Lize C Jiskoot1,2, Jackie M Poos3,4, Manon E Vollebergh3, Sanne Franzen3, Judy van Hemmen3, Janne M Papma3, John C van Swieten3, Roy P C Kessels5,6, Esther van den Berg3. 1. Department of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center, NF-331, Post box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.c.jiskoot@erasmusmc.nl. 2. Dementia Research Centre, University College London, London, UK. l.c.jiskoot@erasmusmc.nl. 3. Department of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center, NF-331, Post box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 5. Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Medical Psychology, Radboudumc Alzheimer Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The emotion recognition task (ERT) was developed to overcome shortcomings of static emotion recognition paradigms, by identifying more subtle deficits in emotion recognition across different intensity levels. In this study, we used the ERT to investigate emotion recognition deficits across the frontotemporal (FTD) and Alzheimer's Dementia (AD) spectrum. METHODS: With the ERT, we assessed the recognition of facial emotional expressions (anger-disgust-fear-happiness-sadness-surprise) across four intensities (40-60-80-100%) in patients with behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD; n = 32), and AD (n = 32), presymptomatic FTD mutation carriers (n = 47) and controls (n = 49). We examined group differences using multilevel linear regression with age, sex and education level as covariates, and performed post hoc analyses on presymptomatic (MAPT, GRN and C9orf72) mutation carriers. Classification abilities were investigated by means of logistic regression. RESULTS: Lowest ERT total scores were found in patients with bvFTD and AD, whereas equal highest performance was found in presymptomatic mutation carriers and controls. For all emotions, significantly lower subscores were found in patients with bvFTD than in presymptomatic mutation carriers and in controls (highest p value = 0.025). Patients with bvFTD performed lower than patients with AD on anger (p = 0.005) and a trend towards significance was found for a lower performance on happiness (p = 0.065). Task performance increased with higher emotional intensity, and classification was better at the lowest than at the highest intensity. C9orf72 mutation carriers performed worse on recognizing anger at the lowest intensity than GRN mutation carriers (p = 0.047) and controls (p = 0.038). The ERT differentiated between patients with bvFTD and controls, and between patients with AD and controls (both p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Our results demonstrate emotion recognition deficits in both bvFTD and AD, and suggest the presence of subtle emotion recognition changes in presymptomatic C9orf72-FTD. This highlights the importance of incorporating emotion recognition paradigms into standard neuropsychological assessment for early differential diagnosis, and as clinical endpoints in upcoming therapeutic trials.
BACKGROUND: The emotion recognition task (ERT) was developed to overcome shortcomings of static emotion recognition paradigms, by identifying more subtle deficits in emotion recognition across different intensity levels. In this study, we used the ERT to investigate emotion recognition deficits across the frontotemporal (FTD) and Alzheimer's Dementia (AD) spectrum. METHODS: With the ERT, we assessed the recognition of facial emotional expressions (anger-disgust-fear-happiness-sadness-surprise) across four intensities (40-60-80-100%) in patients with behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD; n = 32), and AD (n = 32), presymptomatic FTD mutation carriers (n = 47) and controls (n = 49). We examined group differences using multilevel linear regression with age, sex and education level as covariates, and performed post hoc analyses on presymptomatic (MAPT, GRN and C9orf72) mutation carriers. Classification abilities were investigated by means of logistic regression. RESULTS: Lowest ERT total scores were found in patients with bvFTD and AD, whereas equal highest performance was found in presymptomatic mutation carriers and controls. For all emotions, significantly lower subscores were found in patients with bvFTD than in presymptomatic mutation carriers and in controls (highest p value = 0.025). Patients with bvFTD performed lower than patients with AD on anger (p = 0.005) and a trend towards significance was found for a lower performance on happiness (p = 0.065). Task performance increased with higher emotional intensity, and classification was better at the lowest than at the highest intensity. C9orf72 mutation carriers performed worse on recognizing anger at the lowest intensity than GRN mutation carriers (p = 0.047) and controls (p = 0.038). The ERT differentiated between patients with bvFTD and controls, and between patients with AD and controls (both p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Our results demonstrate emotion recognition deficits in both bvFTD and AD, and suggest the presence of subtle emotion recognition changes in presymptomatic C9orf72-FTD. This highlights the importance of incorporating emotion recognition paradigms into standard neuropsychological assessment for early differential diagnosis, and as clinical endpoints in upcoming therapeutic trials.
Authors: Lize C Jiskoot; Elise G P Dopper; Tom den Heijer; Reinier Timman; Rick van Minkelen; John C van Swieten; Janne M Papma Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-06-29 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: M L Gorno-Tempini; A E Hillis; S Weintraub; A Kertesz; M Mendez; S F Cappa; J M Ogar; J D Rohrer; S Black; B F Boeve; F Manes; N F Dronkers; R Vandenberghe; K Rascovsky; K Patterson; B L Miller; D S Knopman; J R Hodges; M M Mesulam; M Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Rik Ossenkoppele; Yolande A L Pijnenburg; David C Perry; Brendan I Cohn-Sheehy; Nienke M E Scheltens; Jacob W Vogel; Joel H Kramer; Annelies E van der Vlies; Renaud La Joie; Howard J Rosen; Wiesje M van der Flier; Lea T Grinberg; Annemieke J Rozemuller; Eric J Huang; Bart N M van Berckel; Bruce L Miller; Frederik Barkhof; William J Jagust; Philip Scheltens; William W Seeley; Gil D Rabinovici Journal: Brain Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Roy P C Kessels; Lotte Gerritsen; Barbara Montagne; Nibal Ackl; Janine Diehl; Adrian Danek Journal: Behav Neurol Date: 2007 Impact factor: 3.342
Authors: Katya Rascovsky; John R Hodges; David Knopman; Mario F Mendez; Joel H Kramer; John Neuhaus; John C van Swieten; Harro Seelaar; Elise G P Dopper; Chiadi U Onyike; Argye E Hillis; Keith A Josephs; Bradley F Boeve; Andrew Kertesz; William W Seeley; Katherine P Rankin; Julene K Johnson; Maria-Luisa Gorno-Tempini; Howard Rosen; Caroline E Prioleau-Latham; Albert Lee; Christopher M Kipps; Patricia Lillo; Olivier Piguet; Jonathan D Rohrer; Martin N Rossor; Jason D Warren; Nick C Fox; Douglas Galasko; David P Salmon; Sandra E Black; Marsel Mesulam; Sandra Weintraub; Brad C Dickerson; Janine Diehl-Schmid; Florence Pasquier; Vincent Deramecourt; Florence Lebert; Yolande Pijnenburg; Tiffany W Chow; Facundo Manes; Jordan Grafman; Stefano F Cappa; Morris Freedman; Murray Grossman; Bruce L Miller Journal: Brain Date: 2011-08-02 Impact factor: 13.501
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
Authors: Shefali Chaudhary; Simon Zhornitsky; Herta H Chao; Christopher H van Dyck; Chiang-Shan R Li Journal: Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen Date: 2022 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 2.632
Authors: José Cárdenas; María J Blanca; Fernando Carvajal; Sandra Rubio; Carmen Pedraza Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: E van den Berg; J M Poos; L C Jiskoot; B Montagne; R P C Kessels; S Franzen; J van Hemmen; W S Eikelboom; E G C Heijboer; J de Kriek; A van der Vlist; F J de Jong; J C van Swieten; H Seelaar; J M Papma Journal: Assessment Date: 2021-04-15