 |
 |

Physiological Changes During Carbon Dioxide Inhalation in Patients With Panic Disorder, Major Depression, and Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder
Evidence for a Central Fear Mechanism
Jack M. Gorman, MD;
Justine Kent, MD;
Jose Martinez, MA;
Susan Browne, BA;
Jeremy Coplan, MD;
Laszlo A. Papp, MD
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58:125-131.
ABSTRACT
 |  |
Background Inhalation of carbon dioxide (CO2) has been shown to produce
more anxiety in patients with panic disorder (PD) than in healthy comparison
subjects or patients with most other psychiatric illnesses tested, although
premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) may be an exception. Several reasons
have been proposed to explain CO2 breathing effects in PD. We examined
differences in respiratory response to CO2 breathing in 4 groups
to address these issues.
Methods Patients with PD (n = 52), healthy controls (n = 32), patients with
PMDD (n = 10), and patients with major depression without panic (n = 21) were
asked to breathe 5% and 7% CO2. Continuous measures of respiratory
physiological indices were made.
Results Carbon dioxide breathing produced the expected increases in all 4 respiratory
variables measured. More patients with PD and PMDD had panic attacks than
did controls or patients with major depression. Subjects who experienced panic
during 5% or 7% CO2 inhalation had the most extreme increases regardless
of diagnostic group. Among patients with PD, baseline end-tidal carbon dioxide
levels were significantly lower in those who subsequently had a panic attack
during 5% CO2 breathing than those who did not.
Conclusions Although CO2 breathing causes a higher rate of panic attacks
in patients with PD than other groups (except PMDD), the physiological features
of a panic attack appear similar across groups. Once a panic attack is triggered,
minute ventilation and respiratory rate increase regardless of whether the
subject carries a PD diagnosis. These findings are compatible with preclinical
fear conditioning models of anxiogenesis.
INTRODUCTION
MANY STUDIES1, 2, 3, 4, 5
from multiple groups have now documented that patients with panic disorder
(PD) are likely to experience panic attacks and greater anxiety than healthy
volunteers during inhalation of carbon dioxide (CO2). These attacks
tend to be mild and end quickly when CO2 inhalation is stopped.
At this point, it has been established that CO2-induced panic
is relatively specific to patients with PD,6, 7, 8
although patients with social phobia9 and with
premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD)10 may
also be susceptible. It appears that CO2-induced panic may be relatively
resistant to cognitive manipulations or desensitization,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
although not all studies are compatible with this finding. Finally, rates
of panic during CO2 inhalation decline after successful treatment
of panic disorder.17, 18, 19
Despite the wealth of data that have accumulated concerning CO2-induced panic, the mechanism of action and the neurobiological significance
of this phenomenon are still obscure and also controversial. On the one hand,
it has been argued that the susceptibility of patients with PD to high levels
of anxiety during CO2 breathing represents a specific abnormality
in the afferent neural pathways that respond to increased levels of CO2.20 Studies21, 22
have shown that CO2 sensitivity is increased in the clinically
asymptomatic first-degree relatives of patients with PD, suggesting a familial
and perhaps heritable abnormality.
On the other hand, it has been argued that because CO2 breathing
produces a sense of air hunger and breathlessness, it is highly reminiscent
of the increased breathing and hyperventilation that are frequently experienced
during naturally occurring panic.23 The nonspecific
somatic distress produced by CO2 inhalation, according to this
view, triggers the panic attack.
The issue of whether CO2-induced panic reveals a specific
abnormality in the afferent sensory pathway or a nonspecific somatic trigger
could be resolved by performing formal respiratory sensitivity testing in
patients with PD. Because studies,24, 25, 26, 27
including our first 2, yielded different respiratory physiology results, leading
to different conclusions, we thought it was important to complete one more
study, with a third and independent cohort of patients with PD and controls.
In addition, in the present study we also included a group of patients with
major depression (MD), who generally do not respond to agents that produce
panic in patients with PD, and a group of patients with PMDD, who were shown
in a previous study10 to be sensitive to CO2 breathing. The details of panic rate and anxiety generated during
CO2 breathing among the 4 groups are reported separately. Herein,
we report on the ventilatory responses to CO2 breathing. Two main
questions are addressed: (1) Can we replicate one or the other of the findings
of respiratory physiology differences during 5% or 7% CO2 breathing
between patients with PD and controls from the 2 earlier studies with this
independent cohort? and (2) Is increased ventilatory response to CO2 breathing specific to patients with PD or does it occur in any person
having a panic attack regardless of diagnosis?
