Tuesday, 20 January 2009

Prozac and Old Mice

A while back, I wrote about an important paper which cast doubt on the "neurogenesis hypothesis" of antidepressant drug action, which I summarized as
...the proposal that antidepressants work by promoting the survival and proliferation of new neurones in certain areas of the brain - the "neurogenesis hypothesis". Neurogenesis, the birth of new cells from stem cells, occurs in a couple of very specific regions of the adult brain, including the elaborately named subgranular zone (SGZ) of the dentate gyrus (DG) of the hippocampus. Many experiments on animals have shown that chronic stress, and injections of the "stress hormone" corticosterone, can suppress neurogenesis, while a wide range of antidepressants block this effect of stress and promote neurogenesis. (Other evidence shows that antidepressants probably do this by inducing the expression of neurotrophic signalling proteins, like BDNF.)
It's a popular theory at the moment, not least because it's the only real alternative to the older, much-maligned and certainly incomplete monoamine hypothesis of antidepressants. But the neurogenesis hypothesis has problems of its own. A new paper claims to add to what seems like a growing list of counter-examples: Ageing abolishes the effects of fluoxetine on neurogenesis.

The researchers, Couillard-Despres et. al. from the University of Regensburg in Germany, found that fluoxetine (Prozac) enhances hippocampal neurogenesis in mice - as expected - but found in addition that this only holds true in young mice. In middle-aged and older mice, there was no such effect. That's a new finding, and a very important one.

More specifically, the (male) mice were given injections of Prozac for two weeks each. Compared to mice given placebo injections, the mice on Prozac showed
increased survival and the frequency of neuronal marker expression in newly generated cells of the hippocampus in the young adult group (that is 100 days of age) only. No significant effects on neurogenesis could be detected in fluoxetine-treated adult and elderly mice (200 and over 400 days of age).
For mice, 100 days old corresponds to a human age of about 20 years; 200 days is 35 and 400 days is 65 years. The graph here shows the number of BrdU-labelled cells in the dentate gyrus, a measure of neural progenitor cell survival. As you can see, although Prozac robustly increased BrdU+ cell counts in the 100 day old mice, this effect was much less prominent (although perhaps still present a bit?) in the older mice.

It's already well known that hippocampal neurogenesis is age dependent. Young animals (and people) have lots of new neurones being generated, but the rate progressively and inevitably declines with age. This has always been a problem for the simple hypothesis that reduced neurogenesis causes depression, because if that were the case, we'd all be paralyzed by despair by the age of 50. Despite this, it remained plausible that antidepressants worked by increasing neurogenesis, but this new evidence suggests otherwise.

Or does it? What if it turns out that fluoxetine has no antidepressant-like effects in old rodents? In that case, the neurogenesis hypothesis would be supported, not weakened, by this evidence. The author's of the paper don't even consider this possibility, which is a little odd. They do note that antidepressants are effective in older people with depression, but given that this is a paper about mice that's not the same thing. Someone needs to find out whether Prozac has anti-depressant-like effects in the same kind of old mice as those used in this study. If so, the neurogenesis hypothesis will be looking pretty fragile.

This should also serve as a reminder that lab mice are animals, not research robots. They get old, like the rest of us, and research done only on young mice, or male mice, or a certain breed of mice, may not be applicable to others. I have two cats: if you stroke the grey one on the belly, she'll purr contentedly. But if you foolishly assume that the tabby one is the same, you'll get bitten pretty quickly...

ResearchBlogging.orgS Couillard-Despres, C Wuertinger, M Kandasamy, M Caioni, K Stadler, R Aigner, U Bogdahn, L Aigner (2009). Ageing abolishes the effects of fluoxetine on neurogenesis Molecular Psychiatry DOI: 10.1038/mp.2008.147

7 comments:

Martin Walker said...

very interesting.

As you imply, the data doesn't exclude the possibility of some degree of neurogenesis promotion in older mice. As far as I can tell from the diagrams, there is an increase from the Prozac even for 400+ day old mice, but it's within the margin of error.

