| Literature DB >> 29209234 |
Xiaojun Huang1,2, Weidan Pu3, Haihong Liu4, Xinmin Li5, Andrew J Greenshaw5, Serdar M Dursun5, Zhimin Xue1,2, Zhening Liu1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Betel quid (BQ) is a common psychoactive substance worldwide with particularly high usage in many Asian countries. This study aimed to explore the effect of BQ use on functional connectivity by comparing global functional brain networks and their subset between BQ chewers and healthy controls (HCs).Entities:
Keywords: betel quid; functional connectivity; independent component analysis; network; resting-state
Year: 2017 PMID: 29209234 PMCID: PMC5701933 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00239
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Figure 1A diagrammatic illustration of betel nut. Betel nut is obtained from the betel catechu tree. Source: Iconographia cormophytorum sinicorum Tomus Ⅴ (1976) page: 356 (In Chinese).
Figure 2Independent component analysis non-noise resting state networks from left to right (top row: occipital/temporal, posterior default mode, Visual. Second row: orbitofrontal, right frontoparietal, anterior default mode. Third row: frontotemporal, temporal, parietal. Fourth row: medial frontal/anterior cingulated, left frontoparietal, occipital/parietal. Fifth row: occipital/temporal/cerebellum, frontotemporal/paralimbic, frontotemporal/cerebellum. Bottom row: cerebellum/midbrain, temporal/limbic.).
Demographics and clinical characteristic of participants.
| Betel quid dependent (mean ± SD) | HC (mean ± SD) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 23.54 (3.87) | 24.52 (1.45) | −1.22 | 0.23 |
| Gender (male/female) | 24/0 | 27/0 | ||
| Education (years) | 15.13 (1.73) | 16.00 (0.00) | −2.64 | 0.01 |
| Betel Quid Dependence Scale | 7.42 (1.86) | N/A | ||
| Duration of BQ (years) | 7.75 (4.28) | N/A | ||
| Beck Depression Inventory | 10.58 (6.69) | 3.89 (4.63) | 4.20 | 0.00 |
| Beck Anxiety Inventory | 28.50 (6.20) | 23.19 (2.66) | 4.06 | 0.00 |
N/A, not applicable.
.
*p < 0.05.
Identified networks and their connectivity differences between BQ dependence and healthy control (two sample t-test, p < 0.001 uncorrected).
| IC number | Network | Direction | Cluster size | Region location (AAL) | Brodman area | MNI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 2 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 3 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 4 | Occipital/temporal | Negative | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 5 | Posterior default mode | Negative | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 6 | Visual | Negative | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 7 | Orbitofrontal | BQD > HC | 35 | Frontal_Mid_R, Frontal_Sup_R | 9 | 27 | 42 | 39 |
| 8 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 9 | Right frontoparietal | BQD > HC | 21 | Frontal_Sup_R | 10 | 30 | 66 | 6 |
| 10 | Anterior default mode | Negative | – | – | – | – | ||
| 11 | Frontotemporal | BQD > HC | 22 | Frontal_Inf_Tri_L, Frontal_Inf_Orb_L | 47, 10 | −51 | 36 | −3 |
| 12 | Temporal | Negative | – | – | – | – | ||
| 13 | Parietal | BQD < HC | 43 | Angular_R | 7, 39, 40 | 54 | −66 | 42 |
| 14 | Medial frontal/anterior cingulate | BQD < HC | 57 | Frontal_Inf_Oper_L, Frontal_Inf_Tri_L, Temporal_Sup_L | 44, 22 | −60 | 12 | 0 |
| 15 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 16 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 17 | Left frontoparietal | BQD > HC | 40 | Angular_L | 39 | −45 | −66 | 33 |
| 18 | Occipital/parietal | BQD > HC | 34 | Temporal_Mid_R, Occipital_Mid_R, Angular_R | 39 | 42 | −63 | 21 |
| 19 | Occipital/temporal/cerebellum | Negative | – | – | – | – | ||
| 20 | Frontotemporal/paralimbic | Negative | – | – | – | – | ||
| 21 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 22 | Frontotemporal/cerebellum | BQD > HC | 20 | Temporal_Pole_Sup_L | 38 | −51 | 12 | −9 |
| 23 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 24 | Noise | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 25 | Cerebellum/midbrain | Negative | – | – | – | – | ||
| 26 | Temporal/limbic | BQD > HC | 26 | SupraMarginal_L, Temporal_Sup_L | 40 | −63 | −45 | 27 |
IC, independence component; AAL, anatomical automatic labeling; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; BQD, betel quid dependence; HC, healthy control; Negative, no statistical significance; L/R, left/right; Sup, superior; Mid, middle; Inf, inferior; Tri, triangularis; Orb, orbital; Oper, operculum.
Figure 3Differences in network connectivity in participants between betel quid (BQ) dependence and healthy control, determined through two sample t-tests (p < 0.001 uncorrected). Increased connectivity networks in participants with BQ dependence from left to right (top row: orbitofrontal, right frontoparietal, frontotemporal. Second row: left frontoparietal, occipital/parietal, frontotemporal/cerebellum. bottom row, first one: temporal/limbic) and decreased networks from left to right (bottom row, second and third: parietal and medial frontal/anterior cingulated). The color bars represent the range of t value.
Spearman’s correlation coefficients between functional connectivity and betel quid dependence scale (BQDS) scores in betel quid dependence individuals (n = 24, *p < 0.05 is statistically significant).
| Functional connectivity | BQDS scores | |
|---|---|---|
| Orbitofrontal | 0.39 | 0.03* |
| Right frontoparietal | 0.15 | 0.48 |
| Frontotemporal | 0.22 | 0.31 |
| Parietal | 0.14 | 0.51 |
| Medial frontal/anterior cingulate | −0.35 | 0.02* |
| Left frontoparietal | −0.31 | 0.14 |
| Occipital/parietal | 0.09 | 0.69 |
| Frontotemporal/cerebellum | 0.14 | 0.51 |
| Temporal/limbic | −0.15 | 0.49 |