4.7 Article

Neuropeptide-S (NPS) Receptor Genotype Modulates Basolateral Amygdala Responsiveness to Aversive Stimuli

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 36, 期 9, 页码 1879-1885

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/npp.2011.73

关键词

neuropeptide-S; emotion; amygdala; anxiety; fMRI; imaging genetics

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SFB-TRR-58]
  2. Innovative Medizinische Forschung (IMF) [DA120309, DA211012]
  3. Rolf-Dierichs-Stiftung [ZUW80037]
  4. Astra-Zeneca

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies point to a role of neuropeptide-S (NPS) in the etiology of anxiety disorders. In animal models, NPS and its receptor (NPSR) were shown to be highly expressed in the amygdala, a central structure in the fear circuit, also known to be hyper-responsive in anxiety disorders. Recently, a functional polymorphism in the NPSR gene (rs324981 A/T) has been associated with panic disorder and anxiety sensitivity. However, the role of NPSR gene variation in the modulation of fear-related amygdala responsiveness remains to be clarified. In 79 healthy subjects genotyped for NPSR rs324981, amygdala responses were assessed by means of fMRI. The participants were presented with fear-relevant faces in a robust emotion-processing paradigm frequently used to study amygdala responsiveness. We observed a strong association of NPSR T-alleles with right amygdala responsiveness to fear-relevant faces. The association peak was located in the BLA. Furthermore, responsiveness to aversive stimuli within this BLA cluster predicted a participant's self-reported harm avoidance but not depression level. We conclude that NPSR genotype is associated with increased amygdala responsiveness to fear-relevant stimuli. Thereby, NPSR rs324981 apparently causes an indirect effect on anxiety-related traits and potentially contributes to the pathogenesis of anxiety disorders by shaping fear-related limbic activity. Neuropsychopharmacology (2011) 36, 1879-1885; doi:10.1038/npp.2011.73; published online 27 April 2011

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据