| Literature DB >> 26594631 |
Silvia P Caminiti1, Nicola Canessa2, Chiara Cerami3, Alessandra Dodich4, Chiara Crespi4, Sandro Iannaccone5, Alessandra Marcone5, Andrea Falini6, Stefano F Cappa2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: bvFTD patients display an impairment in the attribution of cognitive and affective states to others, reflecting GM atrophy in brain regions associated with social cognition, such as amygdala, superior temporal cortex and posterior insula. Distinctive patterns of abnormal brain functioning at rest have been reported in bvFTD, but their relationship with defective attribution of affective states has not been investigated.Entities:
Keywords: AD, Alzheimer's disease; Affective mentalizing; BOLD, blood-oxygen-level-dependent; Behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia; CI, causal inferences; Default mode network; EA, emotion attribution; Executive functioning network; FDR, false discovery rate; FTLD, frontotemporal lobar degeneration; GM, gray matter; IA, intention attribution; MANCOVAN, multivariate analysis of covariance; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; PCA, principal component analysis; RSNs, resting-state networks; Resting state functional MRI; SET, story-based empathy task; SPM, statistical parametric mapping; ToM, theory of mind; VBM, voxel based morphometry; aDMN, anterior default mode network; bvFTD, behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia; gICA, group independent component analysis; pDMN, posterior default mode network; rs-fMRI, resting-state fMRI
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26594631 PMCID: PMC4600858 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2015.08.012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
Demographic and clinical features of the sample.
| Controls (n = 30) | bvFTD (n = 12) | U statistics | p-Value | Effect-size (r) | Cohen's d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age in years | 58.84 (7.30) | 63.11 (7.17) | 115 | 0.70 | 0.2566 | 0.5926 |
| Education in years | 13.56 (3.65) | 12.08 (4.29) | 145 | 0.32 | −0.1717 | −0.3858 |
| MMSE | 29.18 (0.95) | 25.33 (3.52) | 44.5 | <0.0001* | −0.6533 | −1.9103 |
| FBI | – | 23.09 (7.02) | – | – | – | – |
| NPI | – | 25.72 (16.71) | – | – | – | – |
| FTLD-CDR sum of boxes | – | 5.72 (3.48) | – | – | – | – |
| IA score | 5.27 (0.98) | 3.67 (2.01) | 82.5 | 0.008* | −0.4735 | −1.1902 |
| CI score | 4.77 (1.17) | 4.08 (1.62) | 135.5 | .20 | −0.2316 | −0.527 |
| EA score | 5.00 (1.29) | 3.00 (1.41) | 56.5 | <0.0001* | −0.5636 | −1.5105 |
For each variable, the mean (and standard-deviation in brackets), Mann–Whitney U statistics and p-value of group comparisons, as well as effects sizes, are reported. The asterisk in the “p-value” column denotes the statistics reported as significant.
bvFTD: behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia; MMSE: Mini Mental State Examination; FBI: Frontal Behavioral Inventory; NPI: Neuropsychiatric Inventory; FTLD-CDR: FTLD-modified Clinical Dementia Rating scale; IA: intention attribution; CI: causal inference; EA: emotion attribution.
Fig. 1Experimental task. Examples of the stimuli used in the intention attribution (IA, left) and emotion attribution (EA, right) conditions of the story-based empathy task (SET) (Dodich et al., 2015). Subjects are first asked to verbally report the intention (IA) or emotion (EA) of the main character of the story depicted by the sequence of cartoons at the top. Then, they are asked to select the correct ending of the story among the three shown at the bottom (A, B or C).
Morphometric features and nuisance predictors related to head motion and quality of spatial normalization.
| Controls | bvFTD | T statistics | p-Value | Effect-size (r) | Cohen's d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GM (ml) | 426.52 (56.82) | 363.22 (56.89) | 3.259 | 0.002288* | −0.4494 | −1.1137 |
| WM (ml) | 726.10 (86.22) | 718.59 (88.63) | 0.253 | 0.801589 | −0.039 | −0.0864 |
| CSF (ml) | 219.24 (30.48) | 286.21 (57.99) | −4.904 | 0.000016* | 0.6034 | 1.6751 |
| TIV (ml) | 1371.86 (135.34) | 1368.03 (110.07) | 0.087 | 0.931028 | −0.0134 | −0.0297 |
| GM/TIV percentage (%) | 31.06 (2.45) | 26.54 (3.46) | 4.77 | 0.000024* | −0.5941 | −1.6349 |
| Average scan-to-scan head motion (mm) | 0.063 (0.03) | 0.079 (0.03) | −1.47 | 0.147 | 0.2342 | 0.5333 |
| Quality of normalization (smoothed) | 0.963 (0.005) | 0.961 (0.006) | 0.880553 | 0.383820 | −0.1682 | −0.3778 |
| Quality of normalization (unsmoothed) | 0.923 (0.007) | 0.920744 (0.009) | 1.061066 | 0.295025 | −0.1329 | −0.2967 |
For each variable, the mean (and standard-deviation in brackets), T statistics and p-value of group comparisons, as well as effects sizes, are reported. The asterisk in the “p-value” column denotes the statistics reported as significant.
bvFTD: behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia; ml: milliliters; GM: gray matter; WM: white matter; CSF: cerebrospinal fluid; TIV: total intracranial volume.
