According to strict selection criteria (set out in our PROSPERO preregistration, complying with PRISMA guidelines), 7 papers provided enough information to decide on the hypothesis. Our hypothesis could be fully confirmed for the 3 to 24 h after the onset of a transient 2 h or permanent occlusion. As for the mechanism, the theory predicts that the energy-deprived brain suppresses insulin secretion via the sympathoadrenal system, thereby preventing insulin-mediated glucose uptake into muscle and fat and, as a result, enhancing insulin-independent glucose uptake via the blood-brain barrier. Evidence from our included studies actually demonstrated cerebral insulin suppression. In all, the current work confirms the second major prediction of the Selfish-Brain theory that relates to a proximal bottleneck of the cerebral supply chain, cerebral artery occlusion. Its first major prediction relates to a distal supply bottleneck, caloric restriction, and is fulfilled as shown by our previous work, whereas the prediction of the long held gluco-lipostatic theory, which sees the brain as only passively supplied, is violated (Sprengell et al., 2021). The crucial point was that caloric restriction elicits smaller changes in mass (energy) in the brain than in the body. Taken together, the evidence from the current and previous work clearly shows that the most accurate predictions are possible with a theory that views the brain as an independently self-regulating energy compartment occupying a primary position in energy metabolism.Entities:
Keywords: blood glucose; brain energy metabolism; cerebral artery occlusion; cerebral insulin suppression; selfish-brain theory; systematic review
Year: 2021 PMID: 34248487 PMCID: PMC8264130 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.685031
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
Figure 1The cerebral supply chain. Energy is transferred from the environment through the body to the brain, the end consumer of the supply chain. The characteristic of supply chains is the procurement on demand, also called pull principle. When the brain needs energy, the brain-pull demands it from the body. When the body needs energy, the body-pull demands it from the environment.
Figure 2The branched cerebral supply chain. The branching originates from the blood, transmitting energy either to the brain or to muscle or fat tissue. (A) Systematic reviews on two different bottlenecks in the cerebral supply chain. The first one deals with a distal bottleneck, i.e. caloric restriction, and is already published (Sprengell et al., 2021); the second one, the current work, deals with a proximal bottleneck, i.e. cerebral artery occlusion. (B) Cerebral insulin suppression induced by cerebral artery occlusion. Intraneuronal ATP depletion activates the sympathetic nervous system and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, which both rigorously suppress pancreatic ß-cell secretion, and in so doing block insulin-dependent glucose uptake in muscle and fat tissue. The portion of glucose that is prevented from entering muscle and fat tissue accumulates in the blood, facilitating transfer across the blood-brain barrier via the insulin-independent pathway, allowing partial compensation when brain supply is compromised.
Figure 3Flowchart through different phases of the systematic review modified according to Moher's publication (Moher et al., 2009).
Characteristics and results of included studies.
| Boujon et al. ( | 129S6/ SvEv mice, ~ 10 weeks old, male | Exp: 5 | BG was measured at baseline, on day 3, and on day 7 | Two-way ANOVA followed by Turkey's multiple comp. test. Mean ±S.E.M. | Exp: 110 ± | |||||
| Harada et al. ( | ddY mice, 5 weeks old, male | Exp: 8-17 | BG was measured at baseline and afterwards at 1h, 3h, 6h, 12h, on day 1, 3 and 5. Increment of BG was calculated. | One-way ANOVA followed by paired student's | Exp: 0±sns,[ | Insulin, insulin after glucose load | ||||
| Li et al. ( | Sprague-Dawley rats, male | Exp: 23 | BG was measured before, during, and after 2h occlusion | One-way ANOVA | Data not shown | Data not shown. Q: “no significant changes of …. glucose levels… between different groups”; test statistics not shown. | Body weight (data not shown) | |||
| Wang et al. ( | Sprague- Dawley rats, adult, male | Exp: 6 Con: 6 | BG was measured hourly over 24h | Student‘s | Exp: 83 | Cortisol, glucagon, fasting insulin | ||||
| Wang et al. ( | Sprague- Dawley rats, adult, male | Exp: 8 Con: 8 | BG was measured at baseline and on day 1 | Student's unpaired | Exp: 81.1 ± 5.4ns, | Body weight, fasting insulin, epinephrine, norepi-nephrine | ||||
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ddY mice, 5 weeks old, male | Exp1: 17 Con1: 12 Exp2: 16 Con2: 8 | BG was measured at baseline and on day 1. Increment of BG was calculated | One-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe's test. Mean ±S.E.M. | Not shown | |||||
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ddY mice, 5 weeks old, male | Exp1: 7 Con1: 9 Exp2: 6 Con2: 7 | BG was measured at baseline and on day 1. Increment of BG was calculated | One-way ANOVA followed by the Scheffe's | Not shown | |||||
Only information from study arms meeting our inclusion criteria is presented. The sample sizes refer to the number of animals that survived the intervention and the observation period and whose outcomes were measured. Secondary outcomes relevant to our research question are shown in the last column. For time data, onset of ischemia is considered timepoint 0. Data are presented as means ± S.E.M. Abbreviations: Exp: experimental group; Con, Control group; BG, blood glucose; ns, not significant; Q.:Quote; S.D.: Standard deviation; S.E.M.: Standard error of the mean
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01.
