Literature DB >> 35150243

A multi-pronged investigation of option generation using depression, PET and modafinil.

Yuen-Siang Ang1,2,3, Cristina Cusin2,4, Yoann Petibon2,4, Daniel G Dillon1,2, Micah Breiger1, Emily L Belleau1,2, Marc Normandin2,4, Hans Schroder1,2, Sean Boyden4, Emma Hayden4, M Taylor Levine4, Aava Jahan4, Ashley K Meyer4, Min Su Kang1, Devon Brunner1, Steven E Gelda2, Jacob Hooker2,4, Georges El Fakhri2,4, Maurizio Fava2,4, Diego A Pizzagalli1,2.   

Abstract

Option generation is a critical process in decision making, but previous studies have largely focused on choices between options given by a researcher. Consequently, how we self-generate options for behaviour remain poorly understood. Here, we investigated option generation in major depressive disorder and how dopamine might modulate this process, as well as the effects of modafinil (a putative cognitive enhancer) on option generation in healthy individuals. We first compared differences in self-generated options between healthy non-depressed adults [n = 44, age = 26.3 years (SD 5.9)] and patients with major depressive disorder [n = 54, age = 24.8 years (SD 7.4)]. In the second study, a subset of depressed individuals [n = 22, age = 25.6 years (SD 7.8)] underwent PET scans with 11C-raclopride to examine the relationships between dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability and individual differences in option generation. Finally, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study of modafinil (100 mg and 200 mg), was conducted in an independent sample of healthy people [n = 19, age = 23.2 years (SD 4.8)] to compare option generation under different doses of this drug. The first study revealed that patients with major depressive disorder produced significantly fewer options [t(96) = 2.68, P = 0.009, Cohen's d = 0.54], albeit with greater uniqueness [t(96) = -2.54, P = 0.01, Cohen's d = 0.52], on the option generation task compared to healthy controls. In the second study, we found that 11C-raclopride binding potential in the putamen was negatively correlated with fluency (r = -0.69, P = 0.001) but positively associated with uniqueness (r = 0.59, P = 0.007). Hence, depressed individuals with higher densities of unoccupied putamen D2/D3 receptors in the putamen generated fewer but more unique options, whereas patients with lower D2/D3 receptor availability were likely to produce a larger number of similar options. Finally, healthy participants were less unique [F(2,36) = 3.32, P = 0.048, partial η2 = 0.16] and diverse [F(2,36) = 4.31, P = 0.021, partial η2 = 0.19] after taking 200 mg versus 100 mg and 0 mg of modafinil, while fluency increased linearly with dosage at a trend level [F(1,18) = 4.11, P = 0.058, partial η2 = 0.19]. Our results show, for the first time, that option generation is affected in clinical depression and that dopaminergic activity in the putamen of patients with major depressive disorder may play a key role in the self-generation of options. Modafinil was also found to influence option generation in healthy people by reducing the creativity of options produced.
© The Author(s) (2022). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  depression; dopamine; modafinil; option generation; raclopride PET

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35150243      PMCID: PMC9166534          DOI: 10.1093/brain/awab429

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain        ISSN: 0006-8950            Impact factor:   15.255


  86 in total

1.  Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia contributions to visual working memory.

Authors:  Bradley Voytek; Robert T Knight
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Differential roles of caudate nucleus and putamen during instrumental learning.

Authors:  Andrea Brovelli; Bruno Nazarian; Martine Meunier; Driss Boussaoud
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Role of basal ganglia in limb movements.

Authors:  M R DeLong; G E Alexander; A P Georgopoulos; M D Crutcher; S J Mitchell; R T Richardson
Journal:  Hum Neurobiol       Date:  1984

4.  Efficacy of modafinil compared to dextroamphetamine for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults.

Authors:  F B Taylor; J Russo
Journal:  J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.576

5.  Modafinil improves attention, inhibitory control, and reaction time in healthy, middle-aged rats.

Authors:  Russell E Morgan; Jaime M Crowley; Roland H Smith; Ronee B LaRoche; Marsha M Dopheide
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2007-01-23       Impact factor: 3.533

6.  Impact of modafinil on prefrontal executive function in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Michael D Hunter; Venkatasubramanian Ganesan; Iain D Wilkinson; Sean A Spence
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 18.112

7.  Benefits of adjunct modafinil in an open-label, pilot study in patients with schizophrenia.

Authors:  Murray H Rosenthal; Sharon L Bryant
Journal:  Clin Neuropharmacol       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.592

8.  A prospective trial of modafinil as an adjunctive treatment of major depression.

Authors:  Charles DeBattista; Anna Lembke; H Brent Solvason; Rahwa Ghebremichael; Jennifer Poirier
Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.153

9.  Dopamine Modulates Option Generation for Behavior.

Authors:  Yuen-Siang Ang; Sanjay Manohar; Olivia Plant; Annika Kienast; Campbell Le Heron; Kinan Muhammed; Michele Hu; Masud Husain
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 10.834

10.  What do verbal fluency tasks measure? Predictors of verbal fluency performance in older adults.

Authors:  Zeshu Shao; Esther Janse; Karina Visser; Antje S Meyer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-07-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.