Fig. 2Resting-state networks. Spatial maps of the 32 independent components identified as RSNs.
Fig. 3Resting-state metrics in bvFTD patients.The figure reports the components displaying a significant difference between bvFTD patients (red) and healthy controls (CTR; in blue) in terms of either a) power spectra of resting-state network (RSN) time course, and b) average gray-matter (GM) volume. Compared with controls, patients typically display reduced GM volume and a relative shift towards higher frequencies in the spontaneous fluctuations of the BOLD signal at rest. The only exception is represented by the right frontal component 64 (bottom of the figures), which displays higher intensity of activation in patients vs. controls as well as no significant group difference in GM volume or resting state power spectra.
Statistical effects associated with resting-state spectral power at low vs. high frequencies.
| Low frequency (<0.05 Hz) | High frequency (>0.1 Hz) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group comparisons | p-Value | Effect-size (r) | Cohen's d | p-Value | Effect-size (r) | Cohen's d |
| C12 | Bin21 | Bin89 | ||||
| Group effect | 0.005140* | −0.4156 | −1.0113 | 0.000057* | 0.5705 | 1.5377 |
| C14 | Bin102 | |||||
| Group effect | – | – | – | 0.000071* | 0.5642 | 1.5125 |
| C50 | Bin108 | |||||
| Group effect | – | – | – | 0.000477* | 0.5062 | 1.2992 |
| C58 | Bin27 | |||||
| Group effect | 0.000357* | −0.5158 | −1.3326 | – | – | – |
| Correlation with EA (bvFTD only) | p-Value | Correlation | p-Value | Correlation | ||
| Bin08 | Bin108 | |||||
| C37 | 0.013950* | 0.685091 | 0.001260* | −0.814355 | ||
| Interaction analyses | p-Value | Partial eta-squared | Observed power | p-Value | Partial eta-squared | Observed power |
| C64 | Bin02 | Bin108 | ||||
| Interaction group × EA | 0.015433* | 0.197110 | 0.751193 | 0.001698* | 0.285174 | 0.927805 |
| C33 | Bin28 | Bin97 | ||||
| Interaction group × EA | 0.006283* | 0.234203 | 0.843163 | 0.000177* | 0.365420 | 0.985926 |
| C53 | Bin15 | Bin107 | ||||
| Interaction group × EA | 0.000267* | 0.351437 | 0.980471 | 0.006720* | 0.231487 | 0.837325 |
| C20 | Bin15 | Bin107 | ||||
| Interaction group × EA | 0.284352 | 0.064044 | 0.264230 | 0.000408* | 0.336863 | 0.973083 |
For each component/bin, the p-value and effects sizes of the statistical test performed are reported. The asterisk in the “p-value” columns denotes the statistics reported as significant after an FDR correction for multiple comparisons. bvFTD: behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia; EA: emotion attribution.
Supplementary Fig. 1The brain regions, belonging to component 37 of the attentional fronto-parietal network, showing decreased resting-state brain activity in bvFTD patients compared with healthy controls.
Supplementary Fig. 2The brain networks showing reduced functional connectivity (i.e. temporal correlation between resting-state time courses) in bvFTD patients compared with healthy controls.
Fig. 4Affective mentalizing in bvFTD patients.The dorsomedial sector of the anterior DMN (top-left) is the only component displaying, in bvFTD patients, a significant relationship with EA performance, which is positively related to low-frequency power spectra and negatively related to high frequency ones (bottom-right). This component corresponds to the aDMN highlighted by group comparisons (see component 12 in Fig. 3, top left) in terms of spatial location, GM reduction (bottom left) and resting-state metrics (top right: the red and light-blue temporal profiles are those resulting from the main analysis, while the green profile is that resulting from the analysis in patients only).
Fig. 5Task by group interaction.In patients, compared with controls, higher emotion attribution (EA) performance was more strongly associated with internal coherent activity (i.e. higher loading on low frequency power spectra and/or lower loading on high frequency spectra) in different components. Two of them, involving the anterior inferotemporal cortex (component 20) and the middle/superior temporal cortex alongside posterior insular cortex (component 53) also displayed a significant gray matter reduction (bottom half of the figure).