| Literature DB >> 26270056 |
Sisi Jiang1, Hao Yan1, Qiang Chen2, Lin Tian1, Tianlan Lu1, Hao-Yang Tan3, Jun Yan1, Dai Zhang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that working memory deficits is a core feature of symptomatology of schizophrenia, which can be detected in patients and their unaffected relatives. The impairment of working memory has been found related to the abnormal activity of human brain regions in many functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies. This study investigated how brain region activation was altered in schizophrenia and how it was inherited independently from performance deficits.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26270056 PMCID: PMC4536207 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135468
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic, clinical and cognitive details for each group.
| Variable | SCZ | NCS |
| PAT | NCP |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 20) | (n = 20) | (n = 20) | (n = 20) | |||
|
| 0.8 | |||||
|
| 13 | 16 | 11 | 10 | ||
|
| 7 | 11 | 9 | 10 | ||
|
| 22.7(3.8) | 23.1(3.1) | 0.7 | 50.7(5.0) | 51.8(5.9) | 0.5 |
|
| 13.8(1.8) | 14.2(1.6) | 13.5(3.2) | 13.8(2.6) | 0.9 | |
|
| 10.40(3.87) | 12.40(4.19) | 11.05(4.31) | 10.35(4.06) | 0.36 | |
|
| 0.86(0.09) | 0.88(0.09) | 0.83(0.10) | 0.84(0.96) | 0.33 | |
|
| 19.0(2.6) | |||||
|
| 40.6(36.9) | |||||
|
| 66.5(10.9) | |||||
|
| 18.6(4.7) | |||||
|
| 16.0(4.5) | |||||
|
| 31.9(4.7) | |||||
|
| 402.0(233.4) | |||||
|
| 3.9(2.3) | 4.8(2.0) | 0.2 | 3.2(2.4) | 2.9(2.3) | 0.7 |
|
| 9.4(2.3) | 10.9(2.0) | 0.045 | 8.3(2.4) | 9.2(1.7) | 0.2 |
Significance threshold defined at p<0.05
Pa p value for Pearson’s χ2-test
P b p value for Two-Sample t Test
P c p value for one way ANOVA
CPZ-eq, chlorpromazine equivalents.
Fig 1Discrepant Activation between Groups and in Conjunction Analysis Using the BrainNet Viewer software (http://www.nitrc.org/projects/bnv/) [33].
(A) Between-group hyper activation regions related to disease (SCZ > NCS). Regions with significantly (p<0.05, FWE corrected) activation. (B) Between-group hyper activation regions related to familial risk (PAT > NCP). Regions with significantly (p<0.05, FWE corrected) activation. (C) Conjunction analyses depict significant overlap in activity related to disease and activity related to familial risk (SCZ > NCS∩PAT > NCP) (p<0.05, FWE corrected). Clusters are depicted in the right middle frontal gyrus, bilateral precentral gyrus, left inferior parietal gyrus, bilateral superior frontal gyrus, and left supplementary motor area.
Fig 2Discrepant Activation between Groups and in Conjunction Analysis Using the BrainNet Viewer software () [33].
(A) Between-group reduced activation regions related to disease (SCZ < NCS). Regions with significantly (p<0.05, FWE corrected) activation. (B) Between-group reduced activation regions related to familial risk (PAT < NCP). Regions with significantly (p<0.05, FWE corrected) activation. (C) Conjunction analyses depict significant overlap in activity related to disease and activity related to familial risk (SCZ < NCS∩PAT < NCP) (p<0.05, FWE corrected). Clusters are depicted in the right precuneus gyrus.
Conjunction analyses show significant overlap in different activity between SCZ>NCS ∩PPT>NCP and SCZ
| Brain region | BA | Left(L) | Right(R) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MNI (in mm) | size | t-value | ES | MNI (in mm) | size | t-value | ES | ||||||
| x | y | z | x | y | z | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Precentral Gyrus | 6 | -48 | 6 | 38 | 56 | 6.38 | 0.44 | ||||||
| Inferior Parietal Lobule | 40 | -38 | -56 | 52 | 56 | 6.25 | 0.43 | ||||||
| Superior Frontal Gyrus | 6 | -20 | 2 | 66 | 59 | 5.99 | 0.41 | ||||||
| Superior Frontal Gyrus | 6 | 30 | -4 | 62 | 20 | 5.57 | 0.38 | ||||||
| Supplementary Motor Gyrus | 32 | -4 | 12 | 52 | 27 | 5.28 | 0.36 | ||||||
| Middle Frontal Gyrus | 46 | 36 | 52 | 18 | 13 | 5.23 | 0.36 | ||||||
| Precentral Gyrus | 6 | 52 | 6 | 36 | 13 | 5.09 | 0.35 | ||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Precuneus Gyrus | 10 | -58 | 42 | 23 | 5.96 | 0.41 | |||||||