Cortical stimulation in conscious rats controls joint inflammation

Accepted Manuscript Cortical stimulation in conscious rats controls joint inflammation

Gabriel Shimizu Bassi, Luis Ulloa, Victor Rodrigues Santos, Flávio Del Vecchio, Polianna Delfino-Pereira, Gerson Jonathan Rodrigues, Jaci Airton Castania, Fernando Queiróz Cunha, Hélio Cesar Salgado, Thiago Mattar Cunha, Norberto Garcia-Cairasco, Alexandre Kanashiro PII: DOI: Reference:

S0278-5846(18)30015-0 doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2018.02.013 PNP 9350

To appear in:

Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

9 January 2018 21 February 2018 27 February 2018

Please cite this article as: Gabriel Shimizu Bassi, Luis Ulloa, Victor Rodrigues Santos, Flávio Del Vecchio, Polianna Delfino-Pereira, Gerson Jonathan Rodrigues, Jaci Airton Castania, Fernando Queiróz Cunha, Hélio Cesar Salgado, Thiago Mattar Cunha, Norberto Garcia-Cairasco, Alexandre Kanashiro , Cortical stimulation in conscious rats controls joint inflammation. The address for the corresponding author was captured as affiliation for all authors. Please check if appropriate. Pnp(2018), doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2018.02.013

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT CORTICAL STIMULATION IN CONSCIOUS RATS CONTROLS JOINT INFLAMMATION Gabriel Shimizu Bassi1,2@; Luis Ulloa3@, Victor Rodrigues Santos4; Flávio Del Vecchio4; Polianna Delfino-Pereira4,5, Gerson Jonathan Rodrigues5, Jaci Airton Castania4, Fernando Queiróz Cunha6; Hélio Cesar Salgado4, Thiago Mattar Cunha6; Norberto

PT

Garcia-Cairasco4,5@ and Alexandre Kanashiro6,7@

1

Department of Immunology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School - University of São Paulo,

RI

Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. 2

SC

Translational Research Center for GastroIntestinal Disorders (TARGID), Intestinal

Neuroimmune Interactions, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3

Department of Surgery, Center of Immunology and Inflammation, Rutgers - New

NU

Jersey Medical School, Rutgers University. Newark, NJ 07103. USA. 4

Department of Physiology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School - University of São Paulo,

MA

Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. 5

Department of Neuroscience and Behavioral Sciences, Ribeirão Preto Medical School

- University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. 6

PT E

São Carlos, SP, Brazil.

D

Department of Physiological Sciences, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCAR),

7

Department of Pharmacology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School - University of São

Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.

Corresponding Authors:

CE

@

GSB: [email protected]; LU: [email protected]; NGC: [email protected];

AC

AK: [email protected];

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT ABSTRACT The neuronal control of the immune system is fundamental to the development of new therapeutic strategies for inflammatory disorders. Recent studies reported that afferent vagal stimulation attenuates peripheral inflammation by activating specific sympathetic central and peripheral networks, but only few subcortical brain areas were investigated. In the present study, we report that afferent vagal stimulation also activates specific cortical areas, as the parietal and cingulate cortex. Since these cortical structures innervate sympathetic-related areas, we investigate whether

PT

electrical stimulation of parietal cortex can attenuate knee joint inflammation in nonanesthetized rats. Our results show that cortical stimulation in rats increased

RI

sympathetic activity and improved joint inflammatory parameters, such as local neutrophil infiltration and pro-inflammatory cytokine levels, without causing behavioral

SC

disturbance, brain epileptiform activity or neural damage. In addition, we superposed the areas activated by afferent vagal or cortical stimulation to map common central

NU

structures to depict a brain immunological homunculus that can allow novel therapeutic approaches against inflammatory joint diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis.

MA

Key words: joint inflammation; cortical stimulation; vagus nerve; neuro-immune

AC

CE

PT E

D

interactions, immunological homunculus

2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT INTRODUCTION Joint pain is one of the most common disabling factors in articular inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (Castañeda et al. 2016; Upchurch & Kay 2012), that can lead to cognitive impairments as anxiety, depression and suicide contributing to arthritic morbidity and mortality (Boyden et al. 2016; Hewlett et al. 2011). There is no cure for rheumatoid arthritis and current clinical treatments are based on the use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that neutralize cytokines (e.g. tumor necrosis factor; TNF) inhibiting activation of leucocyte such as neutrophil

PT

(Edrees et al. 2005, Mantovani et al. 2011, Inui and Koike 2016). Neutrophils are critical for the innate immunity to eliminate microorganisms producing microbicide

RI

mediators, but when unregulated, they can cause tissue injury as observed in the joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Chronic DMARDs usage causes undesirable side such

as

systemic

immunosuppression,

opportunistic

SC

effects,

infections

and

malignancies (Favalli et al. 2009). Recent studies showed that neural stimulation could

NU

induce therapeutic advantages by controlling local inflammation in arthritic disorders without provoking systemic side effects (Levine 1978, Bassi et al. 2015, 2017).

MA

The regulation of the innate immunity by the sympathetic nervous system has been well studied (Elenkov 1995, Kenney and Ganta 2011). More recent studies also report the potential of the parasympathetic nervous system to control inflammation (Ulloa and Deitch 2009, Pavlov and Tracey 2015). In fact, vagal stimulation has

D

received special attention due to its ability to control the innate immune system and to

PT E

inhibit systemic inflammation in multiple experimental models, from sepsis to rheumatoid arthritis (Ulloa and Deitch 2009, Levine et al. 2014, Koopman et al. 2016, Bassi et al. 2017). Anatomical studies indicate that vagal stimulation inhibits systemic

CE

TNF levels in experimental sepsis through two peripheral neuroimmune mechanisms: First, vagal stimulation inhibits splenic TNF production in experimental sepsis by activating the sympathetic splenic nerve and inducing neurogenic norepinephrine in the

AC

spleen (Rosas-Ballina et al. 2011, Olofsson et al. 2012). Second, vagal stimulation inhibits systemic inflammation in experimental sepsis by inducing the production of dopamine in the adrenal medulla (Torres-Rosas et al. 2014). In addition to these efferent pathways, recent studies also suggested a third mechanism where vagal afferent stimulation must activate central neuronal networks controlling peripheral inflammation (Bratton et al. 2012, Martelli et al. 2014, Bassi et al. 2015, Inoue et al. 2016, Abe et al. 2017, Willemze et al. 2017). We recently reported that vagal stimulation attenuates arthritic joint inflammation through an afferent vagal pathway toward the central nervous system that induces local sympathetic production of norepinephrine in the joints (Bassi et al. 2017). This vagal afferent mechanism required 3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT the integrity of the locus coeruleus (LC), a sympathomodulatory structure in the brain, showing, for the first time, the existence of specific inflammatory processing brain centers that can control peripheral inflammation in arthritis (Bassi et al. 2017). In addition to the LC, vagal afferent activity is well known to modulate other critical somatosensory and autonomic areas localized in the lower and upper brainstem, diencephalon and cerebral hemispheres towards direct and indirect polysynaptic connections originated in central vagal nuclei (such as the nucleus of the solitary tract and the dorsomedial nucleus) (Saper and Loewy 1980, Rutecki 1990, Guyenet 1991,

PT

Ruggiero et al. 2000, Buller 2003, Saper 2011). These connections suggest the existence of other brain immunomodulatory centers that can contribute to the anti-

RI

inflammatory effects of the afferent vagal stimulation and inhibit inflammation in arthritic joints without inducing systemic side effects. In the current study, we show that vagal

SC

stimulation induced c-Fos expression (a neuronal activity marker) in several brain areas including the parietal cortex. Furthermore, specific stimulation of the parietal

NU

cortex inhibits inflammation in arthritic joints without inducing systemic antiinflammatory side effects. We propose an inflammatory central processing map that

MA

includes brain areas activated by both vagal and cortical stimulations that can have immunomodulatory functions, with clinical implications for treating rheumatoid arthritis.

Animal experiments

D

METHODS

PT E

Male Wistar rats (250–300 g) were obtained from the main Animal Facility of the Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, and housed upon arrival at the animal facility in plastic cages under a 12-hour light/dark cycle (lights ON at 7am) at

CE

20°C ± 1°C. The animals had unrestricted access to food and drinking water. The number of animals used was the minimum required to ensure reliability of the results, and every effort was made to minimize animal discomfort. All animals were

AC

anesthetized with a mixture of ketamine and xylazine (50 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg, respectively) administered into the right posterior calf muscle through a 30G needle. The experimental protocols comply with the recommendations of the SBNeC (Brazilian Society of Neuroscience and Behavior), the Ethical Principles of the Brazilian College of Animal Experimentation (COBEA Protocols 137/2013, 189/2015) and the US National Institutes of Health Guide for The Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Surgical procedures After the confirmation of anaesthesia by the lack of response to a foot pinch and corneal reflex, rats were maintained in supine position on a heated pad, and a medial 4

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT laparotomy was performed, and one of the following surgical procedures was used: for splenectomy (SPX), the spleen was visualized, exposed and then removed after ligation of all splenic blood vessels; in subdiaphragmatic vagotomy (sVNX), the posterior wall of the oesophagus was visualized to find the posterior vagal branch, which was followed until its exit from the oesophageal hiatus, and then 1 to 2 mm length of the nerve was removed; for sympathectomy (SYMPX), the right lumbar sympathetic ganglia (L2–L3 level) were dissected near the renal artery, the L5 ganglion was identified at the level of aorta bifurcation, and all pathways connecting L2 to L5

PT

were excised as we previously described in Bassi et al. (2017); adrenalectomy (ADX) was performed after bilateral dorsal incision followed by visualization of the kidneys,

RI

and both adrenal glands were removed. Adrenalectomized animals had free access to 0.9% NaCl to avoid body electrolyte loss. After each surgery, the wounds were

SC

carefully closed with sutures using nylon thread. Experiments were performed 7-10

Zymosan-induced arthritis

NU

days after the surgeries.

