BACKGROUND: Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder resulting in social-cognitive deficits partially attributed to abnormalities processing social cues, such as facial expressions. However, to our knowledge, the functional neuroanatomy of deficient social cue processing in individuals with FTD has not been examined. The objective of this study was to delineate the functional abnormalities under lying altered facial expression processing in individuals with FTD using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). METHODS: Patients meeting Neary criteria for behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) with supportive neuroimaging and 18 age-matched healthy controls completed an implicit facial expression task during fMRI. We conducted volumetric brain morphometry to correct functional imaging data for volume differences. RESULTS: We included 20 patients with bvFTD and 18 controls in our study. The results demonstrate emotion-specific functional abnormalities in frontal and limbic regions in patients with bvFTD. Patients also showed decreased activity in posterior ventral visual regions, specifically the fusiform cortex, possibly reflecting reduced afferent input from limbic regions. Finally, bvFTD was associated with increased activity in posterior regions, including the inferior parietal cortex. LIMITATIONS: Autopsy validation of frontotemporal dementia is not yet available for this cohort. CONCLUSION: Together, these findings suggest that fMRI combined with tasks targeting social-cognitive deficits is a powerful technique to objectively measure neural systems involved in emotion processing in individuals with bvFTD. As viewing emotional expressions is known to engage many of the same neural systems that are active when experiencing the emotion itself, fMRI during expression processing provides a novel window into the emotions of patients with FTD.
BACKGROUND: Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder resulting in social-cognitive deficits partially attributed to abnormalities processing social cues, such as facial expressions. However, to our knowledge, the functional neuroanatomy of deficient social cue processing in individuals with FTD has not been examined. The objective of this study was to delineate the functional abnormalities under lying altered facial expression processing in individuals with FTD using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). METHODS:Patients meeting Neary criteria for behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) with supportive neuroimaging and 18 age-matched healthy controls completed an implicit facial expression task during fMRI. We conducted volumetric brain morphometry to correct functional imaging data for volume differences. RESULTS: We included 20 patients with bvFTD and 18 controls in our study. The results demonstrate emotion-specific functional abnormalities in frontal and limbic regions in patients with bvFTD. Patients also showed decreased activity in posterior ventral visual regions, specifically the fusiform cortex, possibly reflecting reduced afferent input from limbic regions. Finally, bvFTD was associated with increased activity in posterior regions, including the inferior parietal cortex. LIMITATIONS: Autopsy validation of frontotemporal dementia is not yet available for this cohort. CONCLUSION: Together, these findings suggest that fMRI combined with tasks targeting social-cognitive deficits is a powerful technique to objectively measure neural systems involved in emotion processing in individuals with bvFTD. As viewing emotional expressions is known to engage many of the same neural systems that are active when experiencing the emotion itself, fMRI during expression processing provides a novel window into the emotions of patients with FTD.
Authors: Laurie Carr; Marco Iacoboni; Marie-Charlotte Dubeau; John C Mazziotta; Gian Luigi Lenzi Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-04-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Kezia Lange; Leanne M Williams; Andrew W Young; Edward T Bullmore; Michael J Brammer; Steven C R Williams; Jeffrey A Gray; Mary L Phillips Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: H J Rosen; M L Gorno-Tempini; W P Goldman; R J Perry; N Schuff; M Weiner; R Feiwell; J H Kramer; B L Miller Journal: Neurology Date: 2002-01-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Patrik Vuilleumier; Mark P Richardson; Jorge L Armony; Jon Driver; Raymond J Dolan Journal: Nat Neurosci Date: 2004-10-24 Impact factor: 24.884
Authors: Elizabeth C Finger; Abigail A Marsh; Derek G Mitchell; Marguerite E Reid; Courtney Sims; Salima Budhani; David S Kosson; Gang Chen; Kenneth E Towbin; Ellen Leibenluft; Daniel S Pine; James R Blair Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2008-05
Authors: Jan Jastorff; Francois-Laurent De Winter; Jan Van den Stock; Rik Vandenberghe; Martin A Giese; Mathieu Vandenbulcke Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2016-08-11 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Camilla N Clark; Laura E Downey; Hannah L Golden; Phillip D Fletcher; Rajith de Silva; Alberto Cifelli; Jason D Warren Journal: Behav Neurol Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 3.342
Authors: Miriam H Cohen; Amelia M Carton; Christopher J Hardy; Hannah L Golden; Camilla N Clark; Phillip D Fletcher; Kankamol Jaisin; Charles R Marshall; Susie M D Henley; Jonathan D Rohrer; Sebastian J Crutch; Jason D Warren Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2015-12-31 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Jackie M Poos; Lize C Jiskoot; Janne M Papma; John C van Swieten; Esther van den Berg Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 2.892