Prenatal Folate and Choline Levels and Brain and Cognitive Development in Children: A Critical Narrative Review

Women’s nutritional status during pregnancy can have long-term effects on children’s brains and cognitive development. Folate and choline are methyl-donor nutrients and are important for closure of the neural tube during fetal development. They have also been associated with brain and cognitive development in children. Animal studies have observed that prenatal folate and choline supplementation is associated with better cognitive outcomes in offspring and that these nutrients may have interactive effects on brain development. Although some human studies have reported associations between maternal folate and choline levels and child cognitive outcomes, results are not consistent, and no human studies have investigated the potential interactive effects of folate and choline. This lack of consistency could be due to differences in the methods used to assess folate and choline levels, the gestational trimester at which they were measured, and lack of consideration of potential confounding variables. This narrative review discusses and critically reviews current research examining the associations between maternal levels of folate and choline during pregnancy and brain and cognitive development in children. Directions for future research that will increase our understanding of the effects of these nutrients on children’s neurodevelopment are discussed.

Evaluation of adverse effects/events of genetically modified food consumption: a systematic review of animal and human studies

Objective A systematic review of animal and human studies was conducted on genetically modified (GM) food consumption to assess its safety in terms of adverse effects/events to inform public concerns and future research. Methods Seven electronic databases were searched from January 1st 1983 till July 11th 2020 for in vivo, animal and human studies on the incidence of adverse effects/events of GM products consumption. Two authors independently identified eligible studies, assessed the study quality, and extracted data on the name of the periodical, author and affiliation, literature type, the theme of the study, publication year, funding, sample size, target population characteristics, type of the intervention/exposure, outcomes and outcome measures, and details of adverse effects/events. We used the Chi-square test to compare the adverse event reporting rates in articles funded by industry funding, government funding or unfunded articles. Results One crossover trial in humans and 203 animal studies from 179 articles met the inclusion criteria. The study quality was all assessed as being unclear or having a high risk of bias. Minor illnesses were reported in the human trial. Among the 204 studies, 59.46% of adverse events (22 of 37) were serious adverse events from 16 animal studies (7.84%). No significant differences were found in the adverse event reporting rates either between industry and government funding (χ2 = 2.286, P = 0.131), industry and non-industry funding (χ2 = 1.761, P = 0.185) or funded and non-funded articles (χ2 = 0.491, P = 0.483). We finally identified 21 GM food-related adverse events involving 7 GM events (NK603 × MON810 maize, GTS 40-3-2 soybean, NK603 maize, MON863 maize, MON810 maize, MON863 × MON810 × NK603 maize and GM Shanyou 63 rice), which had all been on regulatory approval in some countries/regions. Conclusion Serious adverse events of GM consumption include mortality, tumour or cancer, significant low fertility, decreased learning and reaction abilities, and some organ abnormalities. Further clinical trials and long-term cohort studies in human populations, especially on GM food-related adverse events and the corresponding GM events, are still warranted. It suggests the necessity of labelling GM food so that consumers can make their own choice.

Is It Time to Test the Antiseizure Potential of Palmitoylethanolamide in Human Studies? A Systematic Review of Preclinical Evidence

Antiseizure medications are the cornerstone pharmacotherapy for epilepsy. They are not devoid of side effects. In search for better-tolerated antiseizure agents, cannabinoid compounds and other N-acylethanolamines not directly binding cannabinoid receptors have drawn significant attention. Among these, palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) has shown neuroprotective, anti-inflammatory, and analgesic properties. All studies examining PEA’s role in epilepsy and acute seizures were systematically reviewed. Preclinical studies indicated a systematically reduced PEA tone accompanied by alterations of endocannabinoid levels. PEA supplementation reduced seizure frequency and severity in animal models of epilepsy and acute seizures, in some cases, similarly to available antiseizure medications but with a better safety profile. The peripheral-brain immune system seemed to be more effectively modulated by subchronic pretreatment with PEA, with positive consequences in terms of better responding to subsequent epileptogenic insults. PEA treatment restored the endocannabinoid level changes that occur in a seizure episode, with potential preventive implications in terms of neural damage. Neurobiological mechanisms for PEA antiseizure effect seemed to include the activation of the endocannabinoid system and the modulation of neuroinflammation and excitotoxicity. Although no human study was identified, there is ground for testing the antiseizure potential of PEA and its safety profile in human studies of epilepsy.

Eszopiclone and Zolpidem Produce Opposite Effects on Hippocampal Ripple Density

Clinical populations have memory deficits linked to sleep oscillations that can potentially be treated with sleep medications. Eszopiclone and zolpidem (two non-benzodiazepine hypnotics) both enhance sleep spindles. Zolpidem improved sleep-dependent memory consolidation in humans, but eszopiclone did not. These divergent results may reflect that the two drugs have different effects on hippocampal ripple oscillations, which correspond to the reactivation of neuronal ensembles that represent previous waking activity and contribute to memory consolidation. We used extracellular recordings in the CA1 region of rats and systemic dosing of eszopiclone and zolpidem to test the hypothesis that these two drugs differentially affect hippocampal ripples and spike activity. We report evidence that eszopiclone makes ripples sparser, while zolpidem increases ripple density. In addition, eszopiclone led to a drastic decrease in spike firing, both in putative pyramidal cells and interneurons, while zolpidem did not substantially alter spiking. These results provide an explanation of the different effects of eszopiclone and zolpidem on memory in human studies and suggest that sleep medications can be used to regulate hippocampal ripple oscillations, which are causally linked to sleep-dependent memory consolidation.

Efficacy of topical cannabinoids in the management of pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies

Background/importanceCannabinoids are emerging as an alternative pain management option, preliminarily supported by preclinical and clinical studies. Unwanted side effects from oral or inhaled cannabinoids remain, however, a major barrier to widespread use. Peripherally acting cannabinoids (eg, topically applied) may circumvent these side effects while providing localized pain management.ObjectiveOur purpose was to systematically review the literature on the effectiveness of peripherally acting cannabinoids for pain management.Evidence reviewWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PubMed databases. Included studies examined the effect of topical/peripherally administered cannabinoids on pain ratings in humans, as well as pain-related outcomes in animals (eg, paw withdrawal). Due to a lack of trials, human studies were summarized in a narrative synthesis. Separate meta-analyses were performed for animal studies using radiant tail flick or paw withdrawal outcomes.FindingsOur search yielded 1182 studies following removal of duplicates, with 46 studies (6 human, 40 animal) included. Human studies (one randomized controlled trial and five case studies/series) reported no adverse events to topical cannabinoids and preliminary evidence of decreased pain ratings. Animal studies reporting tail flick (5) (2.81, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.69, p<0.001) and mechanical withdrawal (11) (2.74, 95% CI 1.82 to 3.67, p<0.001) reported prolonged responses (analgesia) in peripheral cannabinoid groups compared with controls.ConclusionsPreclinical animal studies provided low-quality evidence for peripherally administered cannabinoids to provide regional, antinociceptive effects. The scarcity of high-quality human studies underscores the need to translate preclinical evidence into well-controlled human trials.