MA

Fifty microliters of zymosan suspension (100 µg) in sterile saline (0.9 % NaCl; vehicle) were injected into the femorotibial joint (intra-articular; i.a.) of both knees (Keystone et al. 1977, Gegout et al. 1994). Joint experimental score was assessed as follows: 0 = no evidence of inflammation; 1= edema of the femorotibial cavity (slight

D

edema); 2 = edema involving all joint capsule surrounding the knee (large edema); 3 =

PT E

the same as 2 plus small hemorrhagic spots along the synovial bursa; 4 = the same as 2 plus large hemorrhagic spots or blood/pus leakage (Bassi et al. 2015, 2017). Joint diameter was measured by a caliper in millimeters (mm). Knee neutrophil recruitment:

CE

animals were killed by decapitation and then the knee joint was opened and washed with saline solution containing EDTA (1 mM). Synovial cavities were then opened, washed with a mixture of PBS/EDTA by a micropipette, diluted (1:5) and the total

AC

number of leukocytes was determined by means of Neubauer chamber using an optical microscope (400x). The results are depicted as neutrophils/joint cavity.

Vagal stimulation in anaesthetized animals Rats were anesthetized and maintained in supine position. A midline cervical incision was performed and the right carotid artery was identified. The vagus nerve was carefully dissected from the right carotid artery and bipolar stainless steel electrodes were connected to the stimulation device (MP150, Biopac Systems, Santa Barbara, CA, USA) was placed across the nerve trunk. The right vagus nerve has been chosen by our group because it is consistently more sensitive to electrical stimulation than the 5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT left vagus nerve (Hotta et al. 2009). After the end of the stimulation (5Hz, 0.1ms, 1V), the electrode was removed and wounds were closed with sutures. In the afferent vagal stimulation group, the right vagus nerve was carefully identified and cut near the sternocleidomastoid muscle and the wounds were closed with sutures. Twenty-four hours later, the animal was re-anesthetized and the proximal end of the right vagus nerve was then carefully identified and a bipolar stainless steel electrode was placed across the afferent nerve trunk. Electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve (VNS) was delivered for 2 minutes and only animals presenting noticeable reduced breath rate

PT

were considered for the experiment. After the end of the stimulation, the electrode was removed and wounds were closed with sutures. The sham group underwent similar

RI

surgical procedures but was not subjected to electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve.

SC

Vagus nerve stimulation in unanesthetized rats

Anesthetized rats were maintained in supine position and the right vagus nerve

NU

was carefully dissected from the carotid artery through a ventral approach. Briefly, bipolar stainless steel electrodes were implanted around the vagus nerve and

MA

exteriorized through the sternocleidomastoid muscle in the nape of the neck. Next, both electrode and nerve trunk were covered with silicone (Kwik-Sil silicone elastomer; World Precision Instruments, Sarasota, FL, USA). After silicone polymerization, the wounds were closed with sutures. Flunixin meglumine (Banamine, 25 mg/kg,

D

subcutaneous; Schering-Plough, Cotia, SP, Brazil) was injected immediately after the

PT E

end of surgery. Twenty-four hours later, the animals were individually placed in a circular arena (Ø 37 cm; 50 cm high) in a quiet environment to avoid stress. Vagal electrodes were connected to an external electrical stimulator (1M1C; AVS Projetos,

CE

São Carlos, SP, Brazil) and a period of 10 minutes of free locomotion and exploration was allowed. After this period, rats were subjected to 2 minutes of vagus nerve stimulation (5 Hz; 0.1 ms; 1 V). This VNS parameter has been chosen by our group

AC

because it has anti-inflammatory properties without causing significant cardiovascular alterations (Bassi et al. 2017). Vagal stimulation was confirmed by reduced breath rate and a more steady state behaviour (lack of locomotion, exploration or freezing) that was restored immediately after the end of the stimulation. Five minutes after the stimulation the animals were exposed to the Elevated Plus-Maze test (EPM), an experimental tool to evaluate anxiety (File et al. 2001). Twenty-four hours after the behavioral experiment, the animals were re-stimulated for the c-Fos experiment. In the sham group, the electrodes were implanted around the right vagus nerve and exteriorized in the nape of the neck, but no electrical current was delivered.

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Stereotaxic surgery Naïve Wistar rats were anesthetized and placed in a stereotaxic frame (David Kopf, Tujunga, CA, USA) for implantation of the screws (stainless steel screw, Ø 1.5 mm; Fine Science Tools, Heidelberg, Germany) and electrode (stainless-steel teflonisolated microwire; Ø 127 µm; A-M Systems, Sequim, WA, USA). On the left parietal cortex (anteroposterior = 2.7 mm, mediolateral = 5.0 mm, dorsoventral = duramater contact) was implanted a stainless steel screw that served as a stimulation electrode, and in the same contralateral area another stainless steel screw was fixed and used as

PT

a recording eletrode. In addition, one bipolar recording electrode was implanted in the left hippocampus (anteroposterior: -6.3 mm, mediolateral = 4.5 mm, dorsoventral = 4.5

RI

mm) and a stainless steel screw was implanted in the frontal bone and welded to a tiny wire to serve as the ground electrode. In other group of animals, an additional tripolar

SC

electrode for recording and stimulus (double function) in the left basolateral amygdala (anteroposterior: 6.7 mm, mediolateral = 4.7 mm, dorsoventral = 7.1 mm) was

NU

implanted to serve as control group. The frontal bone screw was welded to a tiny wire to serve as the ground and two stainless steel support screws were fixed. All recording

MA

and stimulus were monopolar electrodes and their coordinates extracted from the Rat Brain Atlas (Paxinos and Watson 2007). The screws and electrode were then welded to a RJ11cat6 male plug and fixed to the skull by acrylic resin. At the end of surgery each animal received an intramuscular injection (0.2 mL) of veterinary antibiotic

D

(Pentabiótico, 0.2 mL; Fort Dodge, Campinas, SP, Brazil), followed by an injection of

PT E

the anti-inflammatory and analgesic banamine (Flunixin Meglumine, 2.5 mg/kg, Schering-Plough, Cotia, SP, Brazil).

CE

Cortex stimulation in unanesthetized rats Seven to ten days after the stereotaxic surgery, the animals were individually placed in a circular arena (Ø 37 cm; 50 cm high) and the stimulation cable was

AC

connected to the electrodes. A quiet environment was maintained to avoid stress and 10 minutes period of free locomotion and exploration were allowed to the animals. Brain cortex was electrically stimulated for 2 minutes by means of a sinusoidal wave stimulator (60 Hz, 0.1 ms, 50 µA) (Reis et al. 2010) continuously monitored by an oscilloscope connected to a 1 kΩ resistor in line to the electrodes. None of the stimulated animals presented alertness, freezing, escape or seizure behaviors during the stimulation. Five minutes after the stimulation the animals were exposed to the EPM. Twenty-four hours after the behavioral experiment, the animals underwent immunological experiments. The sham group underwent similar stereotaxic surgery but no electrical current was delivered. 7

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Temperature measurement in unanesthetized rats Tail temperature was measured with a thermal camera (Multi-Purpose Thermal Imager IRI 4010; InfraRed Integrated Systems Ltd Park Circle, Tithe Barn Way Swan Valley Northampton, UK), placed 50 cm above the animal's tail, and was plotted as the mean of three measurements recorded at different points throughout the length of the tail. The experiments were conducted in a room kept at 26 ± 1°C, which is the

PT

thermoneutral zone for rats (Gordon 1990). Video and electroencephalogram recording and analysis

RI

To ensure that during cortical electrical stimulation (CES) no aberrant neuronal (epileptiform) activity was produced in cortical or subcortical structures, monopolar

SC

electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings of the electrical activity of the ipsilateral hippocampus and contralateral cerebral cortex were analysed. Each animal was placed

NU

individually in an acrylic box (Ø 37 cm; 50 cm high) with a metallic shielded cage (Faraday) and connected to the system through an electric plug (RJ11cat6) in a quiet

MA

environment. After 10 minutes of free exploration, the monophasic cathodic electrical stimulus (60 Hz, 0.1 ms, 50 µA) was applied by 2 minutes. The EEG was captured using the two channels signal conditioner (CyberAmp 320; Axon Instruments, Union City,

CA,

USA)

coupled

to

an

analog-to-digital

interface (PowerLab

3.80;

D

ADInstruments, Bella Vista, Australia). The EEG acquisition parameters were as follow:

PT E

AC recording, band pass from 0.1 Hz to 1 kHz, total gain of 1000x, and sampling rate of 2 kHz. A video camera (Panasonic, Kadoma, Japan) was used to help coupling the observable animal behaviour (exploration, grooming, locomotion, and eventually

CE

abnormal or seizure patterns) in synchrony with the EEG activity. Temporal EEG analysis was digitally made from 0 to 100 Hz and expressed in a power scale in dB, using the software LabChart Pro 8.0 (ADInstruments, Bella Vista, Australia). Visual

AC

analysis of wave amplitude, frequency, morphology and eventual primary and secondary recurrent afterdischarges (markers of epileptiform activity) were analysed similarly to Reis et al. (2010). The EEG patterns were correlated to the animal behaviour before and after the CES. For the positive control of induction of EEG epileptiform activity, the parameters of stimulation for rapid amygdala kindling were: biphasic electrical constant current with intensity of 500 µA (60 Hz, 2 ms) during 10 seconds (Ebert and Loscher, 1995; Foresti et al., 2008). The electrophysiological signals were recorded 1 min before and 5 min after 1st stimulus for hippocampus and amygdala, respectively. The parameters used for recording were the same. For both recordings (CES and rapid amygdala kindling) spectral analysis were made, including 8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT comparisons of amplitudes of EEG signal over the distribution of the frequencies, before and after the stimulus. For the CES, the quantification of the total power (mV2) of the electrographic signal was performed through routine for power spectrum density in order to compare pre-stimulation and post-stimulation EEG epochs (5 minutes each) in hippocampus and cortex. Behavior analysis in the EPM Test To evaluate whether the electrical stimulation procedures produce anxiety-like

PT

behaviors, rats were tested in the EPM 5 minutes after the end of the VNS or CES. The EPM was made of wood and had two open arms (50 x 10 cm) perpendicular to two

RI

enclosed arms of the same size with 50-cm-high walls, with the exception of the central part (10 × 10 cm), where the arms crossed. The apparatus was elevated 50 cm above

SC

the floor (File et al. 2001). The behavior of the animals was analyzed using a video camera positioned 100 cm above the maze. An arm entry or exit was defined as all four

NU

paws entering or exiting an arm, respectively. These data were used to calculate the percentage of open arm entries and percentage of time spent in the open arms. The

MA

following complementary ethological parameters were also analyzed: stretched-attend posture (when the animal stretched to its full length with the forepaws, keeping the hind paws in the same place and turning its back to the anterior position), flat-back approach (locomotion when the animal stretched to its full length and cautiously moved

D

forward), head dipping (dipping the head below the level of the maze floor), and end-

PT E

arm exploration (the number of times the rat reached the end of an open arm) (File et al., 2001; Anseloni and Brandão, 1997). The signal was relayed to a monitor in another room via a closed-circuit television camera to discriminate all forms of behavior.

