| Literature DB >> 33409491 |
Laura Zapparoli1,2, Silvia Seghezzi1,3, Francantonio Devoto1,3, Marika Mariano1, Giuseppe Banfi2,4, Mauro Porta2, Eraldo Paulesu1,2.
Abstract
Current neurocognitive models of motor control postulate that accurate action monitoring is crucial for a normal experience of agency-the ability to attribute the authorship of our actions and their consequences to ourselves. Recent studies demonstrated that action monitoring is impaired in Gilles de la Tourette syndrome, a movement disorder characterized by motor and vocal tics. It follows that Tourette syndrome patients may suffer from a perturbed sense of agency, the hypothesis tested in this study. To this end, we recruited 25 Tourette syndrome patients and 25 matched healthy controls in a case-control behavioural and functional magnetic resonance imaging study. As an implicit index of the sense of agency, we measured the intentional binding phenomenon, i.e., the perceived temporal compression between voluntary movements and their external consequences. We found evidence of an impaired sense of agency in Tourette syndrome patients who, as a group, did not show a significant intentional binding. The more reduced was the individual intentional binding, the more severe were the motor symptoms. Specific differences between the two groups were also observed in terms of brain activation patterns. In the healthy controls group, the magnitude of the intentional binding was associated with the activity of a premotor-parietal-cerebellar network. This relationship was not present in the Tourette syndrome group, suggesting an altered activation of the agency brain network for self-generated acts. We conclude that the less accurate action monitoring described in Tourette syndrome also involves the assessment of the consequences of actions in the outside world. We discuss that this may lead to difficulties in distinguishing external consequences produced by their own actions from the ones caused by others in Tourette syndrome patients.Entities:
Keywords: Tourette’s syndrome; cognitive control; motor control; social cognition; tic disorder
Year: 2020 PMID: 33409491 PMCID: PMC7772095 DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcaa204
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Commun ISSN: 2632-1297
Demographical, neuropsychological and clinical data
| # | Sex | Age | Edu | MMSE | FAB | Raven | BIS- 11 | Y-BOCS TOT | Beck | Conners | STAI- X-1 | STAI- X-2 | PUTS | YGTSS | Neuroleptic treatment | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw | Corr | Raw | Corr | Raw | Corr | Moto | Fon | Soc | ||||||||||||
|
| M | 23 | 8 | 29 | 28.19 | 18 | 18 | 31 | 30.5 | 65 | 24 | 13 | 2 | 31 | 40 | 21 | 13 | 11 | 20 | Risperidone (2 mg) |
|
| F | 19 | 12 | 24 | 22.59 | 16 | 14.9 | 18 | 16 | 77 | 19 | 22 | 2 | 62 | 56 | 26 | 21 | 21 | 50 | None |
|
| M | 22 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 35 | 32.5 | 58 | 15 | 12 | 2 | 41 | 50 | 29 | 15 | 5 | 20 | None |
|
| M | 20 | 12 | 30 | 30 | 17 | 15.9 | 28 | 26 | 62 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 55 | 53 | 34 | 20 | 17 | 20 | Aripiprazole (22.5 mg); |
|
| M | 23 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 35 | 32.5 | 58 | 13 | 1 | 2 | 31 | 54 | 24 | 17 | 7 | 30 | Aripiprazole (7.5 mg); |
|
| M | 20 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 35 | 32.5 | 68 | 16 | 2 | 2 | 45 | 43 | 25 | 11 | 5 | 40 | Aripiprazole (15 mg) |
