Ader R, Felten D, Cohen N
Department of Psychiatry, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York 14642.
Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1990;30:561-602. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pa.30.040190.003021.
The observations and research described in this communication derive from a nontraditional view of the immune system. It has become abundantly clear that there are probably no organ systems or homeostatic defense mechanisms that are not, in vivo, subject to the influence of interactions between behavioral and physiological events. The complex mechanisms underlying these interactions and their relationship to health and illness, however, are imperfectly understood. The most imperfectly understood, perhaps, are the interrelationships among brain, behavior, and immune processes. Without attempting to cover all the literature, we have used stress effects and conditioning phenomena as illustrations to point out that behavior can influence immune function. We have also described data indicating that the immune system can receive and respond to neural and endocrine signals. Conversely, behavioral, neural, and endocrine responses seem to be influenced by an activated immune system. Thus, a traditional view of immune function that is confined to cellular interactions occurring within lymphoid tissues is insufficient to account for changes in immunity observed in subhuman animals and man under real world conditions. These data question seriously the notion of an autonomous immune system. Most of the research on the regulation of immune responses has been predicated on the assumption that such regulation is accomplished by the interacting components of the immune system itself, e.g. interactions among helper and suppressor T-lymphocytes, B-cells, and accessory cells that can result in the production of antibody and effector T cells. The immune system is, indeed, capable of considerable self-regulation, and immune responses can be made to take place in vitro. The functions of that component of adaptive processes known as the immune system that are of ultimate concern, however, are those that take place in vivo. There are now compelling reasons to believe that in vivo immunoregularity processes influence and are influenced by the neuroendocrine environment in which such processes actually take place--an environment that, on the one hand, can generate signals that resting and/or activated leukocytes can receive, and, on the other hand, is exquisitely sensitive to the individual's perception of and capacity to adapt to the demands of the environment. The immune system appears to be modulated, not only by feedback mechanisms mediated through neural and endocrine processes, but by feedforward mechanisms as well. The immunologic effects of learning, an essential feedforward mechanism, suggest that, like direct neural and endocrine processes, behavior can, under appropriate circumstances, serve an immunoregulatory function in vivo.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
本通讯中所描述的观察与研究源自对免疫系统的一种非传统观点。现已非常清楚的是,可能不存在任何一个器官系统或稳态防御机制在体内不受行为与生理事件之间相互作用的影响。然而,这些相互作用背后的复杂机制及其与健康和疾病的关系,目前还未被完全理解。或许,最未被充分理解的是大脑、行为和免疫过程之间的相互关系。在不试图涵盖所有文献的情况下,我们以应激效应和条件作用现象为例,指出行为能够影响免疫功能。我们还描述了一些数据,这些数据表明免疫系统能够接收并对神经和内分泌信号作出反应。相反,行为、神经和内分泌反应似乎也会受到激活的免疫系统的影响。因此,一种局限于淋巴组织内细胞间相互作用的传统免疫功能观点,不足以解释在现实世界条件下在非人动物和人类中观察到的免疫变化。这些数据严重质疑了自主免疫系统这一概念。大多数关于免疫反应调节的研究都是基于这样一种假设,即这种调节是由免疫系统自身的相互作用成分完成的,例如辅助性和抑制性T淋巴细胞、B细胞以及辅助细胞之间的相互作用,这些相互作用可导致抗体和效应T细胞的产生。免疫系统确实能够进行相当程度的自我调节,并且免疫反应能够在体外发生。然而,适应性过程中被称为免疫系统的那一部分的最终功能,是那些在体内发生的功能。现在有令人信服的理由相信,体内免疫调节过程会受到其实际发生所处的神经内分泌环境的影响,并且也会对该环境产生影响——一方面,这种环境能够产生静息和/或激活的白细胞能够接收的信号,另一方面,它对个体对环境需求的感知和适应能力极为敏感。免疫系统似乎不仅受到通过神经和内分泌过程介导的反馈机制的调节,还受到前馈机制的调节。学习作为一种重要的前馈机制所产生的免疫效应表明,与直接的神经和内分泌过程一样,行为在适当情况下能够在体内发挥免疫调节功能。(摘要截选至400词)