A Pilot Study of Neurobiological Mechanisms of Stress and Cardiovascular Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Coronary heart disease is a leading cause of death and disability. Although psychological stress has been identified as an important potential contributor, mechanisms by which stress increases risk of heart disease and mortality are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to assess mechanisms by which stress acts through the brain and heart to confer increased CHD risk. Methods: Coronary Heart Disease patients (N=10) underwent cardiac imaging with [Tc-99m] sestamibi single photon emission tomography at rest and during a public speaking mental stress task. Patients returned for a second day and underwent positron emission tomography imaging of the brain, heart, bone marrow, aorta (indicating inflammation) and subcutaneous adipose tissue, after injection of [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose for assessment of glucose uptake followed mental stress. Patients with (N=4) and without (N=6) mental stress-induced myocardial ischemia were compared for glucose uptake in brain, heart, adipose tissue and aorta with mental stress. Results: Patients with mental stress-induced ischemia showed a pattern of increased uptake in the heart, medial prefrontal cortex, and adipose tissue with stress. In the heart disease group as a whole, activity increase with stress in the medial prefrontal brain and amygdala correlated with stress-induced increases in spleen (r=0.69, p=0.038; and r=0.69, p=0.04 respectfully). Stress-induced frontal lobe increased uptake correlated with stress-induced aorta uptake (r=0.71, p=0.016). Activity in insula and medial prefrontal cortex was correlated with post-stress activity in bone marrow and adipose tissue. Activity in other brain areas not implicated in stress did not show similar correlations. Increases in medial prefrontal activity with stress correlated with increased cardiac glucose uptake with stress, suggestive of myocardial ischemia (r=0.85, p=0.004). Conclusions: These findings suggest a link between brain response to stress in key areas mediating emotion and peripheral organs involved in inflammation and hematopoietic activity, as well as myocardial ischemia, in Coronary Heart Disease patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".