CE

Luminosity at the level of the open arms of the EPM was 20 lx. A total of 5 minutes of free locomotion and exploration of the maze was allowed. The maze was cleaned

AC

thoroughly after each test using damp and dry cloths. C-Fos immunolabeling Twenty four hours after the EPM test and one and a half hours after new vagal or cortical stimulation (see Supplementary Figure 1B), animals were anesthetized and perfused with 0.1 M phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4) followed by 4% paraformaldehyde in 0.1 M PBS. Brains were removed and immersed for 5 hours in paraformaldehyde and then stored for 72 hours in 40% sucrose in 0.1 M PBS for cryoprotection. The brains were sliced (35 μm) in a cryostat (−20oC) and collected in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.4) and subsequently processed under free-floating technique using the Vectastain ABC Elite peroxidase rabbit IgG kit (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, 9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT CA, USA). All reactions were performed under agitation at 23 ± 1 oC. The sections were first incubated with 1% H2O2 for 10 minutes and washed three times with 0.1 M PBS (5 minutes each). Brain sections were then incubated with 0.1 M PBS enriched with 0.1 M glycine, washed three times with 0.1 M PBS (5 minutes each), and incubated with 0.1 M PBS enriched with 0.2% Triton-X and 1% bovine serum albumin (PBS+) for 1 hour. After three washes, the sections were incubated overnight with primary Fos rabbit polyclonal IgG (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA, USA) at a concentration of 1:1000 (coronal sections) or 1:800 (sagittal sections) in PBS+. Sections were again

PT

washed three times (5 minutes each) with 0.1 M PBS and incubated for 1 hour with secondary biotinylated anti-rabbit IgG (H+L; Vectastain, Vector Laboratories,

RI

Burlingame, CA, USA) at a concentration of 1:400 in PBS+. After another series of three 5 minutes washes in 0.1 M PBS, the sections were incubated for 1 hour with the

SC

avidin–biotin-peroxidase complex (A and B solution of the kit ABC, Vectastain, Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA, USA) in 0.1 M PBS at a concentration of 1:200 in 0.1 M immunoreactivity

was

revealed

by

NU

PBS and again washed three times in 0.1 M PBS (5 minutes each). Fos the

addition

of

the

chromogen

3,3′-di-

MA

aminobenzidine (DAB) (0.02%; Sigma, Saint Louis, MO, USA) to which H2O2 (0.04%) was added before use. Finally, tissue sections were washed twice with 0.1 M PBS, mounted on gelatin-coated slides, dehydrated and cover slipped. Fos-positive (Fos+) neurons were visualized under bright-field microscopy as a brown reaction product

D

inside the nuclei. Tissue sections were observed under light microscope (DMI6000b;

PT E

Leica, Wetzlar, Germany). Darker objects with areas between 10 and 80 μm2 were identified and automatically counted by a computerized image analysis system (Fiji; www.fiji.sc). Areas with the same shape and size comprising representative parts of

CE

each brain region were used for all rats, and counting of Fos+ neurons was performed under a 10x objective. Fos+ cells were bilaterally counted in each brain region by a researcher blind to the experimental groups. Nuclei were counted individually and

AC

expressed as mean number of Fos+ cells per nuclei. C-Fos pattern of expression from vagal and cortical stimulated brain sections After c-Fos quantification of both VNS and CES brain sections the photomicrographs were processed with a photo-editor image software (Photoshop CS6). The images were first desaturated and then the background was carefully removed equally in all sections by adjusting image levels to allow only the visualization of the c-Fos immunolabeling as black spots. The VNS and CES c-Fos immunolabeling was filled with green and red color, respectively. Therefore, similar brain sections were 10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT digitally merged and their color contrast was increased. Similar overlaid areas were identified by an orange color (digital co-localization).

C-Fos semi-quantitative analysis from VNS and CES brain sections Sections were examined using light microscopy and the number of c-Fos+ cells was counted and scored by the same observer based on an intensity scale of 0 to +++ compared to the control (naïve) group: 0 = no difference; +: small difference (≤10%);

PT

++: medium difference (>10 and ≤30%); +++: large difference (>30%). Evaluation of GFAP, ATF3 and Fluoro Jade positive (FJ+) neurons

RI

Forty eight hours after the CES, the animals were perfused and their brains were cut as for the c-Fos immunolabeling protocol. The brain sections were then

SC

washed 3 times in PBS (0.01 M, pH 7.4) 3 times for 5 minutes each and incubated in 5% normal goat serum and 1% BSA dissolved in PBS with 0.1% Triton X 100 (PBS-T)

NU

for 1 hour. Subsequently, the sections were washed in PBS-T (0.01 M, pH 7.4) 3 times for 5 minutes and then subjected to immunofluorescence staining with overnight

MA

incubation at 4oC with polyclonal anti-ATF3 (1:1000; catalog # sc-188; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA, USA) or anti-GFAP (1:1000; catalog # sc-9065, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA, USA). As a control, primary antibodies were omitted from the reaction. After incubation with the primary antibodies, the sections

D

were washed in PBS-T 3 times over 5 minutes and incubated at room temperature for

PT E

2 hours with Alexa Fluor 488® goat anti-rabbit IgG (Molecular ProCES, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The sections were washed with PBS-T as described earlier, mounted on glass slides with FluoromountTM Aqueous Mounting Medium (Sigma, Saint Louis, MO, USA),

CE

and then covered with cover slips. For FJ staining, 24 hours after the CES, the animals were perfused and the brains were cut. The brain mounted slides were transferred to a solution of 0.06% KMnO4 for 15 minutes and washed in distilled water three times for 1

AC

minute. After 30 minutes in the staining solution containing 0.0001% FJ C (Fluorojade C; Chemicon International, Merck Millipore, Darmstadt, Germany), the slides were rinsed with distilled water 3 times for 1 minute and fully dried. Finally, the slides were immersed in xylene and cover slipped with mounting media. As GFAP control, another group of animals was subjected to cortical electrolytic damage by direct AC current (square wave, 1 mA, 10 sec) applied through the electrode. As ATF3 and FJ controls, Status Epilepticus (SE) was induced in another group of animals by systemic injection of methyl-scopolamine (2 mg/kg) followed by i.p. pilocarpine (320 mg/kg) (Castro et al. 2011). Ninety minutes after SE establishment, the animals were killed, perfused and their brains were removed. A confocal microscope (SP5, Leica, Wetzlar, Germany) was 11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT used to visualize and capture GFAP, ATF3 and FJ stained sections under the same light conditions.

Cytokines measurement by ELISA For cytokines assessment the synovial cavities were opened, washed with a mixture of PBS/EDTA (1 mM) by a micropipette and diluted (1:5). The samples were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −70oC. On the day of the assay, the samples were thawed and maintained in ice until the end of the experiment. The

PT

samples were homogenized in 500 μL of the appropriate buffer containing protease inhibitors followed by centrifugation for 10 minutes at 2000 g to collect the supernatant.

(IL)-1β

RI

The supernatant was used to measure the levels of TNF (catalog # DY510), interleukin (catalog # DY501), and IL-6 (catalog # DY506) by enzyme-linked

SC

immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using Duo set kits from R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN, USA) according to the user manual. Cytokine concentrations were expressed in

NU

pg·mL−1 based on standard curves.

MA

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using Prism 6.0 (GraphPad) software. Neutrophil recruitment to the knee joint, cytokine, behavioral data, and the number of Fos+ neurons measurement was statistically analyzed by one-way analysis of variance

D

(ANOVA) followed by the Tukey’s multiple comparison post hoc test. The time course

PT E

of joint diameter and clinical score were analyzed with the two-way ANOVA for repeated measures followed by the Bonferroni’s post hoc test when indicated. The analysis of the difference between the two groups was performed by Student’s t test.

CE

The experimental sample n refers to the number of animals and is indicated inside each graph bar and data are expressed as the mean +/- standard error of the mean. Differences were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05. None of the animals

AC

with CES and cortical and hippocampal EEG recordings showed any substantial epileptiform-like alteration (2 standard deviations above or below the baseline) by visual examination that would deserve statistical analysis. EEG basal and post periods were analyzed during approximately 5 min before and after stimulus. The signals were analyzed using Matlab (versão 2009, The Math Works, Inc) and GraphPad Prism version 5.0. Differences with p<0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results Afferent vagal stimulation reduced knee joint inflammation.