Again as you point out, humans aren't mice and neurogenesis may be more responsive in an adult human.

I'm partial to the idea that neurogenesis suppression can cause mood depletion, and that stimulating neurogenesis can elevate mood. It just seems to make common sense. Neurogenesis, after all, creates circumstances for change in the brain. If your stuck in a depression, you need something to shift...

Martin
www.mindsparke.com

Anonymous said...

I read the report of the study. Maybe I missed something, did they say how long the study was for? I don't think so. Is it possible that neurogenesis occurs much later in older mice? Maybe it simply takes say 2 or 3 times longer for and signs of neurogenesis to appear. The healing process in older animals is much longer. My grandmother is 80 and she has been on 2 antidepressants without much success. I told her she needs to stick with the one she is on for at least 8 to 10 weeks and maybe stick with a higher dosage. I'm wondering if she will see a difference around that time or later. I do know that when I first took prozac, I experienced a dramatic turn around, a full 180 degrees, after 3 weeks, with no side effects. I was 22 then. As I have gotten older,I'm 36 now, I have noticed, when getting back on antidepressants it seems to be much longer before I really begin to feel better, and I experience more side effects. This may be due to my age, and other factors like alcohol abuse while on medications. So, now I take natural supplements as adjuncts that will hopefully contribute to the neurogenesis and the efficacy of the ssri I just started, like curcumin, ashwagandha, , fish oil(which I started taking 8 years ago along with zoloft and noticed difference withing the first week), vinpocetine, huperzine, ginko biloba, r lipoic acid, blueberries, vitamin D3, carnosine, and green tea extract(blueberry, carnosine, green tea, and vit, D may increase neuronal stem cells that contribute to neurogenesis) My point is that things obviously become more difficult to treat as we get older and we may need to do more than just take a pill that worked so well when we were younger. And, it may take much longer for older people to react the same way. I wouldn't be surprised if the older mice did eventually show signs of neurogenesis, just to a much lesser degree. Also, I don't think any of us really believe that affect that SSRIs have on our the serotonin receptors doesn't have some kind of direct influence on the way we feel. The is a reason why when I have initially started SSRI treatment that I looked like I was tripping on acid and felt way to hyper. And, after finding the right dose and feeling pretty good and "normal" for a while, I could not bear to be on half the amount for very long(I tried as the dosage seemed to work for other people). That said, I'm sure it is a combination of the brain healing, reversing damage, and reuptake of serotonin that makes the drugs effective.

I would also like to comment on the "placebo" controversy. All I know is that these medications really work. I do think there are many people that really do not need them and they are waaay overprescribed. Maybe there are a lot of people out there that simply do not need them to function and what they really need is good psychotherapy and cognitive therapy, which I think everyone should have at some point in their lives(hopefully sooner than later) Those people may react just as well to a placebo. Again, all I know is that these medications really work and they are very helpful for many people. That said, I do not believe I was born needing antidepressants, it is extremely complicated, as with many of us.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
prozac said...

Well, that's some truly intriguing data. However, as you've mentioned, not all the data is there and there might be factors that haven't been considered or accounted for yet. http://www.prozac.bz

Neuroskeptic said...

A spammer who makes intelligent comments about research? I never thought I'd see the day...

donny said...

Neurogenesis --that's work. Energy status of the cell is probably involved... if depression and deficient neurogenesis in young mice had an energy deficiency in common? Blocking availability of energy for the work of neurogenesis might then at the same time block the anti-depressive effect.

The hormones related to mood seem, every one of them, to be important to appetite, body fat levels, etc.

Anonymous said...

The Neurogenesis Hypothesis could still be true if the antidepressant effect was a result of the relative increase of neurogenesis, rather than the absolute. In this case, as a mouse ages, the fluoxetine-induced neurogenesis would decrease in relation to the overall trend of decreasing neurogenesis in the older brain.