How Genes Could Predict Who Will Get PTSD

National Journal
Aug. 13, 2014, 9:41 a.m.

Can you screen for posttrau­mat­ic stress dis­order in the same way you screen for breast can­cer? A new pa­per from re­search­ers at the Mount Sinai School of Medi­cine sug­gests that gene ex­pres­sion could re­veal which in­di­vidu­als are most likely to de­vel­op PTSD, a de­vel­op­ment that could ac­cel­er­ate the search for a ther­apy to ef­fect­ively pre­treat the dis­order through a pill.

The re­search­ers from the Icahn School of Medi­cine at Mount Sinai took a group of male and fe­male rats and trau­mat­ized them by ex­pos­ing them to the smell of cat ur­ine. Sev­en days later, the re­search­ers sep­ar­ated those rats that were dis­play­ing PTSD-like symp­toms from those that coped with the stress­ful event. An ana­lys­is of the gene ex­pres­sion in the an­im­als showed sup­pressed glu­c­o­cor­tic­oid re­cept­or sig­nal­ing in their brain and blood of the PTSD-stricken ro­dents.

The way your glu­c­o­cor­tic­oid re­cept­ors sig­nal in the face of trau­mat­ic stim­uli af­fects the way the hip­po­cam­pus and the amy­g­dala pro­cess the memory of events. The hip­po­cam­pus serves, in a way, as the brain’s Google. When a per­son is con­fron­ted with new ex­per­i­ences in the form of visu­al, aud­it­ory, and oth­er stim­uli, it’s the hip­po­cam­pus that searches through the brain’s memory to find rel­ev­ant files to in­form the per­son’s re­sponse. Loud noise = ex­plo­sion = run. The amy­g­dala con­trols the brain’s fear level, ef­fect­ing how we ex­per­i­ence stim­uli and how charged are our memor­ies after the fact. To carry the Google meta­phor a bit fur­ther, the amy­g­dala af­fects page rank. Glu­c­o­cor­tic­oid re­cept­or sig­nal­ing can change the way all of these parts of the brain work to­geth­er. The re­search re­vealed some of the path­ways and net­works of gene ex­pres­sion that al­low the re­cept­ors to go off track.

“We meas­ured 22,500 genes and when you meas­ure all those genes you can do com­pu­ta­tion­al ana­lys­is that gives you the tran­scrip­tion factors and the path­ways. So what you can do is you can un­der­stand, through com­pu­ta­tion, what the net­works are,” Dr. Rachel Ye­huda, dir­ect­or of the Trau­mat­ic Stress Stud­ies Di­vi­sion at Icahn School of Medi­cine at Mount Sinai and the study’s lead au­thor, told De­fense One.

Here’s what Ye­huda’s re­search means: We’re one step closer to treat­ing PTSD long be­fore it ru­ins the lives of those it af­fects and, in the case of sol­diers, costs the gov­ern­ment a lot of money. To fur­ther test their the­ory, the re­search­ers gave some of the rats a hor­mone called cor­ticos­t­er­one, (CORT “” equi­val­ent hor­mone of cortisol for ro­dents) about an hour after ex­pos­ing them to the cat ur­ine. They then re­tested them sev­en days later and found “in both sexes, CORT pre­vent­ive treat­ment was as­so­ci­ated with lower anxi­ety be­ha­vi­or in [pred­at­or-scent-stress-ex­posed] rats,” ac­cord­ing to their pa­per, “Ex­pres­sion Pro­fil­ing As­so­ci­ates Blood and Brain Glu­c­o­cor­tic­oid Re­cept­or Sig­nal­ing With Trauma-Re­lated In­di­vidu­al Dif­fer­ences in Both Sexes,” which was pub­lished in the Pro­ceed­ings of the Na­tion­al Academy of Sci­ences on Aug. 11.

The re­la­tion­ship between low cortisol, stress, and sus­cept­ib­il­ity to PTSD has been es­tab­lished for dec­ades, but ther­apies that use cortisol to pre­vent or pre­treat stress are still in the ex­per­i­ment­al phase, and some of the most am­bi­tious work is tak­ing place out­side of the United States.