12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT We first analyzed whether selective afferent vagal stimulation controls arthritic join inflammation by itself, without any efferent signal (Supplementary Fig 1A). Previous studies focused on efferent vagal stimulation directed toward the innervation of peripheral organs (Borovikova et al. 2000, Huston et al. 2006, Matteoli et al. 2013, Torres-Rosas et al. 2014). We performed distal neurectomy of the vagus nerve in order to prevent any potential efferent signal. One day later, vagal afferent electrical stimulation was induced by activating the proximal (afferent) vagal nerve tip. Afferent vagal stimulation (5 Hz, 0.1 ms, 1V) in anesthetized animals reduced neutrophil joint

PT

infiltration similar to that induced by control stimulation of the intact vagus nerve (without neurectomy) (Fig. 1A). Afferent vagal stimulation significantly improved the

RI

experimental score of arthritis (Fig. 1B), reduced joint diameter (articular edema) (Fig. 1C), and the synovial levels of TNF (Fig. 1D), IL-1β (Fig. 1E), and IL-6 (Fig. 1F). Then,

SC

we analyzed whether afferent vagal stimulation controls arthritic joint inflammation through the mechanisms previously described in experimental sepsis. Vagal

NU

stimulation controls peripheral inflammation in sepsis by regulating splenic lymphocytes or dopamine production from the adrenal glands (Huston et al. 2006, Pena et al. 2011,

MA

Rosas-Ballina et al. 2011, Torres-Rosas et al. 2014). However, in the present study, right vagal afferent stimulation still inhibited arthritic joint inflammation in animals submitted

to

subdiaphragmatic

vagotomy,

splenectomy

or

adrenalectomy

(Supplementary Fig. 2A). These results indicated that this vagal afferent mechanism

D

represents a new mechanism of neuro-immune regulation that is independent of the

PT E

subdiaphragmatic vagus nerve, the spleen and the adrenal glands. Then, we analyzed whether the anti-inflammatory potential of afferent vagal stimulation was mediated by the sympathetic nervous system by performing unilateral removal of the sympathetic

CE

chain (L2-L6). The anti-inflammatory potential of afferent vagal stimulation was abolished by ipsilateral, but not contralateral, knee surgical sympathectomy (Supplementary Fig. 2B). These results show that afferent vagal regulation of arthritic

AC

joint inflammation is mediated by a central neural pathway and not through the canonical efferent mechanisms previously reported.

Vagal stimulation induced c-Fos expression in brain cortical structures of awaked rats. Next, we investigated the central neuronal structures mediating the vagal regulation of arthritic joint inflammation (Supplementary Fig 1B). First, we analyzed which brain nuclei were activated by vagal afferent stimulation by using c-Fos expression analysis, a well-established marker of neuronal activity (Morgan et al. 1987). In order to avoid unspecific c-Fos expression due to anesthesia, we stimulated 13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT the vagus nerve in awake, unanesthetized animals. As a control, we first confirmed that cervical right vagal stimulation induced bilateral c-Fos expression in the nucleus tract solitary (NTS) (Naritoku et al. 1995, Cunningham et al. 2007, Bassi et al. 2017) (Fig 2 A,B,G). We observed that vagal stimulation also induced c-Fos expression in the hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN) (Fig. 2 C,D,G) and locus coeruleus (LC) (Fig. 2 E,F,G). Of note, vagal stimulation also increased c-Fos expression in cortical brain areas such as the cingulate (Fig. 2H,I,L) and the parietal cortex (Fig. 2J,K,L), structures involved with sympathetic modulation and motor functions (Burns and Wyss

PT

1985, Drew et al. 2008, Tankus et al. 2014). It is important to note that our stimulation protocol did not induce any behavioral modification in rats exposed to the EPM test,

RI

since the classical (Fig. 2M) or complementary (Supplementary Fig. 3A-D) ethological

SC

parameters remained unchanged.

Cortical electrical stimulation mimicked vagal c-Fos central expression.

NU

In order to design novel therapeutic strategies for rheumatoid arthritis, we studied whether central neurostimulation controls joint inflammation (Supplementary

MA

Fig 1B). We hypothesized that cortical electrical stimulation (CES) of the parietal cortex (see electrodes array in Supplementary Fig. 4A,B) could mimic vagal regulation of arthritic joint inflammation. Cortical stimulation of the left parietal cortex in unanesthetized animals increased c-Fos expression in autonomic control-associated

D

regions bilaterally, such as the PVN and the LC (Fig. 3A-D, G), but not in the NTS (Fig.

PT E

3E-G). Similar to vagal stimulation, CES also increased bilateral c-Fos expression in the cingulate (Fig. 3H, I, L) and parietal cortex (Fig. 3J-L). In addition, our cortical stimulation protocol did not produce behavioral modification observed in the EPM test

CE

for the classical (Fig 3M) or complementary (Supplementary Fig. 3E-H) ethological parameters analysis. Since vagal and cortical stimulation induced similar effects, we compared the c-Fos protein expression after these stimulations by making a digital

AC

overlay of the brain slices considering localization, intensity and range. These studies showed that the NTS was activated by vagal but not by the CES (Fig. 4). Common activated structures were observed along the neuro-axis, such as LC, PVN, periaqueductal gray matter (PAG), raphe nucleus, amygdala, and the cingulate, parietal and piriform cortex (Fig. 4 yellow overlay). We also plotted a semi-quantitative c-Fos analysis between vagal (n=4) and cortical (n=4) stimulation using PTZ-treated animals (n=2) as positive control (Table 1). We also created an illustrative qualitative analysis showing, in coronal (Supplementary Fig. 5) and sagittal (Supplementary Fig. 6) plates, common brain structures activated by both VNS and CES. We reasoned

14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT that these structures must play a critical role controlling arthritic joint inflammation since they were activated by both stimulations.

Cortical electrical stimulation attenuated arthritic joint inflammation. Given that CES increased c-Fos expression in similar brain areas as the VNS, we speculated whether CES could also control arthritic joint inflammation (Supplementary Fig 1C). Cortical stimulation improved the experimental score of arthritis (Fig. 5A), reduced joint diameter (Fig. 5B), local neutrophil migration (Fig. 5C),

PT

and synovial levels of TNF (Fig. 5D), IL-1β (Fig. 5E) and IL-6 (Fig. 5F). Cortical stimulation was a safe procedure to control arthritic joint inflammation since it did not

Supplementary

Fig.

3E-H);

(ii)

behavioral

RI

induce: (i) anxiety-related behaviors of animals evaluated in the EPM test (Fig. 3M and or

electroencephalographic

(EEG)

SC

epileptiform activity (primary or secondary afterdischarges, spikes, spikes and waves, or bursts) in both the hippocampus or cortex (Supplementary Fig. 6AB; Power

NU

analysis suggests that the electrographic signs of hippocampus (p= 0.2351) and cortex (p= 0.5578) were similar for both periods analyzed (paired two-tailed test; t=1.679

MA

df=2). See in this Figure, by contrast, a positive control (rapid amygdala kindling) with EEG epileptiform discharges); (iii) brain lesions evaluated by GFAP expression (associated to potential local neuroinflammation) (Supplementary Fig. 7C-E); (iv) nerve injury as determined by ATF3 immunolabeling (a well-known marker for nerve

D

injury) (Tsujino et al. 2000) (Supplementary Fig. 7F-K); or (v) neurodegeneration as

PT E

detected by Fluoro-Jade-positive (FJ+) histochemistry (Schmued et al. 1997) (Supplementary Fig. 7L-O). These results show the potential of CES to reduce

CE

arthritic joint inflammation without inducing noticeable side effects. The anti-inflammatory effect of cortical stimulation depends on the integrity of the local sympathetic chain.

AC

Given that cortical stimulation activated brain structures involved in the modulation of the autonomic nervous system, such as the LC, PVN, and PAG (Guyenet 1991, Stern 2015, Venkatraman et al. 2017), and that the knee joints have substantial sympathetic innervation (Hildebrand et al. 1991, Schaible and Straub 2014), we examined whether CES requires the articular sympathetic innervations to control joint inflammation (Supplementary Fig 1D). First, we observed that CES decreased rat`s tail skin temperature (Fig. 7A), suggesting a sympathetic activation. To examine whether local sympathetic innervations were required to control inflammation, we performed unilateral sympathectomy (L2-L6) prior to cortical stimulation. Cortical stimulation

reduced

neutrophil

infiltration

in

the

knee

contralateral

to

the 15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT sympathectomy (Contra – SYMPX), but not in the ipsilateral (Ipsi – SYMPX) joint (Fig. 6B). These findings demonstrated that cortical stimulation controls arthritic joint inflammation via local sympathetic innervation of the joint.

Discussion The present study depicts a central neuroimmune map composed by several common brain structures activated by afferent vagal or cortical stimulation which can be harnessed for managing inflammatory disorders such as arthritic inflammation by

PT

decreasing local production of inflammatory cytokines and neutrophilic infiltration into the knee joint.

RI

Early studies reported that vagal stimulation controlled joint inflammation in clinical and experimental settings (Levine et al. 2014, Koopman et al. 2016, Bassi et al.

SC

2017). We recently reported that this effect was mediated by afferent vagal signals that activate central sympathomodulatory structures, such as the PVN and LC (Bassi et al.

