Manelis Anna, Almeida Jorge R C, Stiffler Richelle, Lockovich Jeanette C, Aslam Haris A, Phillips Mary L
1 Department of Psychiatry, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
2 Department of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA.
Brain. 2016 Sep;139(Pt 9):2554-66. doi: 10.1093/brain/aww157. Epub 2016 Jun 30.
Bipolar disorder is often misdiagnosed as major depressive disorder, which leads to inadequate treatment. Depressed individuals versus healthy control subjects, show increased expectation of negative outcomes. Due to increased impulsivity and risk for mania, however, depressed individuals with bipolar disorder may differ from those with major depressive disorder in neural mechanisms underlying anticipation processes. Graph theory methods for neuroimaging data analysis allow the identification of connectivity between multiple brain regions without prior model specification, and may help to identify neurobiological markers differentiating these disorders, thereby facilitating development of better therapeutic interventions. This study aimed to compare brain connectivity among regions involved in win/loss anticipation in depressed individuals with bipolar disorder (BDD) versus depressed individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) versus healthy control subjects using graph theory methods. The study was conducted at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and included 31 BDD, 39 MDD, and 36 healthy control subjects. Participants were scanned while performing a number guessing reward task that included the periods of win and loss anticipation. We first identified the anticipatory network across all 106 participants by contrasting brain activation during all anticipation periods (win anticipation + loss anticipation) versus baseline, and win anticipation versus loss anticipation. Brain connectivity within the identified network was determined using the Independent Multiple sample Greedy Equivalence Search (IMaGES) and Linear non-Gaussian Orientation, Fixed Structure (LOFS) algorithms. Density of connections (the number of connections in the network), path length, and the global connectivity direction ('top-down' versus 'bottom-up') were compared across groups (BDD/MDD/healthy control subjects) and conditions (win/loss anticipation). These analyses showed that loss anticipation was characterized by denser top-down fronto-striatal and fronto-parietal connectivity in healthy control subjects, by bottom-up striatal-frontal connectivity in MDD, and by sparse connectivity lacking fronto-striatal connections in BDD. Win anticipation was characterized by dense connectivity of medial frontal with striatal and lateral frontal cortical regions in BDD, by sparser bottom-up striatum-medial frontal cortex connectivity in MDD, and by sparse connectivity in healthy control subjects. In summary, this is the first study to demonstrate that BDD and MDD with comparable levels of current depression differed from each other and healthy control subjects in density of connections, connectivity path length, and connectivity direction as a function of win or loss anticipation. These findings suggest that different neurobiological mechanisms may underlie aberrant anticipation processes in BDD and MDD, and that distinct therapeutic strategies may be required for these individuals to improve coping strategies during expectation of positive and negative outcomes.
双相情感障碍常被误诊为重度抑郁症,导致治疗不充分。与健康对照受试者相比,抑郁个体对负面结果的预期增加。然而,由于双相情感障碍抑郁个体的冲动性增加和躁狂风险,他们在预期过程的神经机制方面可能与重度抑郁症患者不同。神经影像数据分析的图论方法允许在无需事先设定模型的情况下识别多个脑区之间的连接性,可能有助于识别区分这些疾病的神经生物学标志物,从而促进更好的治疗干预措施的开发。本研究旨在使用图论方法比较双相情感障碍抑郁个体(BDD)、重度抑郁症抑郁个体(MDD)和健康对照受试者在输赢预期中涉及的脑区之间的脑连接性。该研究在匹兹堡大学医学中心进行,包括31名BDD患者、39名MDD患者和36名健康对照受试者。参与者在执行数字猜谜奖励任务时接受扫描,该任务包括输赢预期阶段。我们首先通过对比所有预期阶段(赢预期 + 输预期)与基线时的脑激活,以及赢预期与输预期时的脑激活,在所有106名参与者中识别出预期网络。使用独立多样本贪婪等价搜索(IMaGES)和线性非高斯定向、固定结构(LOFS)算法确定所识别网络内的脑连接性。比较了各组(BDD/MDD/健康对照受试者)和不同条件(赢/输预期)下的连接密度(网络中的连接数量)、路径长度和全局连接方向(“自上而下”与“自下而上”)。这些分析表明,在健康对照受试者中,输预期的特征是自上而下的额叶 - 纹状体和额叶 - 顶叶连接更密集;在MDD中,是自下而上的纹状体 - 额叶连接;在BDD中,是缺乏额叶 - 纹状体连接的稀疏连接。在BDD中,赢预期的特征是内侧额叶与纹状体和外侧额叶皮质区域的密集连接;在MDD中,是自下而上的纹状体 - 内侧额叶皮质连接较稀疏;在健康对照受试者中,是稀疏连接。总之,这是第一项证明具有相当当前抑郁水平的BDD和MDD在连接密度、连接路径长度以及作为赢或输预期函数的连接方向上彼此不同且与健康对照受试者不同的研究。这些发现表明,不同的神经生物学机制可能是BDD和MDD异常预期过程的基础,并且可能需要针对这些个体采取不同的治疗策略,以改善他们在预期正负结果时的应对策略。