Luis Felipe Sarmiento, Jorge Alexander Ríos-Flórez, Fabio Alexis Rincón Uribe, Rafael Rodrigues Lima, Tobias Kalenscher, Amauri Gouveia, Felix Jan Nitsch
{"title":"Do stress hormones influence choice? A systematic review of pharmacological interventions on the HPA axis and/or SAM system.","authors":"Luis Felipe Sarmiento, Jorge Alexander Ríos-Flórez, Fabio Alexis Rincón Uribe, Rafael Rodrigues Lima, Tobias Kalenscher, Amauri Gouveia, Felix Jan Nitsch","doi":"10.1093/scan/nsae069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA axis) and the sympathetic-adrenal-medullary system (SAM system), two neuroendocrine systems associated with the stress response, have often been implicated to modulate decision-making in various domains. This systematic review summarizes the scientific evidence on the effects of pharmacological HPA axis and SAM system modulation on decision-making. We found 6375 references, of which 17 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. We quantified the risk of bias in our results with respect to missing outcome data, measurements, and selection of the reported results. The included studies administered hydrocortisone, fludrocortisone (HPA axis stimulants), yohimbine, reboxetine (SAM system stimulants), and/or propranolol (SAM system inhibitor). Integrating the evidence, we found that SAM system stimulation had no impact on risk aversion, loss aversion or intertemporal choice, while SAM system inhibition showed a tentative reduction in sensitivity to losses. HPA axis stimulation had no effect on loss aversion or reward anticipation but likely a time-dependent effect on decision under risk. Lastly, combined stimulation of both systems exhibited inconsistent results that could be explained by dose differences (loss aversion) and sex differences (risk aversion). Future research should address time-, dose-, and sex-dependencies of pharmacological effects on decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":94208,"journal":{"name":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11498176/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsae069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA axis) and the sympathetic-adrenal-medullary system (SAM system), two neuroendocrine systems associated with the stress response, have often been implicated to modulate decision-making in various domains. This systematic review summarizes the scientific evidence on the effects of pharmacological HPA axis and SAM system modulation on decision-making. We found 6375 references, of which 17 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. We quantified the risk of bias in our results with respect to missing outcome data, measurements, and selection of the reported results. The included studies administered hydrocortisone, fludrocortisone (HPA axis stimulants), yohimbine, reboxetine (SAM system stimulants), and/or propranolol (SAM system inhibitor). Integrating the evidence, we found that SAM system stimulation had no impact on risk aversion, loss aversion or intertemporal choice, while SAM system inhibition showed a tentative reduction in sensitivity to losses. HPA axis stimulation had no effect on loss aversion or reward anticipation but likely a time-dependent effect on decision under risk. Lastly, combined stimulation of both systems exhibited inconsistent results that could be explained by dose differences (loss aversion) and sex differences (risk aversion). Future research should address time-, dose-, and sex-dependencies of pharmacological effects on decision-making.