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
SUBJECTS
Four groups of subjects were studied, patients with PD, patients with
MD, patients with PMDD, and healthy controls. The groups were similar in age
and sex distribution (Table 1),
except that all members of the PMDD group were women. There were no statistically
significant differences in age among the groups.
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Age, Sex, Distribution, Panic Rate, and Time Spent Inhaling
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Among the 4 Groups*
|
|
|
Potential subjects for the study were referred by other mental health
clinicians or responded to media advertisements. Some of the controls were
recruited by the Normal Control Unit of the Mental Health Clinical Research
Center at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York City. After an
initial telephone screen to rule out obviously ineligible subjects, potential
participants were interviewed by a psychiatrist or psychologist (J.K., J.C.,
L.A.P.). If the subject appeared to meet criteria for the study, he or she
was then seen by a second clinician who administered the Structured Clinical
Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). In cases of disagreement
between the clinician who performed the initial interview and the results
of the SCID interview, an attempt at reconciliation was made, which was always
successful. Disagreements were unusual and most often involved the identification
by SCID interview of a secondary diagnosis that was missed by the initial
interviewer but that did not affect study eligibility. The control subjects
recruited from the Normal Control Unit underwent structured interview using
the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (SADS) before our psychiatric
interview and also had brief SCID performed to be sure that no new psychiatric
illness had emerged since the time the SADS was performed. If eligibility
requirements were met, the subject next had a physical examination, electrocardiogram,
and blood and urine tests for complete blood cell counts, routine chemistry
analyses, thyroid function, pregnancy, urinalysis, and urine toxicology screen.
Eligible subjects then received a full description of the CO2
inhalation procedures and signed informed consent documents. The study was
approved by the institutional review board. The consent form clearly explained
that physical sensations, anxiety, and panic attacks are possible during CO2 inhalation and that the subject could have the CO2 flow
stopped immediately on request.
All subjects were required to be medically healthy, and the 3 patients
groups were defined by DSM-IV28
criteria. Subjects were excluded if they had a lifetime history of schizophrenia,
bipolar disorder, or obsessive-compulsive disorder or a history within the
previous 6 months of substance use disorder or eating disorder, except that
specific phobia and a history of adjustment disorder or minor depression (if
SADS interview was used) more than 6 months before testing was permitted.
Patients with PD could not have met criteria for MD within 6 months of testing.
Secondary diagnoses of social phobia, specific phobia, dysthymia, and generalized
anxiety disorder were permitted. Patients with MD could not have a history
of anxiety disorder, except specific phobia, or have experienced a panic attack
within 6 months of testing. Following testing, all patients were offered standard
therapy, but subjects with PMDD were asked to complete 2 months of prospective
rating scales (daily) to confirm the diagnosis of PMDD. Patients with PMDD
could not have a history of anxiety disorder, except specific phobia, or have
experienced a panic attack or met criteria for MD within 6 months of testing.
Subjects were required to be free of psychoactive medication for at
least 2 weeks before testing (6 weeks if fluoxetine had been used), but subjects
were not specifically withdrawn from effective medication for this study.
Patients with PD were permitted to take benzodiazepines in doses equivalent
to diazepam, 10 mg/d, until 3 days before testing, but only 1 of the patients
with PD in this study actually took any benzodiazepines (diazepam) within
2 weeks of testing.
PROCEDURES
Subjects were randomized by computer-generated numbers to receive 1
of 3 cognitive components before CO2 inhalation that were delivered
by videotape according to a uniform script presented by a single psychologist.
The results of the cognitive component of the study are reported separately15 and, because they did not influence panic rate, are
not considered further in this report.
The subject reported to the Biological Studies Unit at the New York
State Psychiatric Institute. A second urine pregnancy test was obtained for
female participants to ensure that they had not become pregnant since the
initial screening laboratory values were obtained. The subject was then asked
to lie down on a bed, and recording electrodes for electrocardiogram and a
blood pressure cuff were placed on the subject. Next, the subject's head was
placed in the clear plastic head canopy. This canopy is vented at a rate of
40 L/min of air, preventing build-up of expired gasses. The experiment was
divided into five 20-minute periods as follows: (1) room air breathing to
establish a first baseline value, (2) 5% CO2, (3) room air breathing
to establish a second baseline value, (4) 7% CO2, and (5) room
air breathing to establish recovery to baseline value. Subjects were also
shown how to open the canopy, which can be done in seconds by flipping a latch.