NU

2017). Despite studies showing that 5Hz activated both afferent and efferent vagal fibers (Reyt et al. 2010), here we can consider that the anti-inflammatory effect of 5Hz

MA

VNS is due to activation of afferent vagal mechanisms because: 1) Previous studies showed that 5 Hz stimulation of the efferent part of the right vagus nerve induced significant changes in heart rate and systemic mean arterial pressure (Hotta et al. 2009). However, we previously showed that stimulation of the intact right vagus with

D

5Hz reduced joint inflammation and activated brain nuclei without inducing significant

PT E

cardiovascular alterations (Bassi et al. 2017); 2) In the present study, afferent VNS with 5 Hz reduced knee inflammation independently on the integrity of peripheral structures described for experimental sepsis, such as the spleen, celiac vagus, or adrenal glands;

CE

3) the knee joint capsule has no cholinergic innervation (Langford and Schmidt 1983, Ferreira-Gomes et al. 2010); 4) There was noticeable reduction on the respiratory rate during the VNS, an effect also observed previously during afferent VNS (Bassi et al.,

AC

2017), suggesting modulation of central respiratory centers activity. Furthermore, vagal afferent stimulation induced a significant increase in c-Fos expression in cortical brain areas, such as the piriform, cingulate and especially in the parietal cortex. Of note, increased c-Fos expression was also observed in the LC after VNS, suggesting this structure as the direct intermediate between the NTS (vagus nerve) and the cortex (Semeniutin 1990, Cheyuo et al. 2011; Naritoku et al., 1995; Cunningham et al., 2007). Finally, it is important to comment that different intensities of nerve stimulation can generate different modulatory effects. We recently demonstrated that low VNS intensity (5Hz, 1V) in rats reduced joint inflammation but did not produce cardiovascular effects; while higher VNS intensity (20Hz, 3V), as commonly performed for clinical epilepsy 16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT treatment, induces profound cardiovascular alteration but no anti-inflammatory effect (Bassi et al, 2017). Direct CES of the parietal cortex induced very similar patterns of brain c-Fos expression in rats exposed to VNS, suggesting common brain structures involved in peripheral inflammation control. In fact, cortical stimulation reduced tail temperature and CES anti-inflammatory effect was abolished by local sympathectomy, suggesting neuroimmune mechanisms dependent on sympathetic mechanisms and innervation. These phenomena can be explained by the increased c-Fos expression in

PT

sympathomodulatory brain structures, such as the LC, PVN and PAG observed after CES (Kannan et al. 1989, Plas et al. 1995, Farkas et al. 1998, Samuels and Szabadi

RI

2008). Together, these results concur with neuroanatomical studies showing a cortexPAG-PVN or cortex-PAG-LC neural pathways in the modulation of sympathetic

SC

signaling (Ennis et al. 1991, Menezes et al. 2009, Ye et al. 2014, Chen et al. 2016). In addition, the activation of other sympathomodulatory brain nuclei, such as the

NU

catecholaminergic A5 and C1 neuron clusters, by afferent vagal or brain stimulation are likely to reduce synovial inflammation as seen for LC or cortical stimulation (Abbott et

MA

al., 2012; Carlson et al. 1996, Kuroki et al. 2004). In fact, mice are protected from ischemia-reperfusion injury when the C1 neurons are stimulated (Abe et al., 2017). It is also important to highlight that our experimental neural stimulation techniques were conducted in non-anesthetized animals, suggesting that clinical neural

D

stimulation protocols intended to be used in unanesthetized and unsedated patients,

PT E

such as transcranial stimulation techniques, may be useful as a low cost therapy for the treatment of inflammatory articular diseases. In addition, non-invasive techniques of brain stimulation can avoid undesirable side effects of intrusive neuromodulatory

CE

therapies, such as surgical, device related, or nerve stimulation-induced complications, including post-operative infections, rejection, nerve damage, or behavior/cardiovascular alterations (Tronnier n.d., Sokolovic and Mehmedagic 2016). Our results may also

AC

explain the central immunomodulatory structures and mechanisms during individual self-stimulation techniques. Studies carried in humans showed that voluntary breath control techniques (brain cortex-modulated) can stimulate the sympathetic functions in order to modulate the innate immunity, suggesting the existence of unknown immunoregulatory encephalic centers (Krogh and Lindhard 1913, Kox et al. 2012, 2014). In fact, clinical studies have already demonstrated that extra-encephalic stimulatory techniques, such as magnetic or direct current transcranial stimulations, can increase the sympathetic activity (Frank et al. 2010, Chang et al. 2015). The present data may also complement studies about placebo effects in inflammatory diseases. About a third of rheumatic patients may report disease improvement by 17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT pharmacologically inert medicines (Beecher 1955, Langley et al. 1983, Williams et al. 1988). In fact, placebo effect relies on complex biological mechanisms involving the activation of relevant brain areas implicated in emotions, expectations, and classical conditioning (Qiu et al. 2009, Finniss et al. 2010), as observed in neuroimaging studies where increased activity of the cingulate and parietal cortex, PAG, and medullary structures was observed during placebo treatment (Levine 1978, Bingel et al. 2006). Further, other auto-motivated behavioral techniques that depend on complex interaction of multiple cortical structures, such as voluntary muscular exercises, may

PT

produce immunomodulatory effects towards the activation of similar neural cascades that involves motor coordination (e.g.: parietal cortex), motivation (e.g.: cingulate

RI

cortex) and autonomic balance (Burns and Wyss 1985, Hamer 2006, Drew et al. 2008, Gleeson et al. 2011, Macefield and Henderson 2015, Shoemaker et al. 2015).

SC

Finally, our data is consistent with several theories related to brain-immune interactions: (i) the existence of the immunological homunculus where the somatotopic

NU

organization of the central nervous system can coordinate the immune system (Tracey 2007, Diamond and Tracey 2011); (ii) the polyvagal theory where different vagal subsystems, particularly the afferent myelinated components, associated to the so-

MA

called “social engagement system”, are critical to control highly cognitive behaviors and emotions (Porges 2011); and (iii) the neocortical-immune axis where complex cognitive behaviors, such as attitudes, spiritual resources, hopes, ideals, and meditative states

D

may shape immunity (Moshel et al. 2005, Tuohy 2005, Kox et al. 2012, 2014,

PT E

Middendorp et al. 2015). We do not rule out the possibility that all these three complex systems could act in synchrony to control immune response-directed behaviors (Bassi et al. 2011, Filiano et al. 2016). Now, the most compelling and intriguing collection of

CE

data comes from coma patients in which VNS (Vagus-NTS-Thalamus-Parietal Cortex connections) and recruitment of complex networks by performing imagery tasks, results in strong alteration in consciousness (even in a patient that spent 15 years in coma)

AC

(Corazzol et al., 2017), probably the strongest support to our expectations of antiinflamamatory effect of yoga, meditation (mindfulness) and activation of the social engagement system, measured by MRI activity. Surely, the coma patients are the highest possible challenge to recruitment of consciousness networks. In summary, our study provides new data about the dissection of the central inflammatory processing centers (in contrast to the classical cholinergic antiinflammatory pathway) that are activated through overlapped, complex cortical and vagal stimulation (Supplementary Fig 8) and can be useful in the development of innovative, viable and safe bioelectronic strategies for the treatment of inflammatory joint conditions in a real translational project. 18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Acknowledgements This study was supported by FAPESP project grants (2007/50261-4, 2011/20343-4, 2012/04237-2 and 2013/08216-2), CAPES-PROEX Physiology and Pharmacology Graduate Programs at FMRP-USP and CNPq project grants (870325/1997-3, 478504/2010-1 and 475715/2012-8). GSB holds a PhD scholarship from CNPq (142068/2012-8). AK holds a PD scholarship from CNPq (118636/2017-0).

PT

FQC, HCS, TMC and NGC hold CNPq Research Fellowships. Author contributions:

RI

G.S.B., L.U., N.G.C. and A.K. designed the study; G.S.B. and J.A.C. performed the surgical procedures, G.S.B performed animals experiments and vagus nerve

SC

stimulation; G.S.B. performed the ELISA; G.S.B. and V.R.S. performed brain tissue analysis; F.D.V, P.D.P, G.S.B and N.G.C performed the EEG recordings and cortical

NU

electrical stimulation; P.D.P performed the quantitative EEG analysis; G.S.B. prepared the Figures; G.S.B., L.U., N.G.C and A.K. wrote the manuscript; G.J.R., H.C.S., F.Q.C.,

MA

T.M.C., N.G.C and A.K. provided financial support. Disclosures

D

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

PT E

References

CE

Abbott, S. B., R. Kanbar, G. Bochorishvili, M. B. Coates, R. L. Stornetta, P.G. Guyenet. 2012. C1 neurons excite locus coeruleus and A5 noradrenergic neurons along with sympathetic outflow in rats. Journal of Physiology 590: 2897-915.

AC

Abe, C., T. Inoue, M. A. Inglis, K. E. Viar, L. Huang, H. Ye, D. L. Rosin, R. L. Stornetta, M. D. Okusa, and P. G. Guyenet. 2017. C1 neurons mediate a stressinduced anti-inflammatory reflex in mice. Nature Neuroscience 20:700–707. Anseloni, V. Z., M. L. Brandão. 1997. Ethopharmacological analysis of behaviour of rats using variations of the elevated plus-maze. Behavioural Pharmacology 8: 533-540. Bassi, G. S., F. Brognara, J. A. Castania, J. Talbot, T. M. Cunha, F. Q. Cunha, L. Ulloa, A. Kanashiro, D. P. M. Dias, and H. C. Salgado. 2015. Baroreflex activation in conscious rats modulates the joint inflammatory response via sympathetic function. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 49:140–147. Bassi, G. S., D. P. M. Dias, M. Franchin, J. Talbot, D. G. Reis, G. B. Menezes, J. A. Castania, N. Garcia-Cairasco, L. B. M. Resstel, H. C. Salgado, F. Q. Cunha, T. M. Cunha, L. Ulloa, and A. Kanashiro. 2017. Modulation of experimental arthritis by vagal sensory and central brain stimulation. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 64:330–343.

19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Bassi, G. S., A. Kanashiro, F. M. Santin, G. E. P. de Souza, M. J. Nobre, and N. C. Coimbra. 2011. Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Sickness Behaviour Evaluated in Different Models of Anxiety and Innate Fear in Rats. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology 110:359–369. Beecher, H. K. 1955. The powerful placebo. Journal of the American Medical Association 159:1602. Bingel, U., J. Lorenz, E. Schoell, C. Weiller, and C. Büchel. 2006. Mechanisms of placebo analgesia: rACC recruitment of a subcortical antinociceptive network. Pain 120:8–15.

PT

Borovikova, L. V., S. Ivanova, M. Zhang, H. Yang, G. I. Botchkina, L. R. Watkins, H. Wang, N. Abumrad, J. W. Eaton, and K. J. Tracey. 2000. Nature 405:458– 462.

