The effect of daily caffeine use on cerebral blood flow: How much caffeine can we tolerate?

Caffeine is a commonly used neurostimulant that also produces cerebral vasoconstriction by antagonizing adenosine receptors. Chronic caffeine use results in an adaptation of the vascular adenosine receptor system presumably to compensate for the vasoconstrictive effects of caffeine. We investigated the effects of caffeine on cerebral blood flow (CBF) in increasing levels of chronic caffeine use. Low (mean = 45 mg/day), moderate (mean = 405 mg/day), and high (mean = 950 mg/day) caffeine users underwent quantitative perfusion magnetic resonance imaging on four separate occasions: twice in a caffeine abstinent state (abstained state) and twice in a caffeinated state following their normal caffeine use (native state). In each state, there were two drug conditions: participants received either caffeine (250 mg) or placebo. Gray matter CBF was tested with repeated-measures analysis of variance using caffeine use as a between-subjects factor, and correlational analyses were conducted between CBF and caffeine use. Caffeine reduced CBF by an average of 27% across both caffeine states. In the abstained placebo condition, moderate and high users had similarly greater CBF than low users; but in the native placebo condition, the high users had a trend towards less CBF than the low and moderate users. Our results suggest a limited ability of the cerebrovascular adenosine system to compensate for high amounts of daily caffeine use.

Methodological considerations for the quantification of self-reported caffeine use.

RATIONALE: The field of research regarding the effects of habitual caffeine use is immense and frequently utilizes self-report measures of caffeine use. However, various self-report measures have different methodologies, and the accuracy of these different methods has not been compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Self-reported caffeine use was estimated from two methods (a retrospective interview of weekly caffeine use and a 7-day prospective diary; n = 79). These estimates were then tested against salivary caffeine concentrations in a subset of participants (n = 55). RESULTS: The estimates of caffeine use (mg/day) from the interview- and diary-based methods correlated with one another (r = 0.77) and with salivary caffeine concentrations (r = 0.61 and 0.68, respectively). However, almost half of the subjects who reported more than 600 mg/day in the interview reported significantly less caffeine use in the diary. CONCLUSIONS: Self-report measures of caffeine use are a valid method of predicting actual caffeine levels. Estimates of high caffeine use levels may need to be corroborated by more than one method.