|
| M | 25 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 17 | 15.6 | 34 | 31.5 | 84 | 13 | 7 | 3 | 27 | 43 | 21 | 20 | 14 | 20 | Pimozide (2 mg) |
|
| M | 19 | 13 | 26 | 24.59 | 16 | 14.5 | 35 | 32.5 | 71 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 26 | 44 | 32 | 13 | 5 | 0 | Quetiapine (50 mg) |
|
| M | 29 | 10 | 29 | 27.59 | 13 | 12.1 | 30 | 29 | 55 | 19 | 7 | 4 | 34 | 32 | 28 | 6 | 7 | 20 | Pimozide (4 mg) |
|
| F | 21 | 13 | 29 | 27.59 | 15 | 13.5 | 22 | 19.5 | 86 | 16 | 5 | 5 | 47 | 36 | 26 | 12 | 11 | 0 | Haloperidol (2 mg); |
|
| M | 29 | 8 | 28 | 27.19 | 16 | 15.5 | 24 | 24 | 63 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 31 | 45 | 19 | 11 | 10 | 30 | Aripiprazole (30 mg); |
|
| M | 27 | 16 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 36 | 36 | 57 | 20 | 13 | 0 | 41 | 51 | 27 | 14 | 0 | 20 | Aripiprazole (30 mg) |
|
| M | 19 | 12 | 27 | 25.59 | 16 | 14.5 | 30 | 28 | 48 | 17 | 2 | 0 | 53 | 40 | 25 | 12 | 13 | 20 | Aripiprazole (15 mg) |
|
| M | 50 | 8 | 29 | 28.97 | 14 | 13.9 | 22 | 23.5 | 67 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 30 | 25 | 27 | 8 | 7 | 40 | Aripiprazole (30 mg) |
|
| M | 22 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 35 | 32.5 | 61 | 20 | 5 | 4 | 37 | 45 | 36 | 15 | 6 | 20 | Pimozide (4 mg) |
|
| M | 28 | 16 | 29 | 27.59 | 18 | 18 | 30 | 26.25 | 70 | 18 | 17 | 1 | 35 | 47 | 34 | 16 | 6 | 40 | Aripiprazole (15 mg) |
|
| M | 18 | 8 | 30 | 30 | 16 | 15.3 | 32 | 32 | 76 | 20 | 7 | 4 | 29 | 33 | 21 | 14 | 0 | 20 | Aripiprazole (22.5 mg); |
|
| M | 22 | 8 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 32 | 32 | 70 | 17 | 11 | 4 | 33 | 50 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 50 | Aripiprazole (15 mg) |
|
| M | 19 | 13 | 30 | 30 | 17 | 15.5 | 36 | 36 | 74 | 10 | 7 | 4 | 34 | 52 | 28 | 17 | 0 | 20 | Pimozide (4 mg) |
|
| M | 18 | 8 | 29 | 28.19 | 16 | 15.3 | 34 | 34 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 23 | 14 | 3 | 4 | 0 | Aripiprazole (22.5 mg) |
|
| F | 34 | 20 | 30 | 30 | 17 | 15.3 | 28 | 24.5 | 86 | 12 | 11 | 4 | 39 | 50 | 29 | 15 | 12 | 30 | None |
|
| M | 48 | 13 | 29 | 27.89 | 18 | 18 | 30 | 29.5 | 68 | 18 | 8 | 2 | 41 | 39 | 36 | 17 | 18 | 20 | None |
|
| M | 47 | 8 | 27 | 26.62 | 16 | 15.8 | 28 | 26.75 | 67 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 37 | 39 | 22 | 11 | 3 | 0 | Pimozide (4 mg) |
|
| F | 24 | 16 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 34 | 30 | 70 | 19 | 20 | 4 | 59 | 41 | 34 | 16 | 11 | 30 | None |
|
| F | 32 | 18 | 30 | 30 | 18 | 18 | 29 | 25.25 | 51 | 21 | 14 | 2 | 50 | 69 | 33 | 11 | 13 | 40 | None |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Figure 1Experimental paradigm. Graphical representation of the temporal-judgement task performed during fMRI
Figure 2Behavioural results: TC values. TC values for the active and passive conditions recorded at 200, 400 and 600 ms of action-outcome delay for HC and GTS patients. Error bars = standard error; asterisks indicate significant results at P < 0.05 Bonferroni corrected. TC is visualized as the percentage of the time delay of the outcome
Figure 3Behavioural results: correlation between behavioural and clinical data. Correlation analysis between the TC values recorded during the active condition at 200 ms (the condition where we found the intentional binding effect in HC) and the severity of the motoric symptoms (measured with the YGTSS scale–subscale motor tics). NB: two sets of data point are overlapping in the scatter-plot graph
Results of the conjunction analysis between HC and GTS of the comparison active > passive trials (independently from the different action-outcome delay)
| Brain regions | MNI coordinates | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Left hemisphere | Right hemisphere | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Active condition > passive condition (conjunction analysis) | ||||||||
| Precentral gyrus (6) | −26 | −24 | 58 | 4.1 | ||||
| −28 | −24 | 64 | 4.0 | |||||
| −26 | −22 | 68 | 4.0 | |||||
| Precentral gyrus (4) | −40 | −22 | 56 | 3.3 | ||||
| Cerebellum_4_5 | −12 | −54 | −14 | 3.9 | ||||
| −20 | −52 | −20 | 3.6 | |||||
| Cerebellum_6 | −14 | −58 | −16 | 3.9 | ||||
| −22 | −56 | −18 | 3.8 | |||||
| −26 | −54 | −20 | 3.7 | |||||
Figure 4fMRI results: conjunction analysis. Conjunction analysis (HC GTS) for the contrast active condition > passive condition (for all the action-outcome delays)
Linear regression analysis between fMRI data collected for trials with action-outcome of 200 ms, with time compression data (at 200 ms action-outcome delay)
| Brain regions | MNI coordinates | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Left hemisphere | Right hemisphere | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Sup. frontal med. gyrus (9) | 10 | 44 | 44 | 4.0 | ||||
| Inf. frontal orb. gyrus (45) | 58 | 22 | −2 | 3.3 | ||||
| Inf. frontal tri. gyrus (45) | −48 | 24 | 2 | 4.0 | ||||
| −44 | 28 | 4 | 3.7 | |||||
| −54 | 22 | 0 | 3.2 | |||||
| Rolandic opercular gyrus | 60 | 16 | 0 | 3.2 | ||||
| Sup. frontal gyrus (8) | 14 | 26 | 48 | 4.1 | ||||
| 14 | 22 | 50 | 3.8 | |||||
| Sup. frontal gyrus (9) | 18 | 32 | 48 | 4.4 | ||||
| Sup. frontal gyrus (6) | −18 | 4 | 64 | 4.4 | ||||
| −14 | 10 | 54 | 3.5 | |||||
| Precentral gyrus (6) | −28 | −12 | 62 | 3.4 | ||||
| −26 | −8 | 66 | 3.3 | |||||
| Pre-supplementary motor area (6) | −16 | 8 | 64 | 4.5 | ||||
| −4 | 18 | 62 | 3.7 | |||||
| −8 | 10 | 54 | 3.7 | |||||
| −6 | 14 | 54 | 3.4 | |||||
| −4 | 18 | 56 | 3.4 | |||||
| Precentral gyrus (4) | −40 | −20 | 58 | 3.4 | ||||
| −38 | −18 | 62 | 3.2 | |||||
| Postcentral gyrus (2) | 38 | −38 | 62 | 4.4 | ||||
| 34 | −40 | 64 | 4.1 | |||||
| 52 | −30 | 50 | 3.7 | |||||
| 32 | −40 | 68 | 3.6 | |||||
| Sup. parietal lobule (40) | 36 | −42 | 60 | 4.1 | ||||
| Insula | −40 | 12 | 2 | 4.2 | 40 | 22 | −6 | 4.1 |
| −40 | 4 | −8 | 3.5 | 46 | 14 | −4 | 4.5 | |
| −42 | 6 | −4 | 3.4 | |||||
| Hippocampus | −20 | −30 | −4 | 3.3 | ||||
| Parahippocampal gyrus | −18 | −34 | −6 | 3.5 | 22 | −34 | −10 | 4.2 |
| Cerebellum_4_5 | −14 | −44 | −10 | 4.3 | 10 | −46 | −6 | 4.1 |
| 10 | −44 | −10 | 4.0 | |||||
| 12 | −40 | −10 | 3.9 | |||||
| Vermis_3 | −2 | −38 | −10 | 3.3 | ||||
| Pallidum | −20 | −2 | −4 | 4.4 | ||||
| −22 | −8 | 0 | 4.3 | |||||
| −24 | −16 | −2 | 3.5 | |||||
| Thalamus | −18 | −8 | 2 | 4.2 | 16 | −10 | −2 | 4.0 |
| 8 | −4 | −6 | 3.7 | |||||
Figure 5fMRI results: linear regression with TC values. Linear regression analysis between the BOLD activity recorded during the task and the differential TC values (active trials–passive trials) when the action-outcome delay was 200 ms and a significant intentional binding was observed in HC (but not in GTS)