One mouse out of six of the interventional group died.
Value taken from graph. Some of the values could only be estimated.
For the time course experiments, the authors used independent 8–17 mice in every indicated period; that is, they euthanized different numbers of animals at 6 h after the occlusion onset, 12 h, 1 day, 3 day, or 5 day and obtained the respective measurements.
Increment of blood glucose was determined by authors using the following formula: increment of BG = BG after occlusion – BG before occlusion.
Certain data points within the graphic were displayed so large that they concealed the S.E.M. markers. We estimate the radius of these graphically displayed points to be 5. The variable s stands accordingly for a S.E.M. of ≤ 5mg/dL.
Estimation of variances from the figures is not possible if the graphically represented data points of the intervention and control groups overlap.
Four out of 27 rats of the interventional group died.
The standard deviation was presented in the original paper. It was converted by the present reviewers to the standard error of the mean using the following formula: .
Glucose concentration is expressed in the unit mM in the original paper. The present reviewers have multiplied the concentration value by the conversion factor 18.02.
Risk of bias assessment.
| Boujon et al. ( | + | + | – | + | ? |
| Harada et al. ( | ? | + | + | – | + |
| Li et al. ( | + | - | – | – | + |
| Wang et al. ( | + | + | + | + | + |
| Wang et al. ( | + | + | ? | + | + |
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ? | + | + | + | + |
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ? | + | + | + | + |
The SYRCLE‘s tool (Hooijmans et al., .
Similar baseline characteristics in blood glucose concentration.
Attrition bias: 1 out of 6 mice (17%) in the MCAO group died; 1 out of 4 mice (25%) in the sham-operated group was excluded because of poor baseline rotarod performance.
First, the study was supported by Roche; Quote: “Roche did not play a role in the conduct of the experiments reported here, nor in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data, nor in the preparation of this manuscript.” Second, the anesthetics chloral hydrate and isoflurane used in all included studies may increase blood glucose. All included papers described that they used the same anesthesia in the sham control group, Boujon and coworkers probably did the same, but did not mention it explicitly.
The increment of blood glucose was presented and analyzed.
Quote “We eliminated mice with brain hemorrhage”; effect on results unclear.
No evidence for unequal housing conditions, conflict of interests or problems of the study design.
Neither baseline blood glucose concentrations nor any other blood glucose concentrations shown.
Attrition bias: 4 out of 27 (15%) mice of the intervention group died and were excluded from the analysis, whereas no rat died in the sham-operated control group. Without specifying any test statistics, Li and coworkers reported that they were unable to detect a statistical difference in blood glucose concentration between rats subjected to cerebral ischemia and sham-operated rats. Thus, it cannot be ruled out that the deceased and surviving rats differed in infarct size and blood glucose profile. In this uncertain situation, one would have liked to see the original blood glucose data.
Random allocation into study groups; randomization of subgroup allocation not explicitly mentioned.
No evidence for dropouts.
Initially there were 8 rats per subgroup, the result table mentions 6–8 rats per subgroup; reason remains unclear.
Figure 4Blood glucose changes 24 h after occlusion onset. (Left) Comparison of how experimental and sham-operated groups differ in their blood glucose changes from before to 24 h after the onset of transient 2 h cerebral artery occlusion. (Right) Comparison of how experimental and sham-operated groups differ in blood glucose concentrations at 24 h after onset of permanent occlusion. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, significant difference in blood glucose concentrations or their changes between experimental and sham-operated groups.
Hypothesis decision in the different ischemia phases.
| Boujon et al. ( | – | ||
| Harada et al. ( | – | + | – |
| Li et al. ( | – | ||
| Wang et al. ( | + | + | |
| Wang et al. ( | + | ||
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ++ | ||
| Yamazaki et al. ( | ++ |
“+” indicates “hypothesis could be confirmed”, “–” indicates “hypothesis could not be confirmed”, blank table field indicates that no test has been performed on the hypothesis. Clear evidence for the hypothesis is found for the intermediate phase. Reasons why the hypothesis could not be confirmed may include the measurements not being taken at the optimal time. The pattern of “+” and “–” suggests that it was too early in the early phase to detect an effect on blood glucose, and already too late in the late phase.
Hypothesis could be confirmed by two independent experiments in one single paper.