4.7 Review

Inflammation: A Proposed Intermediary Between Maternal Stress and Offspring Neuropsychiatric Risk

期刊

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 85, 期 2, 页码 97-106

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2018.08.018

关键词

Cytokine-glucocorticoid feedback; Cytokines; Hypothalamic pituitary adrenal; Pregnancy; Stress; Transgenerational

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [K23MH107831, K23MH102360, P50 MH099910]
  2. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [AI124084]
  3. Office of Research on Women's Health [P50 MH099919, K12HD085848]
  4. Brain and Behavior Research Foundation NARSAD Young Investigator Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

During pregnancy, programming of the fetal central nervous system establishes vulnerabilities for emergence of neuropsychiatric phenotypes later in life. Psychosocial influences during pregnancy, such as stressful life events and chronic stress, correlate with offspring neuropsychiatric disorders and inflammation, respectively. Stress promotes inflammation, but the role of inflammation as a mediator between maternal psychosocial stress and offspring neuropsychiatric outcomes has not been extensively studied in humans. This review summarizes clinical evidence linking specific types of stress to maternal inflammatory load during pregnancy. We propose that inflammation is a mediator in the relationship between psychosocial stress and offspring neuropsychiatric outcomes, potentially influenced by poor maternal glucocorticoid-immune coordination. We present relevant experimental animal research supporting this hypothesis. We conclude that clinical and preclinical research supports the premise that stress-induced maternal immune activation contributes in part to prenatal programming of risk. Programming of risk is likely due to a combination of vulnerabilities, including multiple or repeated inflammatory events; timing of such events; poor maternal regulation of inflammation; genetic vulnerability; and lifestyle contributors.

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