SC

RI

Bratton, B. O., D. Martelli, M. J. McKinley, D. Trevaks, C. R. Anderson, and R. M. McAllen. 2012. Neural regulation of inflammation: no neural connection from the vagus to splenic sympathetic neurons. Experimental Physiology 97:1180–1185. Buller, K. M. 2003. Neuroimmune Stress Responses: Reciprocal Connections Between the Hypothalamus and the Brainstem. Stress 6:11–17.

NU

Burns, S. M., and J. M. Wyss. 1985. The involvement of the anterior cingulate cortex in blood pressure control. Brain Research 340:71–77.

MA

Carlson, S. L., D. J. Beiting, C. A. Kiani, K. M. Abell, and J. P. McGillis. 1996. Catecholamines Decrease Lymphocyte Adhesion to Cytokine-Activated Endothelial Cells. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 10:55–67.

D

Cascão, R., H. S. Rosário, M. M. Souto-Carneiro, and J. E. Fonseca. 2010. Neutrophils in rheumatoid arthritis: More than simple final effectors. Autoimmunity Reviews 9:531–535.

PT E

Castro, O. W., M. A. Furtado, C. Q. Tilelli, A. Fernandes, G. P. Pajolla, and N. Garcia-Cairasco. 2011. Comparative neuroanatomical and temporal characterization of FluoroJade-positive neurodegeneration after status epilepticus induced by systemic and intrahippocampal pilocarpine in Wistar rats. Brain Research 1374:43–55.

CE

Chang, W.-J., K. L. Bennell, P. W. Hodges, R. S. Hinman, M. B. Liston, and S. M. Schabrun. 2015. Combined exercise and transcranial direct current stimulation intervention for knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial: Table 1. BMJ Open 5:e008482.

AC

Chen, M., Z. G. He, S. G. Liu, and H. B. Xiang. 2016. Motor cortexperiaqueductal gray-rostral ventromedial medulla neuronal circuitry may involve in modulation of nociception by melanocortinergic-opioidergic signaling. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology 9(8):7837–7907. Cheyuo, C., A. Jacob, R. Wu, M. Zhou, G. F. Coppa, and P. Wang. 2011. The Parasympathetic Nervous System in the Quest for Stroke Therapeutics. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism 31:1187–1195. Corazzol M., Lio G., Lefevre A., Deiana G., Tell L.,
André-Obadia N., Bourdillon P., Guenot M., Desmurget M.,
Luauté J.,
Sirigu A. 2017. Restoring consciousness with vagus nerve stimulation. Current Biology 27: R979–R1001. Cunningham, J. T., S. W. Mifflin, G. G. Gould, and A. Frazer. 2007. Induction of c-Fos and {DeltaFosB Immunoreactivity in Rat Brain by Vagal Nerve Stimulation. Neuropsychopharmacology 33:1884–1895. 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Diamond, B., and K. J. Tracey. 2011. Mapping the immunological homunculus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:3461–3462. Drew, T., J.-E. Andujar, K. Lajoie, and S. Yakovenko. 2008. Cortical mechanisms involved in visuomotor coordination during precision walking. Brain Research Reviews 57:199–211. Ebert, U., Löscher, W. Differences in mossy fibre sprouting during conventional and rapid amygdala kindling of the rat. 1995. Neurosci lett 190(3): 199202.

PT

Edrees, A. F., S. N. Misra, and N. I. Abdou. 2005. Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: Correlation of TNF-alpha serum level with clinical response and benefit from changing dose or frequency of infliximab infusions. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 23(4):469–474.

SC

RI

Elenkov, I. 1995. Modulation of lipopolysaccharide-induced tumor necrosis factor- production by selective - and -adrenergic drugs in mice. Journal of Neuroimmunology 61:123–131.

NU

Ennis, M., M. Behbehani, M. T. Shipley, E. J. van Bockstaele, and G. AstonJones. 1991. Projections from the periaqueductal gray to the rostromedial pericoerulear region and nucleus locus coeruleus: Anatomic and physiologic studies. The Journal of Comparative Neurology 306:480–494. Farkas, E., A. S. . Jansen, and A. D. Loewy. 1998. Periaqueductal gray matter input to cardiac-related sympathetic premotor neurons. Brain Research 792:179–192.

MA

Favalli, E. G., F. Desiati, F. Atzeni, P. Sarzi-Puttini, R. Caporali, F. B. Pallavicini, R. Gorla, M. Filippini, and A. Marchesoni. 2009. Serious infections during anti-TNF treatment in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Autoimmunity Reviews 8:266–273.

PT E

D

Ferreira-Gomes, J., S. Adães, J. Sarkander, and J. M. Castro-Lopes. 2010. Phenotypic alterations of neurons that innervate osteoarthritic joints in rats. Arthritis & Rheumatism 62:3677–3685. File, S. E., A. S. Lippa, B. Beer, and M. T. Lippa. 2001. Animal Tests of Anxiety. Current Protocols in Neuroscience. . John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

AC

CE

Filiano, A. J., Y. Xu, N. J. Tustison, R. L. Marsh, W. Baker, I. Smirnov, C. C. Overall, S. P. Gadani, S. D. Turner, Z. Weng, S. N. Peerzade, H. Chen, K. S. Lee, M. M. Scott, M. P. Beenhakker, V. Litvak, and J. Kipnis. 2016. Unexpected role of interferon- in regulating neuronal connectivity and social behaviour. Nature 535:425– 429. Finniss, D. G., T. J. Kaptchuk, F. Miller, and F. Benedetti. 2010. Biological, clinical, and ethical advances of placebo effects. The Lancet 375:686–695. Foresti, M. L., Arisi, G. M., Fernandes, A., Tilelli, C. Q., Garcia-Cairasco, N. 2008. Chelatable zinc modulates excitability and seizure duration in the amygdala rapid kindling model. Epilepsy Res 79(2-3): 166-72. Frank, E., P. Eichhammer, J. Burger, M. Zowe, M. Landgrebe, G. Hajak, and B. Langguth. 2010. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of depression: feasibility and results under naturalistic conditions: a retrospective analysis. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience 261:261–266. Gegout, P., P. Gillet, D. Chevrier, C. Guingamp, B. Terlain, and P. Netter. 1994. Characterization of zymosan-induced arthritis in the rat: Effects on joint inflammation and cartilage metabolism. Life Sciences 55:PL321–PL326. 21

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Gleeson, M., N. C. Bishop, D. J. Stensel, M. R. Lindley, S. S. Mastana, and M. A. Nimmo. 2011. The anti-inflammatory effects of exercise: mechanisms and implications for the prevention and treatment of disease. Nature Reviews Immunology 11:607–615. Gordon, C. J. 1990. Thermal biology of the laboratory rat. Physiology & Behavior 47:963–991. Guyenet, P. G. 1991. Central noradrenergic neurons: the autonomic connection. Pages 365–380 Progress in Brain Research. . Elsevier.

PT

Hamer, M. 2006. Exercise and Psychobiological Processes. Sports Medicine 36:829–838.

RI

Hildebrand, C., G. Öqvist, L. Brax, and F. Tuisku. 1991. Anatomy of the rat knee joint and fibre composition of a major articular nerve. The Anatomical Record 229:545–555.

SC

Hotta, H., J. Lazar, R. Orman, K. Koizumi, K. Shiba, H. Kamran, and M. Stewart. 2009. Vagus nerve stimulation-induced bradyarrhythmias in rats. Autonomic Neuroscience 151:98–105.

NU

Huston, J. M., M. Ochani, M. Rosas-Ballina, H. Liao, K. Ochani, V. A. Pavlov, M. Gallowitsch-Puerta, M. Ashok, C. J. Czura, B. Foxwell, K. J. Tracey, and L. Ulloa. 2006. Splenectomy inactivates the cholinergic antiinflammatory pathway during lethal endotoxemia and polymicrobial sepsis. The Journal of Experimental Medicine 203:1623–1628.

D

MA

Inoue, T., C. Abe, S. J. Sung, S. Moscalu, J. Jankowski, L. Huang, H. Ye, D. L. Rosin, P. G. Guyenet, and M. D. Okusa. 2016. Vagus nerve stimulation mediates protection from kidney ischemia-reperfusion injury through 7nAChRmathplus splenocytes. Journal of Clinical Investigation 126:1939–1952.

PT E

Inui, K., and T. Koike. 2016. Combination therapy with biologic agents in rheumatic diseases: current and future prospects. Therapeutic Advances in Musculoskeletal Disease 8:192–202.

CE

Kannan, H., Y. Hayashida, and H. Yamashita. 1989. Increase in sympathetic outflow by paraventricular nucleus stimulation in awake rats. American Journal of Physiology - Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology 256:R1325–R1330. Kenney, M. J., and C. K. Ganta. 2011. Autonomic Nervous System and Immune System Interactions. Comprehensive Physiology. . John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

AC

Keystone, E. C., H. U. Schorlemmer, C. Pope, and A. C. Allison. 1977. Zymosan—Induced Arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 20:1396–1401. Koopman, F. A., S. S. Chavan, S. Miljko, S. Grazio, S. Sokolovic, P. R. Schuurman, A. D. Mehta, Y. A. Levine, M. Faltys, R. Zitnik, K. J. Tracey, and P. P. Tak. 2016. Vagus nerve stimulation inhibits cytokine production and attenuates disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113:8284–8289. Kox, M., L. T. van Eijk, J. Zwaag, J. van den Wildenberg, F. C. G. J. Sweep, J. G. van der Hoeven, and P. Pickkers. 2014. Voluntary activation of the sympathetic nervous system and attenuation of the innate immune response in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111:7379–7384. Kox, M., M. Stoffels, S. P. Smeekens, N. van Alfen, M. Gomes, T. M. H. Eijsvogels, M. T. E. Hopman, J. G. van der Hoeven, M. G. Netea, and P. Pickkers. 22

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 2012. The Influence of Concentration/Meditation on Autonomic Nervous System Activity and the Innate Immune Response. Psychosomatic Medicine 74:489–494. Krogh, A., and J. Lindhard. 1913. The regulation of respiration and circulation during the initial stages of muscular work. The Journal of Physiology 47:112–136. Kuroki, K., H. Takahashi, H. Iwagaki, T. Murakami, M. Kuinose, S. Hamanaka, K. Minami, M. Nishibori, N. Tanaka, and K. Tanemoto. 2004. 2-Adrenergic Receptor Stimulation-Induced Immunosuppressive Effects Possibly through Down-Regulation of Co-Stimulatory Molecules, ICAM-1, CD40 and CD14 on Monocytes. Journal of International Medical Research 32:465–483.