To un­der­stand the fu­ture of PTSD dia­gnostics, you have to go to an emer­gency room in Is­rael.

Pic­ture an Is­raeli sol­dier walk­ing in­to a hos­pit­al after a rock­et at­tack. He’s dis­play­ing minor cuts but he’s more agit­ated than some of the oth­er vic­tims who have come in with far worse in­jur­ies. An at­tend­ing doc­tor gives the pa­tient a pill, not a sed­at­ive to change his mood but an ex­per­i­ment­al cortisol ther­apy, in the hopes of chan­ging the way the sol­dier’s brain is pro­cessing the event. If the treat­ment is suc­cess­ful, the memory of the bomb­ing has be­come less sa­li­ent and will lose its emo­tion­al charge. A per­son who would have de­veloped PTSD is spared the af­flic­tion. It’s re­search that Ye­huda has been col­lab­or­at­ing with on for about three years now un­der Joseph Zo­har, head of the psy­chi­atry de­part­ment at Is­rael’s Sheba Med­ic­al Cen­ter. The re­search is fun­ded by the Na­tion­al In­sti­tute of Men­tal Health.

Ye­huda’s work takes that re­search to an im­port­ant new level, help­ing, po­ten­tially, to en­sure that that ther­apy only goes to those in­di­vidu­als who would be­ne­fit from it so doc­tors aren’t juicing people’s cortisol levels willy-nilly. “The prob­lem in the idea of giv­ing a pro­phy­lact­ic treat­ment is that you don’t want to fix what isn’t broken. You wouldn’t want to try and pre­vent PTSD in someone you didn’t think was go­ing to get it.”

She says that a hand­held dia­gnost­ic tests cap­able of telling a mil­it­ary med­ic or an emer­gency-room nurse if the pa­tient that they’re deal­ing with is a good can­did­ate for a cortisol pill is tech­no­lo­gic­ally pos­sible today, but un­achiev­able without more data.

The De­fense De­part­ment has put ap­prox­im­ately $600,000 in­to Ye­huda’s re­search so far, through the award of an ini­tial concept grant of $150,000 and a sup­ple­ment­al grant of $450,000, and has in­ves­ted mil­lions more in clin­ic­al stud­ies.

Any dis­cus­sion of ge­net­ic dia­gnostics should touch on the policy im­plic­a­tions of know­ing which in­di­vidu­als are more or less sus­cept­ible to ill­nesses on the basis of mo­lecules. Is it pos­sible to sub­ject po­ten­tial mil­it­ary re­cruits to a ge­net­ic screen in or­der to de­term­ine which sol­diers have the greatest chance of de­vel­op­ing PTSD? Is it really so dif­fer­ent from the way that cer­tain ge­net­ic mark­ers such as the BRCA1 and the BRCA2 gene can in­dic­ate an el­ev­ated like­li­hood for de­vel­op­ing breast can­cer?

A ge­net­ic PTSD pre­screen­ing is pos­sible, but Ye­huda says it’s not the best use of the data (and cer­tainly not the goal of her re­search.) “Mo­lecu­lar in­form­a­tion alone should not de­term­ine someone’s fate,” she said. “The in­form­a­tion from gene ex­pres­sion is more use­ful as dia­gnos­is rather than a pre­dic­tion of you who you might be “¦ be­cause there are so many factors.”

In the same way that are there many ways to cope with an el­ev­ated risk for de­vel­op­ing breast can­cer (and also to avoid it without a mam­mo­graphy), so too can in­di­vidu­als take steps to pre­vent the de­vel­op­ment of PTSD even if they want to serve in high-stress en­vir­on­ments. “Gene ex­pres­sion bio­logy is not des­tiny. You can make be­ha­vi­or­al changes and oth­er changes “¦ even psy­cho­ther­apy can change these glu­c­o­cor­tic­oid mark­ers,” Ye­huda said. “We’re not us­ing those net­works to pre­dict the fu­ture. We’re us­ing the data to de­scribe the present mo­ment.”

What We're Following See More »
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.