Conflict monitoring in early frontotemporal dementia

Memory and Aging Center, UCSF Department of Neurology, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Neurology (Impact Factor: 8.3). 09/2009; 73(5):349-55. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181b04b24
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Despite the extensive frontal atrophy and behavioral disinhibition that characterizes behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), many studies of early bvFTD suggest normal executive functioning (EF). The current study examined cognitive control in patients with bvFTD who otherwise seemed cognitively normal.
Subjects included 7 patients with bvFTD with normal neuropsychological test scores, 7 patients with bvFTD matched for Mini-Mental State Examination score but with impaired neuropsychological test scores, and 14 normal controls. A flanker paradigm and other measures of EF were administered to participants. A semiautomated parcellation program was used to analyze structural MRI scans.
On the flanker task, multivariate analysis of variance revealed a significant condition X diagnosis interaction. Both bvFTD groups showed a larger congruency effect than normal controls, i.e., they displayed disproportionately reduced speed and accuracy on incongruent trials relative to congruent trials. Imaging data illustrated significant orbitofrontal atrophy in patients with early bvFTD as compared with controls.
Patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) who performed within normal limits on clinical tests of executive functioning demonstrated a select impairment on an experimental test of cognitive control, suggesting a subtle impairment in inhibiting attention or response to the irrelevant stimuli. Measures of neuropsychological functioning sensitive to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex may be useful in early diagnosis of patients with bvFTD. Our understanding of this syndrome may be increased by considering the efficiency of selective inhibition, a fundamental component of executive cognitive control.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Theories of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) increasingly highlight the role of neuropsychological impairment in ADHD; however, a consistent and identifiable pattern of performance on tests is not well established. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Executive Abilities: Measures and Instruments for Neurobehavioral Evaluation and Research (EXAMINER) battery provides measures of common variance across multiple executive function tests within specific domains and was used to characterize which executive functions are most affected in children with ADHD. Thirty-two children (24 male), ages 8-15 years (M = 12.02; SD = 2.29), diagnosed with ADHD and no comorbid disorder completed the NIH EXAMINER battery. Sixty age and gender matched healthy controls were chosen from a database of participants enrolled in the NIH EXAMINER multi-site study. Children with ADHD performed worse on the working memory score compared with the controls. No differences were found on the cognitive control or fluency scores. For children with ADHD, poorer working memory performance predicted parent report of child learning problems. Cognitive control and fluency scores did not predict learning problems. In summary, working memory emerges as a primary impairment in children with ADHD who have no comorbid disorders. Furthermore, working memory weaknesses may underlie the academic problems often seen in children with ADHD. (JINS, 2013, 19, 1-11).
    Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 10/2013; DOI:10.1017/S1355617713001100 · 3.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the arginylation branch of the N-end rule pathway, unacetylated N-terminal destabilizing residues function as essential determinants of protein degradation signals (N-degron). Here, we show that a neurostimulant, para-chloroamphetamine (PCA), specifically inhibits the Arg/N-end rule pathway, delaying the degradation of its artificial and physiological substrates, including regulators of G protein signaling 4 (RGS4), in vitro and in cultured cells. In silico computational analysis indicated that PCA strongly interacts with both UBR box and ClpS box, which bind to type 1 and type 2 N-degrons, respectively. Moreover, intraperitoneal injection of PCA significantly stabilized endogenous RGS4 proteins in the whole mouse brain and, particularly, in the frontal cortex and hippocampus. Consistent with the role of RGS4 in G protein signaling, treatment with PCA impaired the activations of GPCR downstream effectors in N2A cells, phenocopying ATE1-null mutants. In addition, levels of pathological C-terminal fragments of TDP43 bearing N-degrons (Arg208-TDP25) were significantly elevated in the presence of PCA. Thus, our study identifies PCA as a potential tool to understand and modulate various pathological processes regulated by the Arg/N-end rule pathway, including neurodegenerative processes in FTLD-U and ALS.
    Scientific Reports 09/2014; 4:6344. DOI:10.1038/srep06344 · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Representation of reward value involves a distributed network including cortical and subcortical structures. Because neurodegenerative illnesses target specific anatomic networks that partially overlap with the reward circuit, they would be predicted to have distinct impairments in reward processing. This review presents the existing evidence of reward processing changes in neurodegenerative diseases including mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease, as well as in healthy aging. Carefully distinguishing the different aspects of reward processing (primary rewards, secondary rewards, reward-based learning, and reward-based decision-making) and using tasks that differentiate the stages of processing reward will lead to improved understanding of this fundamental process and clarify a contributing cause of behavioral change in these illnesses.
    Neurocase 01/2014; DOI:10.1080/13554794.2013.873063 · 1.38 Impact Factor


Available from