Pedro Henrique Rodrigues da Silva1 and Renata Ferranti Leoni1
1Department of Physics, FFCLRP, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
Synopsis
There is interest in understanding the functional integration of
cognitive functions and effective therapeutic interventions as a strategy to
improve cognitive deficits. However, uncertainty about how to proceed to
address those issues remains. Therefore, this study aims to propose a methodology
to assess brain specialization and integration during a cognitive task for
future studies on the evaluation of therapeutic strategies. Our methodology
provided a network model related to the performed task, that may serve as a
reference for future investigations in clinical groups; and coupling parameters
that may be used to evaluate the presence of adaptative neuroplasticity after
cognitive training/rehabilitation.
Introduction and Purpose
Recently, there has been an upsurge of interest
in understanding the functional integration of cognitive functions and
effective therapeutic interventions as a strategy to improve cognitive deficits1.
However, considerable uncertainty about how to proceed to address those issues remains.
Functional brain mapping should include
two fundamental principles of functional organization: specialization and
integration2. The
integration within and between specialized areas is mediated by the effective
connectivity, whose evaluation over time may indicate the presence of
associative neuroplasticity. The information processing speed (IPS) calls
attention for its relationship with attentional deficits and its impairment in
patients with traumatic brain injury, depression, dementia and multiple
sclerosis3. Therefore, this study aims to propose a methodology to assess
brain specialization and integration during a cognitive task for future studies
on the evaluation of therapeutic strategies.Materials and Methods
The proposed methodology included five steps:
1. Meta-analysis to identify IPS-related brain
regions. We performed a meta-analysis of six studies (Table 1) that
assessed the IPS using functional MRI (BOLD-fMRI) and an adapted version of the
Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT). We used the ALE
algorithm4, significance level for p-FWE<0.05, and created a 3D
brain template for each region (Table 2).
2. fMRI
experiment. 16 right-handed healthy subjects (7 women, 29.7±5.0
years) were recruited after the study approval by the Research Ethics
Committee. MRI was acquired in a 3T system using a 32-channel head coil for
signal reception. BOLD and anatomical images were acquired with usual sequences
and parameters.
The functional experiment consisted of six blocks of control (30 s each)
intercalated by five blocks of SDMT task (30 s each). During the task blocks, a
symbol was displayed (on a monitor) every 2 seconds and the participant was
asked to associate the number corresponding to the displayed symbol based on a
response key. During the control blocks, a number was displayed every 2 seconds
and the participant was asked to quietly read the number.
3. Mapping of IPS-related regions. Standard image preprocessing was
performed using the SPM12 software5. The statistical parametric map was
obtained using the General Linear Model (GLM) with a boxcar regressor convolved
with a canonical hemodynamic response function (p-FDR<0.01). It was then superimposed
to the templates of Figure 1 to obtain the mean time series of each region.
4. Functional connectivity (FC) analysis.
We used the CONN toolbox6 to perform a bivariate
correlation between the time series of each IPS-related region (p-FDR<0.0001).
The information of functional location and integration was inserted into the effective
connectivity analysis.
5. Effective Connectivity Analysis. To
select the best network model among the hypothesized ones and provide the
effective connectivity parameters, we created three models based on the
meta-analysis results (Figure 2a), seed-to-voxel (Figure 2b) and ROI-to-ROI (Figure
2c) FC analysis. Intrinsic
connections were considered within and between each region, and were considered
to be modulated by the SDMT condition versus baseline. We used the Bayesian
model selection (DCM-SPM12) to select the best network, and then the estimates
of the parameters of this model (driving inputs, intrinsic connections and
modulations) were submitted to group analysis with one-sample t-test
(p<0.05).
Results
Functional maps showed
activations in the frontoparietal network and the occipital cortex for
individual and group analysis (Figure 1), which agree with the regions obtained
with the meta-analysis (Table 2). Seed-to-voxel FC analysis showed the information propagating as in model
2 (Figure 2b). ROI-to-ROI analysis presented similar pattern, regarding the
exclusion of the cuneus to precuneus connection (model 3 - Figure 2c). The most
probable network architecture was represented by model 2, and its coupling
parameters (in Hertz) are shown in Table 3.Discussions
The meta-analysis step provided important information
about brain regions related to the task, helping the choice of regions to be
inserted in the FC analysis the creation of a theoretical model. Obtaining the activation
map allowed to verify the brain activated areas for the group and extract the
regions to be inserted in FC analysis. FC patterns provided network structures involved
in SDMT execution, solving the challenging question about hypothesizing network
structures. Effective connectivity analysis provided a network structure model
for IPS and parameters that may be used to analyze therapeutic strategies.Conclusions
Our proposed methodology provided a network model related to the
performed task, may
serve as a reference for future investigations of IPS in clinical groups; and coupling
parameters that may be used to evaluate the presence of adaptive
neuroplasticity after cognitive training/rehabilitation in longitudinal
studies. Next steps include the better investigation of those parameters.Acknowledgements
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, CAPES, Brasil.References
1. Morgenstern, Jon et al. “The
Contributions of Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging to Understanding
Mechanisms of Behavior Change in Addiction.” Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of
Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors 27.2 (2013): 336–350. PMC.
2. Friston, K. J.
Functional and effective connectivity in neuroimaging: A synthesis. Human Brain Mapping, v. 2, n. 1–2, p.
56–78, 1994.
3. Lezak, M. D.; Howieson,
D. B.; Loring, D. W.; Hannay, H. J.; Fischer, J. S. Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). 2004.
4. Laird, A. R.; Fox, P. M.;
Price, C. J.; et al. ALE meta-analysis: Controlling the false discovery rate
and performing statistical contrasts. Human Brain Mapping. Anais... . v. 25, p.155–164, 2005.
5. Wellcome Department of Imaging
Neuroscience, University College, London, UK; www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/
6. Whitfield-Gabrieli,
S.; Nieto-Castanon, A. Conn : A Functional Connectivity Toolbox for Correlated
and Anticorrelated Brain Networks. , v. 2, n. 3, 2012.