In fact, none of the subject did this. Finally, subjects were instructed that
if they felt they could not continue to breathe CO2 they should
raise their right hand and the flow of CO2 would be stopped immediately.
ASSESSMENTS
Two assessments of whether a panic attack occurred were made following
each of the CO2 inhalation periods. The first was made by a rater
blind to subject diagnosis who had been trained to reliably make the judgment
of panic occurrence by viewing videotapes of lactate infusions. The blinded
rater was instructed to use the DSM-IV criteria for
a panic attack but was not permitted to ask the subject if he or she had experienced
an attack. The second was made by the subject, who pointed to a card to answer
whether a panic attack had occurred while the blinded rater was out of the
room.
Four respiratory measures were collected continuously throughout the
5 periods: tidal volume, respiratory rate, minute ventilation (the product
of tidal volume and respiratory rate), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2). Exhaled air for ETCO2measurement was sampled by a small
nasal cannula sensor. Because the measurement may not be completely accurate
if a subject exhales only through the mouth, a soft plastic mask was placed
over the subject's nose and mouth to ensure that all exhaled air passed by
the ETCO2sensor. Heart rate and blood pressure data will be reported
separately.
DATA ANALYSES
We wished to discern whether patients with PD have a different respiratory
response to CO2 than other groups and whether this is a function
of having the disorder or of having a panic attack. The analysis is complicated
because the very low rate of panic among patients with MD and healthy control
subjects yields small cells for analyses broken down by diagnostic group and
panic occurrence. To maximize the size of cells and still address the primary
question, we performed as the main analysis a 2 (panic disorder vs all other
groups combined) x 2 (panic vs no panic) x 6 (time points) repeated-measures
analysis of covariance (RM-ANCOVA) for each of the 4 respiratory variables.
The 6 time points represent the mean for the respiratory variable during the
last 1 minute of the preceding baseline and the variable at minutes 1 through
5 of 5% CO2 inhalation. After 5 minutes, the number of subjects
in some cells declines to the point that analysis is no longer meaningful.
This is because subjects were able to continue breathing CO2 for
varying lengths of time, with PD and PMDD patients always lasting the shortest
length of time and controls and patients with MD the longest. Sex was the
covariate. In this analysis, significant diagnostic group x time interactions
would indicate differential respiratory responses to CO2 in patients
with PD compared with other groups; significant panic vs no panic group x
time interaction would indicate differential respiratory response on the basis
of whether an attack occurred; and a significant 3-way interaction would indicate
differential respiratory response on the basis of both diagnosis and whether
an attack occurred. Because previous work suggested that the blinded rater's
assessment was more useful for separating groups on the basis of differences
in respiratory responses than the subject's rating, we report analyses using
the subject rating of panic only when they offer additional information.
In addition to the main analysis described here, which yields 4 RM-ANCOVA
statistics, we performed a number of secondary analyses. These were a repeat
of the strategy used for 5% CO2 with data from the 7% CO2 inhalation and a variant of the formal CO2sensitivity measure,
the ratio of change in minute ventilation to change in ETCO2during
CO2 inhalation. For these analyses we used the last 5 minutes of
baseline and the first 5 minutes during 5% and again during 7% breathing and
performed a 4diagnostic group analysis of variance. This was repeated
with change in tidal volume and change in respiratory rate as the numerators
and an examination of whether first baseline respiratory measures were associated
with subsequent panic to 5% CO2. This was done by t tests for the last 5-minute baseline means of each of the 4 respiratory
variables comparing all subjects who panicked with those who did not panic
and then separately within each of the 4 diagnostic groups.
All tests are 2-tailed, with the significance level set at P<.05. When the Mauchly sphericity test was significant, the Greenhouse-Geyser
correction of significance level was used.
RESULTS
SUMMARY OF PANIC RATES AND TIME SPENT BREATHING CO2
A total of 124 subjects entered the study. Seven subjects were dropped
from the PMDD group because of failure to validate the diagnosis after prospective
monitoring, leaving 117 subjects. Table 1 gives data on panic rates by blinded rater assessment for each
of the 4 groups. Discrepancies in total sample size are due to missing data.
One further subject had a panic attack during the first room air period and
did not proceed further; therefore, 116 subjects actually breathed 5% CO2. Of these, 7 subjects had a panic attack before 5 minutes, and data
were excluded from 5 subjects because of technical problems. Therefore, data
for analysis of respiratory variables during 5% CO2 breathing are
available from 104 subjects. Of the subjects with analyzable respiratory data,
44 had PD, 20 had MD, 8 had PMDD, and 32 were controls. As will also be reported
in more detail elsewhere, the panic rates for both 5% and 7% CO2
breathing are significantly greater for patients with PD than controls. There
was no significant difference in panic rate between patients with MD or control
subjects. However, patients with PMDD were susceptible to CO2-induced
panic attacks at a rate similar to patients with PD, and these 2 groups were
not statistically distinguishable in terms of panic rate.
Among the subjects with PMDD, 4 were tested in the luteal phase of the
menstrual cycle, 6 in the follicular phase, and 5 in both phases. No distinction
is made in any of the analyses with respect to phase of the menstrual cycle;
for the few women with PMDD who were tested twice, we used only the first
test regardless of cycle phase.
Table 1 shows the amount
of time subjects actually breathed 5% and 7% CO2, broken down by
group. Subjects with PD spent significantly less time breathing 5% CO2 than controls (t57.2 = -3.89, P<.001 by separate variance estimate) and significantly
less time breathing 7% CO2 (t75.9 = 3.90, P<.001 by separate variance estimate).
Subjects with PMDD also spent significantly less time breathing 7% CO2 than controls (t39 = 2.53, P = .02).
PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE TO CO2
Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4 show minute ventilation, respiratory
rate, tidal volume, and ETCO2responses to 5% CO2 inhalation,
respectively. Inspection of the figures shows that CO2 breathing
produced the expected increases in all 4 respiratory variables. The 2-group
(patients with PD vs other diagnosis) x 2-response (panic vs no panic)
x time RM-ANCOVA yielded significant main effects for minute ventilation
response for panic and time and significant interactions for group x
panic and panic x time. The group effect and group x time interaction
were not significant. Inspection of Figure
1 shows that subjects without PD who panicked had the most extreme
reaction, followed by subjects with PD who panicked. The 2 groups of subjects
who did not panic, with or without PD, had virtually the same minute ventilation
response. For respiratory rate, there were significant main effects for panic
and time. Again, the main effect for group was not significant. For tidal
volume, there were significant main effects for panic and time and a significant
group x panic interaction. Here, the subjects without PD who panicked
had a more extreme reaction than those with PD who panicked, those with PD
who did not panic, and those with other diagnoses who did not panic. The latter
3 groups had virtually the same tidal volume response. Finally, for ETCO2, there were significant main effects for panic and time.
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Minute ventilation data were analyzed
comparing 2 groups (subjects with panic disorder [PD] [n = 44] vs other diagnoses
[n = 60]) and panic status (subjects who panicked [n = 29] and subjects who
did not [n = 75]) during the first 5 minutes of 5% carbon dioxide (CO2) inhalation. Sex is the covariate. Statistics include the following:
sex, F1,99 = 15.06, P<.001; group, F1,99
= 3.13, P= .08; panic, F1,99 = 18.08, P<.001;
group x panic, F1,99 = 3.99, P= .048; time,
F3,300 = 141.32, P<.001; group x time, F3,300 = 2.28, P= .08; panic x time, F3,300
= 8.48, P<.001; and group x panic x time, F3,300 = 0.68, P= .57.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Respiratory rate data were analyzed
comparing 2 groups (subjects with panic disorder [PD] [n = 44] vs other diagnoses
[n = 60]) and panic status (subjects who panicked [n = 29] and subjects who
did not [n = 75]) during the first 5 minutes of 5% carbon dioxide (CO2) inhalation. Sex is the covariate. Statistics include the following:
sex, F1,99 = 19.00, P<.001; group, F1,99
= 0.34, P= .56; panic, F1,99 = 5.52, P=
.02; group x panic, F1,99 = 0.03, P= .85; time,
F2.5,249 = 5.55, P= .002; group x time, F2.5,249 = 1.96, P= .13; panic x time, F2.5,249 = 2.00, P= .13; and group x panic x time,
F2.5,249 = 0.91, P= .42.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. Tidal volume data were analyzed
comparing 3 groups (subjects with panic disorder [PD] [n = 44] vs other diagnoses
[n = 60]) and panic status (subjects who panicked [n = 29] and subjects who
did not [n = 75]) during the first 5 minutes of 5% carbon dioxide (CO2) inhalation. Sex is the covariate. Statistics include the following:
sex, F1,99 = 28.44, P<.001; group, F1,99
= 2.98, P= .09; panic, F1,99 = 4.09, P=
.046; group x panic, F1,99 = 6.69, P= .01; time,
F3.2,315 = 74.60, P<.001; group x time, F3.2,315 = 191, P= .12; panic x time, F3.2,315 = 1.41, P= .24; and group x panic x time,
F3.2,315 = 1.07, P= .36.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 4. End-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) data were analyzed comparing 2 groups (subjects with panic disorder
[PD] [n = 44] vs other diagnoses [n = 59]) and panic status (subjects who
panicked [n = 28] and subjects who did not [n = 75]) during the first 5 minutes
of 5% CO2 inhalation. Sex is the covariate. Statistics include
the following: sex, F1,98 = 10.23, P= .002; group,
F1,98 = 0.36, P= .55; panic, F1,98 = 5.25, P= .02; group x panic, F1,98 = 1.67, P=
.20; time, F2.3,228 = 302.38, P<.001; group x
time, F2.3,228 = 1.26, P= .29; panic x time,
F2.3,228 = 1.22, P= .30; and group x panic x
time, F2.3,228 = 0.33, P= .75.
|
|
|
In summary, for all measures the response to 5% CO2 varied
more with respect to whether a panic attack occurred than whether the subject
had PD.
Analyses of data from the 7% CO2 inhalation experiment are
generally similar to the 5% CO2 inhalation experiment. For minute
ventilation, there were significant main effects for time and panic and significant
interactions for group x panic (F1,70 = 7.50, P = .008) and panic x time (F1.6,115 = 6.02, P = .006) (data not shown but available on request from
the authors). For respiratory rate, there was a significant panic x
time interaction (F2.6,184 = 4.22, P =
.009); for tidal volume, a significant main effect for panic; and no significant
findings for ETCO2. The significant group x panic interaction
for minute ventilation response to 7% CO2 is the only instance
in which diagnostic group membership was a significant factor, but in this
case the group with the most extreme reaction were those without PD who panicked.
Hence, the data again indicate that having a panic attack was more important
than having PD in distinguishing respiratory response.
None of the CO2 sensitivity analyses yielded significant
differences among groups regardless of whether minute ventilation, tidal volume,
or respiratory rate was used as the numerator.
Finally, Table 2 gives data
and statistics for baseline respiratory measures broken down by panic status
and diagnostic group. Although the t test was not
significant for the entire sample, the ETCO2was significantly lower
in subjects with PD who panicked than in those with PD who did not panic (t38.77 = 4.267, P<.001,
n = 48 by separate variance estimate). However, minute ventilation, respiratory
rate, and tidal volume were significantly higher in subjects who panicked
than in those who did not panic among the control and PMDD groups (data not
shown).
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Baseline Respiratory Measures for Patients With and Without
Panic to 5% Carbon Dioxide in 4 Subject Groups*
|
|
|
COMMENT
These data fit with a growing body of studies that should influence
theories about panic to CO2 and panic disorder neurobiology in
general. Unlike our very first CO2 inhalation study,24
done a decade ago, we have now shown on 3 occasions that there is no difference
in minute ventilation response to CO2 inhalation or in formal CO2 sensitivity between patients with PD and other groups. With this weight
of data, substantiated by others,23, 27
it is reasonable to consider theories that implicate central brain circuits
rather than or in addition to abnormalities in the pulmonary, peripheral (aortic
arch), or medullary chemoreceptor. It is clear that patients with PD have
a substantially higher rate of panic attacks and develop more anxiety during
CO2 inhalation than other groups, but there does not seem to be
anything fundamentally abnormal about these patients' ventilatory physiology.
The present data suggest, therefore, that the panic response to CO2 involves a generalized fear response that, although more common among
patients with PD than almost any other diagnostic group or healthy controls,
can still occur in people who do not have PD. This view gains further support
from the association between lower baseline ETCO2and panic response
to 5% CO2 breathing. Such relative hypocapnia suggests that patients
with PD who panicked when breathing 5% CO2 were already anxious
and hyperventilating before CO2 inhalation started. Previously,
we showed that low baseline PCO2levels, high cortisol levels, and
increased anxiety are associated with panic to sodium lactate infusion.29 It should be noted, however, that increased respiration
also predicted panic in 2 other groups in this study. Hence, baseline respiratory
activity also seems to be a diagnostically nonspecific aspect of CO2 panic. There is evidence that the tidal volume response to CO2 inhalation is a genetically mediated function that reflects the sensitivity
of the medullary chemoreceptor.30 The respiratory
frequency response, on the other hand, is caused by the anxiety produced by
the breathlessness and mechanical discomfort that occur when breathing CO2. Interestingly, increase in respiratory rate rather than tidal volume
distinguishes those who panic when breathing CO2 from those who
do not26, 27 and is apparently the
respiratory response to conditioned fear in experimental animals.31
We and others have noted the remarkable similarity between the physiological
events that occur during stimulation of the amygdala in an experimental animal
or human32, 33, 34 and
those that occur during a panic attack.35, 36
This has led to the widespread hypothesis that the neural circuit that subserves
conditioned fear in animals may also be responsible, at least in part, for
panic. The present findings with CO2 inhalation fit this theory
nicely. When asked to breathe CO2, all subjects experience an obligatory
increase in respiratory rate and tidal volume. This is tolerated by most individuals,
even those with depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder. Patients with
PD, however, experience the hyperventilation, breathlessness, and general
somatic discomfort that they routinely experience during panic attacks. According
to this view, CO2 inhalation leads to stimulation of the neural
circuit subserving fear in the patient with PD or any subject who panics,
perhaps including activation of the amygdala and its projection sites. This
causes, among other things, a greater increase in respiratory rate in the
patient who panics compared with the patient who does not, further signaling
danger and resulting in the panic attack itself.
To support this theory, it would be important to show that acute (short-term)
fear in humans is accompanied by stimulation of the amygdala and other parts
of the neural "fear" circuit and that patients with PD have an abnormally
sensitive response in this circuit. This has been shown in healthy volunteers
undergoing fear conditioning37 and in patients
with social phobia during a cognitive challenge.38
Studies of patients with PD at rest indicate differences in activity compared
with controls in limbic brain areas that include the hippocampus and the amygdala.39, 40
There are a few methodologic shortcomings and theoretical objections
that should be considered in interpreting our data. First, sample sizes in
some of the cells are extremely small. This is due in part to the finding
that control subjects and patients with MD rarely panic at CO2
inhalation; therefore, hundreds of these subjects would have to be tested
to yield a meaningfully larger number of patients who panic. Second, we recruited
only a handful of patients with PMDD and did not control for phase of the
luteal cycle. The analogy between a panic attack and the animal model of fear
conditioning is not, to be sure, perfect. There is no evidence to date that
PD is caused by conditioning; indeed, a requirement for the diagnosis of PD
by DSM-IV is that the initial attack must be "spontaneous."
Carbon dioxide inhalation has proven to be a useful tool in understanding
the cognitive and physiological characteristics of panic attacks. Furthermore,
it is a medically benign procedure that is noninvasive and well tolerated.
However, we believe that this study indicates its major limitation: ultimately,
this type of CO2 study can only inform us about peripheral and
brainstem function. Clearly, PD is a complex illness that certainly involves
higher brain regions. We believe that CO2 studies have now pointed
the way to the future of neurobiological research in PD that will require
neuroimaging of cortical and subcortical sites. Nevertheless, our current
data, the last in our series of studies examining the respiratory physiology
associated with CO2-induced panic, clearly suggest the importance
of looking beyond peripheral explanations and attempting to integrate the
human data with the vast array of data on fear and avoidance from basic and
preclinical neuroscience.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication September 25, 2000.
This study was supported by Mental Health Clinical Research Center (MHCRC)
grants MH-30960 and MH-41778, a Senior Research Scientist Award (NIH-00416)
to Dr Gorman, and an Independent Scientist Award (MH-01397) to Dr Papp.
We thank Barbara Barnett and Christopher Tulysewski for editorial assistance.
From the Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, and Biological
Studies Unit, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY.
Corresponding author and reprints: Jack M. Gorman, MD,
Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, 1051 Riverside Dr, Unit 32,
New York, NY 10032.
REFERENCES
 |  |
1. Gorman JM, Browne ST, Papp LA, Martinez JM, Welkowitz L, Coplan JD, Goetz RR, Kent J, Klein DF. Effects of antipanic treatment on response to carbon dioxide. Biol Psychiatry. 1997;42:982-991.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Griez I, Lousberg H, van den Hout MA, Zandbergen J. CO2 vulnerability in panic disorder. Psychiatry Res. 1987;20:87-95.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
3. Perna G, Battaglia M, Garberi A, Arancio C, Bertani A, Bellodi L. Carbon dioxide/oxygen challenge test in panic disorder. Psychiatry Res. 1994;52:159-171.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
4. Sanderson WC, Wetzler S. Five percent carbon dioxide challenge: valid analogue and marker of
panic disorder? Biol Psychiatry. 1990;27:689-701.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
5. Gorman JM, Papp LA, Coplan JD, Martinez JM, Lennon S, Goetz RR, Klein DF. Anxiogenic effects of carbon dioxide and hyperventilation in panic
patients. Am J Psychiatry. 1994;151:1140-1147.
FREE FULL TEXT
6. Perna G, Barbini B, Cocchi S, Bertani A, Gasperini M. 35% CO2 challenge in panic and mood disorders. J Affect Disord. 1995;33:189-194.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
7. Perna G, Bertani A, Arancio C, Ronchi P, Bellodi L. Laboratory response of patients with panic and obsessive-compulsive
disorders to 35% CO2 challenges. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152:85-89.
FREE FULL TEXT
8. Griez E, de Loor C, Pols H, Zandbergen J, Lousberg H. Specific sensitivity of patients with panic attacks to carbon dioxide
inhalation. Psychiatry Res. 1990;31:193-199.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
9. Caldirola D, Perna G, Arancio C, Bertani A, Bellodi L. The 35% CO2 challenge test in patients with social phobia. Psychiatry Res. 1997;71:41-48.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
10. Harrison WM, Sandberg D, Gorman JM, Fyer M, Nee J, Uy J, Endicott J. Provocation of panic with carbon dioxide inhalation in patients with
premenstrual dysphoria. Psychiatry Res. 1989;27:183-192.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
11. Rapee R, Mattick R, Murrell E. Cognitive mediation in affective component of spontaneous panic attacks. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 1986;17:245-253.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
12. Sanderson WC, Rapee RM, Barlow DH. The influence of an illusion of control on panic attacks induced via
inhalation of 5.5% carbon dioxideenriched air. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46:157-162.
FREE FULL TEXT
13. Rapee RM, Telfer LA, Barlow DH. The role of safety cues in mediating the response to inhalations of
CO2 in agoraphobics. Behav Res Ther. 1991;29:353-355.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
14. Papp LA, Welkowitz L, Martinez JM, Klein DF, Browne S, Gorman JM. Instructional set does not alter outcome of respiratory challenges
in panic disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 1995;38:826-830.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
15. Welkowitz LA, Papp LA, Martinez JM, Browne ST, Gorman JM. Instructional set and physiological response to CO2 inhalation. Am J Psychiatry. 1999;156:745-748.
FREE FULL TEXT
16. Beck JG, Shipherd JC, Zebb BJ. Fearful responding to repeated CO2 inhalation: a preliminary
investigation. Behav Res Ther. 1996;34:609-620.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
17. Perna G, Bertani A, Gabriele A, Politi E, Bellodi L. Modification of 35% carbon dioxide hypersensitivity across one week
of treatment with clomipramine and fluvoxamine: a double-blind, randomized,
placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1997;17:173-178.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
18. Bocola V, Trecco MD, Fabbrini G, Paladini C, Sollecito A, Martucci N. Antipanic effect of fluoxetine measured by CO2 challenge
test. Biol Psychiatry. 1998;43:612-615.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
19. Sanderson WC, Wetzler S, Asnis GM. Alprazolam blockade of CO2-provoked panic in patients with
panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1994;151:1220-1222.
FREE FULL TEXT
20. Klein DF. False suffocation alarms, spontaneous attacks, and related conditions. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1993;50:306-317.
FREE FULL TEXT
21. Perna G, Cocchi S, Bertani A, Arancio C, Bellodi L. Sensitivity to 35% CO2 in healthy first-degree relatives
of patients with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152:623-625.
FREE FULL TEXT
22. Coryell W, Arndt S. The 35% CO2 inhalation procedure: test-retest reliability. Biol Psychiatry. 1999;45:923-927.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
23. Roth WT, Margraf J, Ehlers A, Barr TC, Maddock RJ, Davies S, Agras WS. Stress test reactivity in panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992;49:301-310.
ISI
| PUBMED
24. Gorman JM, Fyer MR, Goetz R, Askanazi J, Liebowitz MR, Fyer AJ, Kinner J, Klein DF. Ventilatory physiology of patients with panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1988;45:31-39.
FREE FULL TEXT
25. Papp LA, Martinez JM, Klein DF, Coplan JD, Norman RG, Cole R, deJesus MJ, Ross D, Goetz R, Gorman JM. Respiratory psychophysiology of panic disorder: three respiratory challenges
in 98 subjects. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154:1557-1565.
FREE FULL TEXT
26. Papp LA, Martinez JM, Coplan JD, Gorman JM. Rebreathing tests in panic disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 1995;38:240-245.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
27. Pain MCF, Biddle N, Tiller JWG. Panic disorder, the ventilatory response to carbon dioxide and respiratory
variables. Psychosom Med. 1988;50:541-548.
FREE FULL TEXT
28. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth
Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.
29. Coplan JD, Goetz R, Klein DF, Papp LA, Fyer A, Liebowitz MR, Davies SO, Gorman JM. Plasma cortisol concentrations preceding lactate-induced panic: psychological
biochemical and physiological correlates. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55:130-136.
FREE FULL TEXT
30. Kawakami Y, Yoshihawg T, Actal S. Control of breathing in young twins. J Appl Physiol. 1982;52:537-742.
FREE FULL TEXT
31. Harper RM, Frysinger RC, Trelease RB, Mark JD. State dependent alterations of respiratory cycle timing by stimulation
of the central nucleus of the amygdala. Brain Res. 1984;306:1-8.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
32. LeDoux JE, Iwata J, Cicchetti P, Reis DJ. Different projections of the central amygdaloid nucleus mediate autonomic
and behavioral correlates of conditioned fear. J Neurosci. 1988;8:2517-2529.
ABSTRACT
33. LeDoux JE. The Emotional Brain. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster; 1996.
34. Davis M. The role of the amygdala in fear and anxiety. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1992;15:353-375.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
35. Goddard AW, Charney DS. Toward an integrated neurobiology of panic disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 1997;58(suppl 2):4-11.
36. Kent JM, Coplan JD, Gorman JM. Clinical utility of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in
the spectrum of anxiety. Biol Psychiatry. 1998;44:812-824.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
37. Furmark T, Fischer H, Wik G, Larsson M, Fredrikson M. The amygdala and individual differences in human fear conditioning. Neuroreport. 1997;8:3957-3960.
ISI
| PUBMED
38. Schneider F, Weiss U, Kessler C, Muller-Gartner H-W, Posse S, Salloum J, Grold W, Himmelmann F, Gaebel W, Birbaumer N. Subcortical correlates of differential classical conditioning of aversive
emotional reactions in social phobia. Biol Psychiatry. 1999;45:863-887.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
39. Nordahl T, Stein M, Benkelfat C, Semple W, Andreason F, Zametkin A, Uhde T, Cohen R. Regional cerebral metabolic asymmetries replicated in an independent
group of patients with panic disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 1998;44:998-1006.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
40. Bisaga A, Katz JL, Antonini A, Wright E, Margouleff C, Gorman JM. Cerebral glucose metabolism in women with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1998;155:1178-1183.
FREE FULL TEXT
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
 |
Childhood Respiratory Disease and the Risk of Anxiety Disorder and Major Depression in Adulthood
Goodwin and Buka
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2008;162:774-780.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Neonatal maternal separation induces sex-specific augmentation of the hypercapnic ventilatory response in awake rat
Genest et al.
J. Appl. Physiol. 2007;102:1416-1421.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Characterization of a 7% carbon dioxide (CO2) inhalation paradigm to evoke anxiety symptoms in healthy subjects
Poma et al.
J Psychopharmacol 2005;19:494-503.
ABSTRACT
Asthma and Panic in Young Adults: A 20-Year Prospective Community Study
Hasler et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2005;171:1224-1230.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Response to 5% Carbon Dioxide in Children and Adolescents: Relationship to Panic Disorder in Parents and Anxiety Disorders in Subjects
Pine et al.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005;62:73-80.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Relationship of Asthma and Anxiety Disorders
Katon et al.
Psychosom. Med. 2004;66:349-355.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Does the Brain Noradrenaline Network Mediate the Effects of the CO2 Challenge?
Bailey et al.
J Psychopharmacol 2003;17:252-259.
ABSTRACT
Response Differences of Spontaneous Panic and Fear
Klein
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002;59:567-569.
FULL TEXT
|