5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Uncovering the prevalence and neural substrates of anhedonia in frontotemporal dementia

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Much of human behaviour is motivated by the drive to experience pleasure. The capacity to envisage pleasurable outcomes and to engage in goal-directed behaviour to secure these outcomes depends upon the integrity of frontostriatal circuits in the brain. Anhedonia refers to the diminished ability to experience, and to pursue, pleasurable outcomes, and represents a prominent motivational disturbance in neuropsychiatric disorders. Despite increasing evidence of motivational disturbances in frontotemporal dementia (FTD), no study to date has explored the hedonic experience in these syndromes. Here, we present the first study to document the prevalence and neural correlates of anhedonia in FTD in comparison with Alzheimer’s disease, and its potential overlap with related motivational symptoms including apathy and depression. A total of 172 participants were recruited, including 87 FTD, 34 Alzheimer’s disease, and 51 healthy older control participants. Within the FTD group, 55 cases were diagnosed with clinically probable behavioural variant FTD, 24 presented with semantic dementia, and eight cases had progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA). Premorbid and current anhedonia was measured using the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale, while apathy was assessed using the Dimensional Apathy Scale, and depression was indexed via the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale. Whole-brain voxel-based morphometry analysis was used to examine associations between grey matter atrophy and levels of anhedonia, apathy, and depression in patients. Relative to controls, behavioural variant FTD and semantic dementia, but not PNFA or Alzheimer’s disease, patients showed clinically significant anhedonia, representing a clear departure from pre-morbid levels. Voxel-based morphometry analyses revealed that anhedonia was associated with atrophy in an extended frontostriatal network including orbitofrontal and medial prefrontal, paracingulate and insular cortices, as well as the putamen. Although correlated on the behavioural level, the neural correlates of anhedonia were largely dissociable from that of apathy, with only a small region of overlap detected in the right orbitofrontal cortices whilst no overlapping regions were found between anhedonia and depression. This is the first study, to our knowledge, to demonstrate profound anhedonia in FTD syndromes, reflecting atrophy of predominantly frontostriatal brain regions specialized for hedonic tone. Our findings point to the importance of considering anhedonia as a primary presenting feature of behavioural variant FTD and semantic dementia, with distinct neural drivers to that of apathy or depression. Future studies will be essential to address the impact of anhedonia on everyday activities, and to inform the development of targeted interventions to improve quality of life in patients and their families.

          Related collections

          Most cited references109

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease

          The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia. Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Fast robust automated brain extraction.

            An automated method for segmenting magnetic resonance head images into brain and non-brain has been developed. It is very robust and accurate and has been tested on thousands of data sets from a wide variety of scanners and taken with a wide variety of MR sequences. The method, Brain Extraction Tool (BET), uses a deformable model that evolves to fit the brain's surface by the application of a set of locally adaptive model forces. The method is very fast and requires no preregistration or other pre-processing before being applied. We describe the new method and give examples of results and the results of extensive quantitative testing against "gold-standard" hand segmentations, and two other popular automated methods. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia.

              Based on the recent literature and collective experience, an international consortium developed revised guidelines for the diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. The validation process retrospectively reviewed clinical records and compared the sensitivity of proposed and earlier criteria in a multi-site sample of patients with pathologically verified frontotemporal lobar degeneration. According to the revised criteria, 'possible' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia requires three of six clinically discriminating features (disinhibition, apathy/inertia, loss of sympathy/empathy, perseverative/compulsive behaviours, hyperorality and dysexecutive neuropsychological profile). 'Probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia adds functional disability and characteristic neuroimaging, while behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia 'with definite frontotemporal lobar degeneration' requires histopathological confirmation or a pathogenic mutation. Sixteen brain banks contributed cases meeting histopathological criteria for frontotemporal lobar degeneration and a clinical diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies or vascular dementia at presentation. Cases with predominant primary progressive aphasia or extra-pyramidal syndromes were excluded. In these autopsy-confirmed cases, an experienced neurologist or psychiatrist ascertained clinical features necessary for making a diagnosis according to previous and proposed criteria at presentation. Of 137 cases where features were available for both proposed and previously established criteria, 118 (86%) met 'possible' criteria, and 104 (76%) met criteria for 'probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. In contrast, 72 cases (53%) met previously established criteria for the syndrome (P < 0.001 for comparison with 'possible' and 'probable' criteria). Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Greater sensitivity of the proposed criteria may reflect the optimized diagnostic features, less restrictive exclusion features and a flexible structure that accommodates different initial clinical presentations. Future studies will be needed to establish the reliability and specificity of these revised diagnostic guidelines.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Brain
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0006-8950
                1460-2156
                April 12 2021
                April 12 2021
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The University of Sydney, Brain and Mind Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [2 ]The University of Sydney, School of Psychology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [3 ]ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [4 ]The University of Sydney, School of Medical Sciences, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [5 ]Memory and Cognition Clinic, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia
                [6 ]Black Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                Article
                10.1093/brain/awab032
                33843983
                c5c858bd-d3b9-47d1-98f3-7a9431893682
                © 2021

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article