| Literature DB >> 29866112 |
Sujoy Ghosh Hajra1,2, Careesa C Liu1,2, Xiaowei Song1,3,4, Shaun D Fickling1,2, Teresa P L Cheung1,3,4, Ryan C N D'Arcy5,6,7,8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For nearly four decades, the N400 has been an important brainwave marker of semantic processing. It can be recorded non-invasively from the scalp using electrical and/or magnetic sensors, but largely within the restricted domain of research laboratories specialized to run specific N400 experiments. However, there is increasing evidence of significant clinical utility for the N400 in neurological evaluation, particularly at the individual level. To enable clinical applications, we recently reported a rapid evaluation framework known as "brain vital signs" that successfully incorporated the N400 response as one of the core components for cognitive function evaluation. The current study characterized the rapidly evoked N400 response to demonstrate that it shares consistent features with traditional N400 responses acquired in research laboratory settings-thereby enabling its translation into brain vital signs applications.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical application; ERP; MEG; N400; Semantic language
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29866112 PMCID: PMC5987605 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-018-1527-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Fig. 1Illustration of auditory stimulus sequence of the brain vital sign framework. Blocks of five tones and two words repeated 60 times for a total scan time of about 5 min. Words represent prime-target pairs, containing both semantic congruent (pink–orange) and incongruent (pink–blue) pairs. Tones (standard = green and deviant = black) elicit sensory (N100) and attention (P300) measures
Fig. 2Sensor-level MEG results showing differential processing in incongruent compared to congruent condition. a Grand-averaged GFP demonstrating increased power for incongruent relative to congruent condition. Shaded region denotes window of interest (300–500 ms). b Mean GFP averaged across the time window specified in part A, calculated for each subject and presented as mean ± SEM across subjects. *p < 0.05. c Time–frequency wavelet spectral power averaged over all MEG channels. Colour bar represents log power values
Fig. 3ERP results demonstrating differential processing of semantic congruence and incongruence. a–c Grand-averaged ERP waveforms at the Fz, Cz, and Pz electrode sites, respectively. Shaded regions denote windows of interest (300–500 ms). d Mean ERP amplitudes averaged over the windows of interest, calculated for each subject and presented as Mean ± SEM across subjects. *p < 0.05
Fig. 4Source localization results. Top: Incongruent word processing activates a left-lateralized distributed region of cortex including temporal, inferior frontal and inferior parietal areas (incongruent > congruent contrast, p < 0.005unc.). Bottom: No suprathreshold clusters were identified for the reverse contrast (congruent > incongruent). Color bar represents T-statistic values
Comparison of the features of interest between the N400 response elicited using traditional approaches and the rN400 response elicited under the rapid assessment brain vital sign framework
| Modality | Feature of interest | Traditional approach N400 | Rapid framework (rN400) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEG | Peak amplitude (cong. vs. incong.) | ERP: |Vincong| > |Vcong|a | ERP: |Vincong| > |Vcong| |
| Peak latency (ms) | ~ 400 msa | 420 ms | |
| Scalp topography | Centro-parietal maximab | Max at parietal (Pz) | |
| MEG | Amplitude difference (cong. vs. incong.) | ∆300–500 msc,d | ∆300–500 ms |
| Spectral effects | ⇓ beta-band powere | ⇓ beta-band power | |
| Cortical activation | ⇑ IFG, TL, IPLc,d,f | ⇑ IFG, TL, IPL |
Effects are based on comparison of the incongruent condition with the congruent condition data. EEG-based features include peak amplitude (V), peak latency (ms), and scalp topography. MEG-based features include amplitude difference during the 300–500 ms window (∆300–500ms), spectral effects, and cortical activations. Cong. congruent condition, incong. incongruent condition, IFG inferior frontal gyrus, TL temporal lobe (superior, middle and inferior temporal gyri), IPL inferior parietal lobule. Only statistically significant features are shown
a Kutas and Federmeier [17], b Lau et al. [9], c Halgren et al. [44], d Maess et al. [24], e Wang et al. [20], f Helenius et al. [23]