D Rangaprakash1, Gopikrishna Deshpande1,2,3, Jeffrey S Katz1,2,3, Thomas S Denney1,2,3, and Michael N Dretsch4,5
1AU MRI Research Center, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States, 2Department of Psychology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States, 3Alabama Advanced Imaging Consortium, Auburn University and University of Alabama Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States, 4U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, Fort Rucker, AL, United States, 5Human Dimension Division, HQ TRADOC, Fort Eustis, VA, United States
Synopsis
Brain
functioning relies on various segregated/specialized neural regions functioning
as an integrated-interconnected network. Psychiatric disorders are associated
with altered functioning of these brain networks. Using resting-state fMRI, we assessed
strength and variability of directional connectivity in brain-networks obtained
from U.S. Army Soldiers with PTSD and mTBI. Employing graph-theoretic
techniques in a novel framework, we show that PTSD and mTBI are associated with
frontal disinhibition of key subcortical and visual regions, which leads to
overdrive in parietal association areas, causing increased symptoms. This work
is significant given that a mechanistic understanding of underlying network functioning
in comorbid PTSD/mTBI has been elusive.Introduction
The
human brain is a highly interconnected system. Although connectivity modeling is
popular, it can only characterize pair-wise relationships between brain
regions. Complex network modeling1, using graph-theoretic measures,
can inform us on how the ensemble of connections behave. Among such network
properties, functional segregation informs
about dense-connectedness within separate subnetworks, while functional integration captures the ease of interaction
between subregions1. It has been shown that segregation and
integration are altered in psychiatric disorders2,3. In this work,
we study network-level alterations in the brains of Soldiers with posttraumatic
stress disorder (PTSD) and post-concussion syndrome (PCS, a chronic outcome of mild
traumatic brain injury [mTBI]).
Effective
connectivity (EC) refers to directional influences among brain regions4.
We constructed brain networks using strength (static-EC [SEC]) and temporal
variability (dynamic-EC [DEC]) of directional connectivity. It has been shown
that lower temporal variability of connectivity is associated with both
neurologic and psychiatric conditions5, often presenting as a lack
of cognitive flexibility. We hypothesized that PTSD and mTBI are characterized
by altered strength and lower variability of segregation and integration in directional
brain networks.
Methods
U.S.
Army Soldiers (N=87) were recruited for the study, which included 17 with PTSD,
42 with both PTSD and PCS (PCS+PTSD) and 28 matched combat controls. Resting-state
fMRI data was obtained in a 3T Verio Siemens scanner with TR=600ms, TE=30ms, voxel
size=3×3×5mm3, 1000 volumes and 2 sessions (cerebellum was excluded).
Standard pre-processing steps were performed including realignment,
normalization to MNI space, detrending and regressing of white-matter, CSF,
six-head motion parameters and global-mean signal. Each voxel time series were
subjected to blind hemodynamic deconvolution6 to obtain underlying
latent neuronal variables. Mean timeseries were obtained from 125 functionally
homogenous brain regions (cc200 template7).
SEC
was obtained (whole-brain) using Granger causality4. DEC was
obtained using time-varying Granger causality evaluated in a Kalman filter
framework8. Variance of DEC (vDEC) was taken as the measure of
variability in connectivity. Segregation was obtained using transitivity
(global measure, one value per subject) and clustering coefficient1 (local
measure, one value per region per subject). Integration was obtained using
global efficiency (global measure) and edge betweenness1 (local
measure, one value per connection). Variability of segregation and integration
were obtained by first evaluating the measures at each timepoint from DEC and
then taking the variance of those values. Significant group differences
(controlled for age, race, education and head-motion) were obtained (p<0.05,
FDR-corrected) for both connectivity and network measures. Nodes and connections
conforming to our hypothesis (see Fig.1) were obtained.
Results and Discussion
With
global measures, we found significantly reduced strength and variability of
segregation and integration in PTSD and PCS+PTSD compared to Controls, but no significant
difference between the PTSD and PCS+PTSD groups, indicating that PTSD symptomatology
might contribute to global brain alterations whereas the effect of mTBI is
localized. Further granularity was obtained with local measures. Altered
segregation was mainly observed in frontal and occipital regions (Fig.2). Altered
local measures of integration could be found in fronto-visual (Fig.3) and
parietal-overdrive (Fig.4) subnetworks. The fronto-visual subnetwork showed frontal
under-modulation (lower strength/variance of connectivity) of secondary visual
areas and lingual gyrus. This subnetwork was, however, not different between
PTSD and PCS+PTSD, indicating that it might not be affected by mTBI (since one difference
between these groups is history of significant prior mTBI(s) in the PCS group).
The parietal-overdrive subnetwork showed that the visual areas affected in fronto-visual
subnetwork drove two key parietal regions (precuneus, temporo-parietal-junction
[TPJ]). Additionally there was fronto-subcortical disinhibition resulting in
over-drive (increased strength but lower variance of connectivity) of key
subcortical areas (anterior-insula, amygdala, hippocampus), which then resulted
in over-drive of the same key parietal regions. Interestingly, this
fronto-subcortical-parietal subnetwork was significantly altered between all
groups, indicating that both PTSD and mTBI affect this subnetwork.
Schematic
of the entire network (Fig.5) shows that the left middle-frontal gyrus (MFG) is
the likely source of entire network disruption, whose under-modulation causes
overdrive in subcortical and visual pathways, culminating in a parietal
overdrive. Our results are significant given that regions affected here have
been implicated (inconsistently) in earlier studies9, but a clear
understanding of underlying mechanisms and network structure has not emerged
from them. We show altered network segregation in frontal and visual areas, and
altered integration along two pathways (fronto-visual and fronto-subcortical). The
visual subnetwork might have a supporting role in traumatic memory retrieval
process. The fronto-subcortical subnetwork, altered in both PTSD and mTBI,
indicates emotion dysregulation with hyperactivated amygdala and hippocampus,
which underpins compromised control over traumatic memories (evident from
parietal overdrive). This characterization fits well with behavioral
manifestations of co-occurring PTSD and mTBI.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge financial support for this work from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materials Command
(MRMC) (Grant # 00007218). The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in
this article are those of the authors and should
not be interpreted as representing the official views or policies,
either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Army or the Department of Defense
(DoD). The funders had no role in study design,
data collection and analysis, decision to
publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The authors thank the personnel at the TBI clinic and behavioral
health clinic, Fort Benning, GA, USA and the US Army Aeromedical Research
Laboratory, Fort Rucker, AL, USA, and most of all, the soldiers who
participated in the study.References
[1] Rubinov M. et
al., Neuroimage,52(3):1059-69,2010
[2] Rocca et al.,
Brain Structure and Function, 2014 Sep (in press)
[3] Yu et al.,
Schizophrenia Research,150(2-3):450-8,2013
[4] Deshpande G.
et al., IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering,57(6):1446-56,2010
[5] Jia H. et
al., Brain Connectivity,4(9):741-59,2014
[6] Wu et al.,
Medical Image Analysis,17(3):365-74,2013
[7] Craddock
R.C. et al., Human Brain Mapping,33,1914–1928,2011
[8] Grant M.M.
et al., Human Brain Mapping,35(9):4815-4826,2014
[9] Simmons A.N.
et al., Neuropharmacology,62(2):598-606,2012