PT

Langford, L. A., and R. F. Schmidt. 1983. Afferent and efferent axons in the medial and posterior articular nerves of the cat. The Anatomical Record 206:71–78.

RI

Langley, G. B., H. Sheppeard, and R. D. Wigley. 1983. Placebo therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin. Exp. Rheumatol. 1:17–21. Levine, J. 1978. The mechanism of placebo analgesia. The Lancet 312:654–

SC

657.

NU

Levine, Y. A., F. A. Koopman, M. Faltys, A. Caravaca, A. Bendele, R. Zitnik, M. J. Vervoordeldonk, and P. P. Tak. 2014. Neurostimulation of the Cholinergic AntiInflammatory Pathway Ameliorates Disease in Rat Collagen-Induced Arthritis. PLoS ONE 9:e104530.

MA

Macefield, V. G., and L. A. Henderson. 2015. Autonomic responses to exercise: Cortical and subcortical responses during post-exercise ischaemia and muscle pain. Autonomic Neuroscience 188:10–18.

D

Mantovani, A., M. A. Cassatella, C. Costantini, and S. Jaillon. 2011. Neutrophils in the activation and regulation of innate and adaptive immunity. Nature Reviews Immunology 11:519–531.

PT E

Martelli, D., S. T. Yao, J. Mancera, M. J. McKinley, and R. M. McAllen. 2014. Reflex control of inflammation by the splanchnic anti-inflammatory pathway is sustained and independent of anesthesia. AJP: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology 307:R1085–R1091.

AC

CE

Matteoli, G., P. J. Gomez-Pinilla, A. Nemethova, M. D. Giovangiulio, C. Cailotto, S. H. van Bree, K. Michel, K. J. Tracey, M. Schemann, W. Boesmans, P. V. Berghe, and G. E. Boeckxstaens. 2013. A distinct vagal anti-inflammatory pathway modulates intestinal muscularis resident macrophages independent of the spleen. Gut 63:938–948. Menezes, R. C. A. D., D. V. Zaretsky, M. A. P. Fontes, and J. A. DiMicco. 2009. Cardiovascular and thermal responses evoked from the periaqueductal grey require neuronal activity in the hypothalamus. The Journal of Physiology 587:1201– 1215. Middendorp, H. van, M. Kox, P. Pickkers, and A. W. M. Evers. 2015. The role of outcome expectancies for a training program consisting of meditation, breathing exercises, and cold exposure on the response to endotoxin administration: a proof-ofprinciple study. Clinical Rheumatology 35:1081–1085. Mohr, W., A. Wild, and H. P. Wolf. 1981. Role of polymorphs in inflammatory cartilage destruction in adjuvant arthritis of rats. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 40:171–176. Morgan, J., D. Cohen, J. Hempstead, and T. Curran. 1987. Mapping patterns of c-fos expression in the central nervous system after seizure. Science 237:192–197. 23

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Moshel, Y. A., H. G. Durkin, and V. E. Amassian. 2005. Lateralized neocortical control of T lymphocyte export from the thymus. Journal of Neuroimmunology 158:3– 13. Naritoku, D. K., W. J. Terry, and R. H. Helfert. 1995. Regional induction of fos immunoreactivity in the brain by anticonvulsant stimulation of the vagus nerve. Epilepsy Research 22:53–62. Olofsson, P. S., M. Rosas-Ballina, Y. A. Levine, and K. J. Tracey. 2012. Rethinking inflammation: neural circuits in the regulation of immunity. Immunological Reviews 248:188–204.

PT

Pavlov, V. A., and K. J. Tracey. 2015. Neural circuitry and immunity. Immunologic Research 63:38–57.

RI

Paxinos, G., and C. Watson. 2007. The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates, Sixth Edition: Hard Cover Edition. . Academic Press.

SC

Pena, G., B. Cai, L. Ramos, G. Vida, E. A. Deitch, and L. Ulloa. 2011. Cholinergic Regulatory Lymphocytes Re-Establish Neuromodulation of Innate Immune Responses in Sepsis. The Journal of Immunology 187:718–725.

NU

Plas, J. V. D., F. W. Maes, and B. Bohus. 1995. Electrophysiological analysis of midbrain periaqueductal gray influence on cardiovascular neurons in the ventrolateral medulla oblongata. Brain Research Bulletin 38:447–456.

MA

Porges, S. W. 2011. The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions, Attachment, Communication, and Self-regulation (Norton Series on Interpersonal Neurobiology). . W. W. Norton & Company. Qiu, Y.-H., X.-Y. Wu, H. Xu, and D. Sackett. 2009. Neuroimaging study of placebo analgesia in humans. Neuroscience Bulletin 25:277–282.

PT E

D

Reis, G. M., Q. M. Dias, J. W. S. Silveira, F. D. Vecchio, N. Garcia-Cairasco, and W. A. Prado. 2010. Antinociceptive Effect of Stimulating the Occipital or Retrosplenial Cortex in Rats. The Journal of Pain 11:1015–1026.

CE

Reyt, S., C. Picq, V. Sinniger, D. Clarençon, B. Bonaz, and O. David. 2010. Dynamic Causal Modelling and physiological confounds: A functional MRI study of vagus nerve stimulation. NeuroImage 52:1456–1464.

AC

Rosas-Ballina, M., P. S. Olofsson, M. Ochani, S. I. Valdes-Ferrer, Y. A. Levine, C. Reardon, M. W. Tusche, V. A. Pavlov, U. Andersson, S. Chavan, T. W. Mak, and K. J. Tracey. 2011. Acetylcholine-Synthesizing T Cells Relay Neural Signals in a Vagus Nerve Circuit. Science 334:98–101. Ruggiero, D. ., M. . Underwood, J. . Mann, M. Anwar, and V. Arango. 2000. The human nucleus of the solitary tract: visceral pathways revealed with an “in vitro” postmortem tracing method. Journal of the Autonomic Nervous System 79:181–190. Rutecki, P. 1990. Anatomical, Physiological, and Theoretical Basis for the Antiepileptic Effect of Vagus Nerve Stimulation. Epilepsia 31:S1–S6. Samuels, E., and E. Szabadi. 2008. Functional Neuroanatomy of the Noradrenergic Locus Coeruleus: Its Roles in the Regulation of Arousal and Autonomic Function Part I: Principles of Functional Organisation. Current Neuropharmacology 6:235–253. Saper, C. B. 2011. Diffuse Cortical Projection Systems: Anatomical Organization and Role in Cortical Function. Comprehensive Physiology. . John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 24

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Saper, C. B., and A. D. Loewy. 1980. Efferent connections of the parabrachial nucleus in the rat. Brain Research 197:291–317. Schaible, H.-G., and R. H. Straub. 2014. Function of the sympathetic supply in acute and chronic experimental joint inflammation. Autonomic Neuroscience 182:55– 64. Schmued, L. C., C. Albertson, and W. Slikker. 1997. Fluoro-Jade: a novel fluorochrome for the sensitive and reliable histochemical localization of neuronal degeneration. Brain Research 751:37–46.

PT

Semeniutin, A. I. 1990. [The effect of electrical stimulation of the locus coeruleus on the neuronal activity of the parietal associative cortex]. Neirofiziologiia 22:486–494.

RI

Shoemaker, J. K., K. N. Norton, J. Baker, and T. Luchyshyn. 2015. Forebrain organization for autonomic cardiovascular control. Autonomic Neuroscience 188:5–9.

SC

Sokolovic, S., and S. Mehmedagic. 2016. OS 11-06 The effect of vagus nerve stimulation on arterial hypertension using active implantable device. Journal of Hypertension 34:e75.

NU

Stern, J. E. 2015. Neuroendocrine-Autonomic Integration in the Paraventricular Nucleus: Novel Roles for Dendritically Released Neuropeptides. Journal of Neuroendocrinology 27:487–497.

MA

Tankus, A., I. Fried, and S. Shoham. 2014. Cognitive-motor brain–machine interfaces. Journal of Physiology-Paris 108:38–44.

D

Torres-Rosas, R., G. Yehia, G. Peña, P. Mishra, M. del Rocio ThompsonBonilla, M. A. Moreno-Eutimio, L. A. Arriaga-Pizano, A. Isibasi, and L. Ulloa. 2014. Dopamine mediates vagal modulation of the immune system by electroacupuncture. Nature Medicine 20:291–295.

PT E

Tracey, K. J. 2007. Physiology and immunology of the cholinergic antiinflammatory pathway. Journal of Clinical Investigation 117:289–296. Tronnier, V. M. (n.d.). Vagus Nerve Stimulation: Surgical Technique and Complications. Pages 29–38 Progress in Neurological Surgery. . S. Karger AG.

