Introduction: Chronic psychosocial stress (cPSS) is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, caused in part by dysregulation of the neural-hematopoietic-inflammatory axis and epigenetic changes. cPSS may also affect NF-kB dependent pathways, suggesting a potential link to accelerated CVD risk and health inequities for populations most impacted by adverse social determinants. Hypothesis: We propose cPSS associates with greater amygdala activity (AmygA), a stress marker, and splenic activity (SpleenA), a hematopoietic activation measure. This relates to higher pro-inflammatory cytokine levels, partially due to less DNA methylation of NF-kB pathway-related genes. Methods: 60 African American adults (93.3% female, mean age 61) with CVD risk, living in the Washington, D.C. area underwent 18 FDG PET/CT to evaluate AmygA and SpleenA. DNA methylation analysis assessed epigenetic associations of the NF- κ B1/2 gene in PBMCs and ELISA- measured serum IL-1β and TNFα. Multivariable regression analysis adjusted for atherosclerotic CVD 10-year risk score and BMI was used to examine associations. Results: Greater AmygA and SpleenA were significantly associated with one another (β=0.26; p=0.003) and both were associated with greater pro-inflammatory cytokines IL1-β (AmygA:β =0.36, SpleenA:β=0.72, p<0.05) and TNF-α (AmygA:β=0.31, SpleenA:β=0.58, p<0.05). Further, we identified 2 significant methylation sites out of 81 on the NF- κ B1/2 gene. Notably, AmygA and SpleenA were inversely associated with the NF-κB1 cg01983105 and cg07955720 methylation sites (Table). Conclusions: We highlight a possible link between AmygA and SpleenA with decreased DNA methylation of the NF- κB gene. Our findings demonstrate a potential relationship between chronic stress-related neural activity and CVD risk through immune function and epigenetic alterations. These results should be examined in larger, diverse population-based cohorts with longitudinal data to identify intervention targets for reducing health inequities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharda et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: