Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Letter
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editorial
Images
Images in Neurology
Images in Neuroscience
Images in Neurosciences
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Letters to the Editor
Media and News
None
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Point of View
Position Paper
Review Article
Short Communication
Short Communications
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Techniques in Neurosurgery
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Letter
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editorial
Images
Images in Neurology
Images in Neuroscience
Images in Neurosciences
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Letters to the Editor
Media and News
None
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Point of View
Position Paper
Review Article
Short Communication
Short Communications
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Techniques in Neurosurgery
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Letter
Case Report
Case Series
Commentary
Current Issue
Editorial
Erratum
Guest Editorial
Images
Images in Neurology
Images in Neuroscience
Images in Neurosciences
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Letters to the Editor
Media and News
None
Notice of Retraction
Obituary
Original Article
Point of View
Position Paper
Review Article
Short Communication
Short Communications
Systematic Review
Systematic Review Article
Technical Note
Techniques in Neurosurgery
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
16 (
3
); 385-390
doi:
10.25259/JNRP_267_2024

The influence of neuroactive steroids on cortical evoked response potentials and attentive performance of cognitive tasks in young adults – A cross-sectional study

Department of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India
IQVIA, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
Department of Biochemistry, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Department of Pathology, Santhiram Medical College, Nandyala, Andhra Pradesh, India.

*Corresponding author: Immadi Sudhakar Vamshidhar, Department of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India. dr.vamshi_immadi@aiimsmangalagiri.edu.in

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Hasansab Itagi A, Vamshidhar I, Yunus GY, Swapnika T, Gadagottu S, Lakshmanan D. The influence of neuroactive steroids on cortical evoked response potentials and attentive performance of cognitive tasks in young adults – A cross-sectional study. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2025:16:385-90. doi: 10.25259/JNRP_267_2024

Abstract

Objectives:

The term “neurosteroids” is now often employed to describe steroids such as dehydroepiandrostenedione-sulfate (DHEA-S) that is produced inside the hippocampus and other brain regions. The name was then revised to neuroactive steroids (NASs), which are steroids that affect neuronal circuits, including cortisol. NASs influence synaptic behavior and affect learning and cognition processes. This study aimed to determine the influence of NASs on cortical-evoked response potentials and the attentive performance of cognitive tasks.

Materials and Methods:

The study utilized an analytical cross-sectional design and was conducted at the physiology outpatient department on 30 young adult male subjects with good physical fitness and in their early twenties to early thirties. The study excluded individuals who had pre-existing cardiovascular problems, unstable coronary syndromes or were involved in severe athletic training.

Results:

Participants had a median age of 21 years, a mean resting heart rate of 81.03 bpm, an average systolic blood pressure of 116.77 mmHg, and an average diastolic blood pressure of 74.90 mmHg. Cortisol levels were 7.13 ± 3.04 μg/dL, DHEA-S levels were 350.34 ± 89.74 μg/dL, and the cortisol to DHEA-S ratio was 0.023 ± 0.01. Stroop test accuracy was 98.93 ± 1.11% for congruent trials and 96.77 ± 2.02% for incongruent trials, with response times of 23.83 ± 5.27 s and 31.1 ± 5.78 s, respectively. Mini-mental state examination scores correlated significantly with DHEA-S, cortisol, and cortisol/DHEA-S ratio, indicating a possible link between these hormones and cognitive function.

Conclusion:

The neuroprotective and neuroinhibitory effects of DHEA-S and cortisol are apparent. The anti-glucocorticoid effect of DHEA-S was verified by the observed negative correlation between cortisol and DHEA-S concentration. They exhibit properties that may induce anxiety, trigger seizures, enhance memory, stimulate the growth of new neurons, and offer protection to the nervous system.

Keywords

Attention
Cortisol
Dehydroepiandrostenedione-sulfate
Neuroactive steroids
Trail making test

INTRODUCTION

Neuroactive steroids (NASs) are naturally produced substances that alter neurotransmitter receptors in the brain to rapidly alter neuronal excitability. They play a vital role in controlling many brain processes such as emotion, cognition, and behavior. The impact of NASs on the focus and productivity of young people is currently being extensively investigated. NAS interacts with neurotransmitter receptors and affects the generation of electrical signals and communication between nerve cells, thus playing a crucial role in the regulation of cognitive and learning processes. While the role of NAS is predominantly studied in the context of neurological disorders, extensive research is necessary to fully comprehend its role in the brain’s response to various conditions. Below is an elaborate analysis of how NASs and their ratios may influence attention and performance in this specific population.[1,2] The sulfate form of dehydroepiandrostenedione-sulfate (DHEA-S) has been linked to enhancements in mood, memory, and cognitive function, highlighting the importance of DHEA. They mitigate the impact of cortisol and, perhaps, improve performance under stressful situations. Progesterone, a steroid, has been shown to have a tranquilizing effect on the brain and has been demonstrated to affect memory and attention processes.[3,4] The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis may be regulated by neuroactive hormones, especially DHEA, which decreases the impact of stress on cognitive function. NASs can affect attentional processes by influencing the neurotransmitter systems. DHEA has shown the ability to enhance attentional function, maybe by mitigating the detrimental impact of cortisol on the brain.[5] The impact on memory and executive functioning varies and is contingent on the particular neurosteroid and its concentration. DHEA is often linked to improved working memory and executive function. The balance between NASs is crucial for maintaining homeostasis. An effective method for assessing the impact of stress on cognitive performance involves analyzing the DHEA-to-cortisol ratio, with cortisol serving as an indicator of stress. A higher ratio of DHEA to cortisol is often associated with enhanced cognitive function and a heightened capacity to manage stress.[6] NASs modify the capacity of neurons to generate electrical signals and transfer information between them, thereby influencing cognition. Hence, this study aimed to determine the impact of NASs on cortical-evoked response potentials and the attentive performance of cognitive tasks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in the Department of Physiology Outpatient Unit of the Medical Sciences, Institute of National Importance for a period of 6 months (October 2023–March 2024). Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional ethical committee before conducting the study (IEC certificate no: AIIMS/MG/IEC/2022-23/228). Participants were given a comprehensive explanation of the study objectives and methodologies, and written consent was obtained according to the guidelines set by the Institutional Review Board.

This study adopted an analytical technique using a cross-sectional design. The sample size was estimated using the formula: N = (Za/2)2 s2/d2, where s is the standard deviation (SD) obtained from the pilot study and d is the accuracy of the estimate or how close it is to the true mean. Za/2 normal deviates from the two-tailed alternative hypothesis at a level of significance. A pilot study conducted on five young adults resulted in an SD of 5, with a probability of 95%, and at an error rate of 5%, the minimum sample size required was estimated to be 24 subjects, and after an allowance of 20% for non-respondents is assumed, the corrected sample required was 30 subjects. Accordingly, 30 young healthy adult male participants with ages ranging from 21.5 to 31.9 years who willingly consented to participate in the examination were included in the study. A comprehensive medical history was obtained, encompassing information regarding existing medical conditions and drugs taken over the past 6 months. Subsequently, comprehensive clinical and systemic evaluation was performed. The study excluded those with pre-existing cardiovascular diseases, unstable coronary syndromes, or those engaged in vigorous athletic training, as they may act as confounders.

Blood samples were collected to assess the levels of neuroactive hormones, specifically cortisol, and DHEA-S, using aseptic techniques and preserved in vials containing ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid anticoagulant at a concentration of approximately 1.5 mg/mL. This sample was collected after administering a validated questionnaire to measure perceived stress, emotions, and mood. DHEA-S and cortisol concentrations were measured using fully automated electrochemical luminescence immunoassay technology on the ROCHE COBAS E 411. Subsequently, the research focus shifted toward event-related potentials (ERPs) data, particularly to analyze the P300 component exclusively. Eysenck explained that cognitive performance was determined by the time taken to respond and the proportion of the maximal possible accuracy of the task.[7] Each participant was then given a battery of cognitive tests performed on the Stroop test, Trial Making test, and Mini-mental state examination (MMSE). P300 - cortical evoked response potential was used for neurophysiological measure of cognitive function.

P300 – Cortical evoked response potential

The study involved ERP data from the root mean square of the electromyography MK-2 recorder which was measured with the “oddball paradigm” using a P300 standard auditory based on the 10/20 electrode placement method. It used single-channel audio stimuli, rarefaction clicks with a duration of 100 μs at intensity levels of 30–100 decibels transmitted through headphones at a carrier rate of 11. They were confined to a location of 36 characters to concentrate on a particular character of their desire. Sensitivity was measured by giving participants instructions to press a button when the light stimuli arose. Reaction time (RT) was measured in milliseconds and was repeated 5 times to minimize variability in response times.

Description of the cognitive tasks

Electrical sensory stimuli were applied in the Stroop test. To ensure standardization at the start of the test, participants were administered a 5-min relaxation session, during which they relaxed while seated on the chair. The trials consisted of an instructional cue of either “color” or “word” and the cue-target interval varied with each trial and equaled 1, 3, or 5 s. Participants then viewed a word stimulus formed by red, blue, or green letters, with the following instructions: In the “color” task, participants were instructed to identify the letter color and in the “word” task, they were instructed to read the word. All the words were printed in capital letters; in 60% of the trials, the tones of the word and the background color of the font were the same; in the remaining 40% of trials, the tones of the word and the background color of the font were different; the contestant must therefore be able to make a split-second decision on whether the color of the word was the word. The percentage of accurate responses provided a measure of accuracy, while congruent and incongruent trials took an average of seconds. Cognitive impairment was evaluated using the MMSE, and its modification was used to track changes in the following periods, according to Folstein et al.[8] A SD below 23 suggests learning disability. The trail-making test (TMT) had two parts: A and B. In Part A, the task was to join 25 sequentially numbered circles in the fastest possible manner. In Part B, they joined 25 circles labeled 1-13 along the number line and A in alphabetical order on the same side. The results were generated from the split times calculated in seconds.

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software(version 19.0) (SPSS Inc., IBM Corporation, Chicago, IL, USA). The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to verify normality, and the statistical method was determined based on this test. Descriptive results are expressed as the mean ± SD. Unpaired t-test inferential analysis was used to determine the differences between variables. Statistical significance (P-value) was used to determine the significance of the study parameters. At a confidence interval of 95%, statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Figure 1 presents the following measurements: The average age is 21 years, the height is 1.70 m, the weight is 62.47 kg, the resting heart rate is 81.03 beats/min, the systolic blood pressure is 116.77 mmHg, and the diastolic blood pressure is 74.90 mmHg. Figure 2 shows that the measurements are as follows: Cortisol level is 7.13 ± 3.04 μg/dL, DHEA-S level is 350.34 ± 89.74 μg/dL, Cortisol/DHEA-S ratio is 0.023 ± 0.01, Stroop test correctness of response for congruent trials is 98.93 ± 1.11%, for incongruent trials is 96.77 ± 2.02%, Stroop test RT for congruent trials is 23.83 ± 5.27 s, for incongruent trials is 31.1 ± 5.78 s, TMT-A score is 23.93 ± 4.56, TMT-B score is 49.73 ± 8.02, MMSE score is 29.33 ± 0.71, and P300 latency is 312.97 ± 35.98 ms. Participants with elevated levels of DHEA-S demonstrated better performance, indicated by higher accuracy percentages and quicker RTs. Lower P300 latencies were associated with faster RTs and improved response accuracy, leading to better cognitive performance. Individuals with reduced attention and performance exhibited a notably elevated Cortisol/DHEA-S ratio.

Basic parameter of the participants. RHR: Resting heart rate, SBP: Systolic blood pressure, DBP: Diastolic blood pressure. X-axis: Age in years, height in cm, weight in kg, RHR in beats/min, SBP in mmHg, DBP in mmHg. Y-axis: Numerical values in relation with X-axis parameters.
Figure 1:
Basic parameter of the participants. RHR: Resting heart rate, SBP: Systolic blood pressure, DBP: Diastolic blood pressure. X-axis: Age in years, height in cm, weight in kg, RHR in beats/min, SBP in mmHg, DBP in mmHg. Y-axis: Numerical values in relation with X-axis parameters.
Cognitive parameter. DHEA-S: Dehydroepiandrostenedionesulfate, TMT: Trail-making test, MMSE: Mini-mental state examination, RT: Reaction time. Y-axis: Numerical values in relation with X-axis parameters.
Figure 2:
Cognitive parameter. DHEA-S: Dehydroepiandrostenedionesulfate, TMT: Trail-making test, MMSE: Mini-mental state examination, RT: Reaction time. Y-axis: Numerical values in relation with X-axis parameters.

The ratio of cortisol to DHEA-S has the potential to influence RTs for incongruent trials. This is suggested by a t-value of 2.54 and a P = 0.09, both of which signal a tendency toward statistical significance. However, when considering a significance threshold of 0.05, this effect does not meet the requirements for statistical significance. The t-values of 3.98 and P = 0.15 suggest a significant trend, indicating a potential influence of the cortisol/DHEA-S ratio on TMT-B completion times.

The statistical analysis reveals a significant difference (t = 2.41, P = 0.02) between the groups with high and low DHEA-S values on the MMSE scores. These data suggest that there exists a positive correlation between higher levels of DHEA-S and improved cognitive performance. The t-value of 2.56, along with a P = 0.01, indicates a statistically significant correlation between cortisol levels and MMSE scores. Higher cortisol levels may be associated with improved cognitive performance. The correlation between the cortisol to DHEA-S ratio and MMSE scores is statistically significant, as indicated by the t-value of 1.77 and P = 0.04 [Table 1].

Table 1: Unpaired t-test results for cognitive parameters and neuroactive steroids.
Cognitive parameter Neuroactive steroid t-value P-value
Stroop Test -correctness (congruent trial) DHEA-S 1.54 0.13
Cortisol 2.43 0.22
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 1.66 0.17
Stroop Test -correctness (incongruent trial) DHEA-S 1.37 0.27
Cortisol 2.87 0.11
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 1.89 0.45
Stroop Test -reaction time (congruent trial) DHEA-S 2.56 0.31
Cortisol 2.31 0.28
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 2.22 0.16
Stroop Test -reaction time (incongruent trial) DHEA-S 1.87 0.11
Cortisol 1.36 0.13
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 2.54 0.09
TMT-A (seconds) DHEA-S 1.53 0.24
Cortisol 1.67 0.11
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 1.98 0.19
TMT-B (seconds) DHEA-S 2.88 0.22
Cortisol 1.50 0.24
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 3.98 0.15
MMSE scores DHEA-S 2.41 0.02
Cortisol 2.56 0.01
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 1.77 0.04
P300 latency (ms) DHEA-S 1.57 0.17
Cortisol 3.69 0.23
Cortisol/DHEA-S Ratio 2.65 0.11

MMSE: Mini-mental state examination, DHEA-S: Dehydroepiandrostenedione-sulfate, TMT: Trail-making test. P value significance threshold of 0.05

In general, the majority of cognitive markers do not exhibit statistically significant associations with levels of NASs. Nevertheless, noteworthy discoveries have been made: MMSE scores exhibit a substantial correlation with DHEA-S, cortisol, and the cortisol/DHEA-S ratio, indicating a possible connection between these neuroactive hormones and cognitive function as a whole. In addition, there is a notable correlation between the cortisol/DHEA-S ratio and RTs in the Stroop test, namely during incongruent trials. This highlights the necessity for additional research in this field.

DISCUSSION

The important findings of this study include cortisol levels of 7.13 ± 3.04 μg/dL and DHEA-S levels of 350.34 ± 89.74 μg/dL, with a cortisol/DHEA-S ratio of 0.023 ± 0.01. Higher DHEA-S scores correlate with better cognitive performance, faster RTs, and greater accuracy. Lower P300 latencies are associated with improved cognitive response times. Although the cortisol/DHEA-S ratio showed a trend toward influencing RTs and TMT-B completion times, these were not statistically significant. Higher DHEA-S and cortisol levels were significantly correlated with better MMSE scores, suggesting a positive association between these hormones and cognitive function.

A recent study analyzed the plasma concentrations of DHEA, DHEA-S, cortisol, dissociative psychological symptoms, and military performance in 41 physically fit individuals enrolled in the combat diver qualification course; a favorable connection was observed between elevated levels of DHEA and DHEA-S and enhanced performance on the underwater navigation test. Furthermore, a notable negative correlation was observed between symptoms of stress-induced dissociation and elevated levels of DHEA and DHEA-S.[9] An analysis of NASs, such as pregnenolone and DHEA, and their ratios, particularly about cortisol, provides valuable insights into their impact on attention and cognitive performance in young persons. Van Broekhoven and Verkes found that administering allopregnanolone in moderate doses can enhance concentration by reducing anxiety. However, higher doses of the drug can impair attention due to its sedative qualities, indicating that the effect on cognitive function is dependent on the dosage.[10] Eser et al. confirmed that the modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid A (GABA-A) receptors by allopregnanolone is crucial for its effects on anxiety and attention.[11] This study also offered valuable insights into the neuronal mechanisms that underlie these effects. Wolf and Kirschbaum conducted a study that demonstrated that incorporating DHEA into one’s diet can improve cognitive abilities, namely working memory and attention, particularly in young individuals experiencing stress.[12] According to the scientists, the negative effect of DHEA on cortisol plays a significant role in enhancing cognitive function.[12] Alhaj et al. reported similar findings, suggesting that DHEA enhances cognitive performance and mood.[13] This provides evidence that the regulation of cortisol levels using DHEA may have a beneficial effect on cognitive function.

Morgan et al. found a connection between a higher DHEA/cortisol ratio and enhanced cognitive performance as well as an increased capacity to manage stress.[14] This finding indicates that it is crucial to maintain a balanced level of these neurosteroids for optimal cognitive health. Guazzo et al. found that individuals with a higher DHEA/cortisol ratio demonstrated enhanced memory function and reduced levels of anxiety.[15] This discovery provides evidence that this ratio can be regarded as a reliable indication of cognitive well-being. Majewska et al. and Paul and Purdy investigated the influence of neurosteroids on GABA-A receptors, which subsequently modulate inhibitory control and cognitive functions.[16,17] The research highlights the importance of neurosteroids, specifically allopregnanolone, in regulating attention and performance. Dubrovsky examined the relationship between neurosteroids and N-methyl-Daspartate (NMDA) receptors, which play critical roles in synaptic plasticity and memory. Neurosteroids can enhance cognitive processes by controlling the activation of NMDA receptors, as demonstrated by this interaction.[18] Sapolsky et al. investigated the role of neurosteroids in regulating the HPA axis and stress management.[19] Neurosteroids like DHEA were highlighted as having the ability to mitigate the detrimental effects of cortisol on the brain, hence safeguarding cognitive functioning during periods of stress. Yen and Laughlin presented proof that the administration of DHEA reduces cortisol levels and improves cognitive performance, especially in stressful situations.[20] To address the variability in neurosteroid levels and their influence on cognitive function, future research must prioritize personalized treatments. Studies conducted by Ritsner et al. and Marx et al. suggested that differences in the processing of neurosteroids and the initial levels of these substances in individuals could offer useful insights for the development of tailored treatment approaches.[21,22] Comprehensive investigation is required to fully understand the long-lasting effects of neurosteroid modulation on cognitive function. Wolf and Kirschbaum and Morgan et al. propose utilizing longitudinal designs to investigate temporal changes and assess the enduring efficacy of cognitive enhancers.[9,12] Supplementing neurosteroids in clinical research has demonstrated promise in enhancing cognitive impairment and attention deficits. Eser et al. and Guazzo et al.[11,15] emphasize the therapeutic capacity of neurosteroids in the treatment of conditions such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and anxiety disorders.

CONCLUSION

This study conclusively illustrates the neuroprotective and neuroinhibitory effects of DHEA-S and cortisol. The anti-glucocorticoid activity of DHEA-S was confirmed by the inverse ratio of cortisol to DHEA-S. Our findings support existing data indicating that the immediate effects of neurosteroids do not involve interactions with traditional steroid hormone receptors responsible for gene transcription. Neurosteroids have been shown to directly influence the function of ligand-gated ion channels, particularly GABA-A receptors, and possess characteristics of inducing anxiety, promoting seizures, increasing memory, stimulating neurogenesis, and providing neuroprotection. Suppression of GABA-A receptor activity: The enhanced activity of NMDA receptors may be used in the future to build powerful analogs as a translational and rational approach to neurological diseases.

Acknowledgments:

The authors thank the Department of Physiology for their support in the conduction of this study. All the authors state that the manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors that the requirements for authorship as stated in the Journal guidelines have been met, and that each author believes that the manuscript represents honest work.

Ethical approval:

The research/study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Mangalagiri (A.P), number AIIMS/MG/IEC/2022-23/228, dated 01/08/2022.

Declaration of patient consent:

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.

Conflicts of interest:

There are no conflicts of interest.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:

The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.

Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.

References

  1. , , , , . Effects of physical activity level on attentional networks in young adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19:5374.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , . Sport experience and physical activity: Event-related brain potential and task performance indices of attention in young adults. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2019;4:33.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , , , et al. Neuroactive steroids and cognitive functions in first-episode psychosis patients and their healthy siblings. Front Psychiatry. 2019;10:390.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , , , et al. Simultaneous determination of selected steroids with neuroactive effects in human serum by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2024;15:1990-2005.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , . Neuroactive steroids, toll-like receptors, and neuroimmune regulation: Insights into their impact on neuropsychiatric disorders. Life (Basel). 2024;14:582.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. . Steroids and Alzheimer's disease: Changes associated with pathology and therapeutic potential. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:4812.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , . Extraversion, arousal, and performance In: Personality and individual differences: A natural science approach. London: Plenum; . p. :237-288.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. , , . Mini-mental state. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189-98.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , . Relationships among plasma dehydroepiandrosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, cortisol, symptoms of dissociation, and objective performance in humans exposed to underwater navigation stress. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;66:334-40.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. , . Neurosteroids in depression: A review. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2003;165:97-110.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , , . Neuroactive steroids and affective disorders. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2006;84:656-66.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , . Actions of dehydroepiandrosterone and its sulfate in the central nervous system: Effects on cognition and emotion in animals and humans. Brain Res Rev. 1999;30:264-88.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , . Effects of DHEA administration on episodic memory, cortisol and mood in healthy young men: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2006;188:541-51.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , , . Stress-induced deficits in working memory and visuo-constructive abilities in special operations soldiers. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;60:722-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. , , , , . Cortisol, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and the DHEA to cortisol ratio in schizophrenia. Psychol Med. 2006;26:545-53.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , , . Steroid hormone metabolites are barbiturate-like modulators of the GABA receptor. Science. 1986;232:1004-7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. , . Neuroactive steroids. FASEB J. 1992;6:2311-22.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. . Neurosteroids, neuroactive steroids, and symptoms of affective disorders. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2006;84:644-55.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. , , . How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions. Endocr Rev. 2000;21:55-89.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. , . Aging and the adrenal cortex. Exp Gerontol. 1998;33:897-910.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. , , , , . Improvement of sustained attention and visual and movement skills, but not clinical symptoms, after dehydroepiandrosterone augmentation in schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006;26:495-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. , , , , , , et al. Pregnenolone as a novel therapeutic candidate in schizophrenia: Emerging preclinical and clinical evidence. Neuroscience. 2011;191:78-90.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Show Sections