AC

CE

Tsujino, H., E. Kondo, T. Fukuoka, Y. Dai, A. Tokunaga, K. Miki, K. Yonenobu, T. Ochi, and K. Noguchi. 2000. Activating Transcription Factor 3 (ATF3) Induction by Axotomy in Sensory and Motoneurons: A Novel Neuronal Marker of Nerve Injury. Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience 15:170–182. Tuohy, V. K. 2005. The neocortical-immune axis. Journal of Neuroimmunology 158:1–2. Ulloa, L., and E. A. Deitch. 2009. Neuroimmune perspectives in sepsis. Critical Care 13:133. Venkatraman, A., B. L. Edlow, and M. H. Immordino-Yang. 2017. The Brainstem in Emotion: A Review. Frontiers in Neuroanatomy 11. Willemze, R. A., O. Welting, H. P. van Hamersveld, S. L. Meijer, J. H. A. Folgering, H. Darwinkel, J. Witherington, A. Sridhar, M. J. Vervoordeldonk, J. Seppen, and W. J. de Jonge. 2017. Neuronal control of experimental colitis occurs via sympathetic intestinal innervation. Neurogastroenterology & Motility:e13163. Williams, H. J., J. R. Ward, S. L. Dahl, D. O. Clegg, R. F. Willkens, T. Oglesby, M. H. Weisman, S. Schlegel, R. M. Michaels, M. E. Luggen, R. P. Polisson, J. Z. 25

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Singer, S. M. Kantor, J. B. Shiroky, R. E. Small, M. I. Gomez, J. C. Reading, and M. J. Egger. 1988. A controlled trial comparing sulfasalazine, gold sodium thiomalate, and placebo in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 31:702–713. Ye, D.-W., C. Liu, T.-T. Liu, X.-B. Tian, and H.-B. Xiang. 2014. Motor CortexPeriaqueductal Gray-Spinal Cord Neuronal Circuitry May Involve in Modulation of Nociception: A Virally Mediated Transsynaptic Tracing Study in Spinally Transected Transgenic Mouse Model. PLoS ONE 9:e89486.

Legends

SC

RI

PT

Fig. 1. Afferent vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) reduces articular inflammation by means of local sympathetic modulation. (A) Afferent VNS has the same effect as the intact VNS. Afferent VNS improved knee (B) experimental score, (C) articular edema, (D) neutrophil count (n=5 for each group), and synovial levels of (E) TNF, (F) IL-1β, and (G) IL-6. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar. * p < 0.05; * p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

D

MA

NU

Fig. 2. VNS increases c-Fos expression in brain cortical and subcortical areas. VNS increases c-Fos immunolabeling in the (AB) nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS), (CD) locus coeruleus (LC), (EF) hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN) (G), and in the cingulate (HI) (Cg) and (JK) parietal cortex when compared to the control, nonstimulated, group (GL). (M) VNS does not induce behavioral changes of rats exposed to the EPM test. III: third ventricle; IV: fourth ventricle. Data were analyzed using oneway ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

AC

CE

PT E

Fig. 3. Cortical electrical stimulation (CES) increases c-Fos immunolabeling in brain sympathoexcitatory nuclei. CES (60 Hz, 0.5 ms, 50 µA) increases c-Fos expression in the (AB) hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN) and (CD) locus coeruleus (LC), but not in the (EF) nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS) (G). CES increases c-Fos expression in the (HI) cingulate cortex and in the (JK) parietal cortex when compared to the control (non-stimulated) group (L). (M) (CES) does not induce behavioral changes of rats exposed to the EPM test. III: third ventricle; IV: fourth ventricle. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; Scale bar = 100 µM. Fig. 4. Representative overlay (yellow) of serial coronal rat brain sections from both VNS (green) and CES (red) c-Fos immunolabeling observed along the divisions of the neuroaxis. Cg: cingulate cortex; LC: locus coeruleus; NTS: nucleus of the solitary tract; PAG: periaqueductal gray matter; Pir: piriform cortex; PVN: paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus; Retro: retrosplenial cortex. IA: interaural. Refer to Table 1 for a better c-Fos expression quantification among the different brain structures. The scale of the different brain sections was not maintained to ease visualization. Fig. 5. Cortical electrical stimulation (CES) improves articular inflammatory parameters. (A) Experimental score, (B) joint diameter, (C) neutrophilic infiltration, and synovial levels of (D) TNF, (E) IL-1β, and (F) IL-6 of the femorotibial joint in animals submitted to the CES; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Data were analyzed using 26

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar. Fig. 6. (A) CES decreases rat tail temperature; (B) CES anti-inflammatory effect is prevented in the ipsilateral joint to the surgical sympathectomy (Ipsi – SYMPX) when compared the contralateral sympathectomized (Contra – SYMPX) knee. *** p < 0.001. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar.

PT

Table 1. Semi-quantitative analysis of c-Fos expression along the brain neuro-axis in animals submitted to VNS, CES or PTZ compared to control (naïve) rats according to the Rat Brain Atlas (Paxinos and Watson 2007). 0: no difference; +: small difference (<10%); ++: medium difference (>10 and ≤30%); +++: large difference (>30%).

RI

Supplementary Fig. 1: Schematic timelines of the experiments according to their chronology in the present study.

MA

NU

SC

Supplementary Fig. 2: The anti-inflammatory effect of afferent VNS is maintained after (A) splenectomy (SPX), adrenalectomy (ADX), or subdiaphragmatic vagotomy (sVNX), and in the (B) contralateral (Contra – SYMPX), but not in the ipsilateral (Ipsi– SYMPX), joint submitted to unilateral sympathetic chain removal. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar. *** p < 0.001 versus control.

PT E

D

Supplementary Fig. 3. Effects of (A-D) vagal or (E-H) cortical (CES) stimulation on the complementary ethological analysis in rats submitted to the elevated-plus maze test. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey`s multiple comparison test; The number of animals used for each group is displayed at the bottom of the corresponding bar.

CE

Supplementary Fig. 4. (A) Representative image showing the general localization of the ground, stimulation and recording electrodes on the rat skull; (B) Representative photomicrography of coronal sections of the rat brain at the level of the parietal cortex, hippocampus and amygdala showing the localization of the electrodes. Image and photomicrographs extracted from Paxinos and Watson (2007).

AC

Supplementary Fig. 5. Microphotographs of coronal sections of Wistar rat brain showing activated areas after VNS (yellow) or CES (blue) through c-Fos immunolabeling intensity and c-Fos overlay (green) showing the common activated areas. Refer to Table 1 for a better c-Fos expression quantification among the different brain structures. Supplementary Fig. 6. Microphotographs of sagittal sections of Wistar rats showing activated areas after VNS (green) or CES (red) through c-Fos immunolabeling intensity and c-Fos overlay (orange), showing the common (overlapped) activated areas. Refer to Table 1 for a better c-Fos expression quantification among the different brain structures. Supplementary Fig. 7. Example of EEG recording from one animal (n=3 total, similar, not statistically different data) showing the (A) EEG activity (in mV) in the hippocampus (A1 and B1 – red line), cortex (A1 – blue line) and amygdala (blue line) (B1 – blue line), before (baseline), during (saturated amplifier) and after CES periods (A1) and 1st stimulus from rapid amygdala kindling (positive control) (B1). (B) Recordings showing 27

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT

the frequency (Hz) and intensity (dB - heatmap) of EEG activity measured in the hippocampus (A2 and B2 – red line), cortex (A2 – blue line) and amygdala (B2 – blue line), before (baseline), during (saturated amplifier) (B1) and after CES periods and 1st stimulus from rapid amygdala kindling (positive control) (B2). Microphotographs of coronal sections from Wistar brain cortex showing the expression of GFAP (green) in lesioned areas of the parietal cortex in (C) control, (D) CES, or (E) cortical lesioned animals (DC current, square wave, 1 mA, 10 sec; 10 mCoulombs); Microphotographs of coronal sections from Wistar rat brain showing the expression of ATF3 in degenerating neurons at the level of the parietal (FG) and cingulate (HI) cortex and hippocampus (JK) in animals under CES or Status Epilepticus (SE - positive control). Microphotographs of coronal sections from Wistar brain rats showing the expression of Fluoro-Jade (FJ) in necrotic neurons at the level of the parietal and cingulate (LM) and hippocampus (NO) in animals under CES or SE (positive control).

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

Supplementary Fig. 8. Comprehensive illustration of the proposed central inflammatory processing network which is activated through afferent vagal stimulation and CES. Afferent VNS activates specific brain cortical areas, such as the parietal and cingulated cortex. CES directed to the parietal cortex activates the paraventricular nucleus (PVN) and the locus coeruleus (LC). The activation of the LC increases the sympathetic activity to the knee joint to control synovial inflammatory process.

28

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

29

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

30

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

31

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

32

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

33

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

34

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

35

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

36

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT C-FOS immunolabelling

Cingulated 1 Cingulated 2 Piriform Occipital

VNS

CES

PTZ

+

+

+++

+

+

++

+

+

++

+++

+++

+++

PT

Cortex Parietal

Hipocampus Dentate Gyrus dorsal Dentate Gyrus ventral Amon`s Horn 1 Amon`s Horn 2

++

0

0

++

0

0

++

0

0

++

0

0

++

+

0

++

0

0

++

+

0

++

0

0

++

+

0

++

0

0

+

+++

+

++

0

0

++

0

0

++

+

+

++

Amygdala Basolateral Central Medial

PT E

D

Anterior Cortical

MA

NU

Amon`s Horn 3

+

0

SC

0

0

RI

0

CE

Thalamus Lateral Posterior

AC

Habenula

Hypothalamus Paraventricular Lateral Ventral Medial Arcuate Nucleus

Mesencephalon

37

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT ventral PAG +

++

+

+

++

+

+

+

0

0

+

0

0

+

+++

+++

+++

+++

0

++

++

++

CE

PT E

D

MA

Afferent vagus nerve stimulation activates subcortical and cortical brain areas; Cortical electrical stimulation (CES) activates similar subcortical and cortical brain areas; CES and Aff VNS reduced joint inflammation; CES does not cause behavioral disturbance, epileptiform activity or neural damage;

AC

 

+++

NU

Highlights  

SC

++ +++

0

RI

Brainstem Solitary Tract Nucleus Dorsal Motor Nucleus Locus Coeruleus

+

PT

dorsal PAG Dorsal Raphe Nucleus Inferior Colliculus Superior Colliculus Coclear Nuclei

38