Microstructural white matter network-connectivity in individuals with psychotic disorder, unaffected siblings and controls.
Clustering
Connectivity
Efficiency
Schizophrenia
Siblings
White matter
Journal
NeuroImage. Clinical
ISSN: 2213-1582
Titre abrégé: Neuroimage Clin
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101597070
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
23
10
2018
revised:
08
06
2019
accepted:
10
07
2019
entrez:
8
9
2019
pubmed:
8
9
2019
medline:
7
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Altered structural network-connectivity has been reported in psychotic disorder but whether these alterations are associated with genetic vulnerability, and/or with phenotypic variation, has been less well examined. This study examined i) whether differences in network-connectivity exist between patients with psychotic disorder, siblings of patients with psychotic disorder and controls, and ii) whether network-connectivity alterations vary with (subclinical) symptomatology. Network-connectivity measures (global efficiency (GE), density, local efficiency (LE), clustering coefficient (CC)) were derived from diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and were compared between 85 patients with psychotic disorder, 93 siblings without psychotic disorder and 80 healthy comparison subjects using multilevel regression models. In patients, associations between Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) symptoms and topological measures were examined. In addition, interactions between subclinical psychopathology and sibling/healthy comparison subject status were examined in models of topological measures. While there was no main effect of group with respect to GE, density, LE and CC, siblings had a significantly higher CC compared to patients (B = 0.0039, p = .002). In patients, none of the PANSS symptom domains were significantly associated with any of the four network-connectivity measures. The two-way interaction between group and SIR-r positive score in the model of LE was significant (χ The findings indicate absence of structural network-connectivity alterations in individuals with psychotic disorder and in individuals at higher than average genetic risk for psychotic disorder, in comparison with healthy subjects. The differential subclinical symptom-network connectivity associations in siblings with respect to controls may be a sign of psychosis vulnerability in the siblings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Altered structural network-connectivity has been reported in psychotic disorder but whether these alterations are associated with genetic vulnerability, and/or with phenotypic variation, has been less well examined. This study examined i) whether differences in network-connectivity exist between patients with psychotic disorder, siblings of patients with psychotic disorder and controls, and ii) whether network-connectivity alterations vary with (subclinical) symptomatology.
METHODS
Network-connectivity measures (global efficiency (GE), density, local efficiency (LE), clustering coefficient (CC)) were derived from diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and were compared between 85 patients with psychotic disorder, 93 siblings without psychotic disorder and 80 healthy comparison subjects using multilevel regression models. In patients, associations between Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) symptoms and topological measures were examined. In addition, interactions between subclinical psychopathology and sibling/healthy comparison subject status were examined in models of topological measures.
RESULTS
While there was no main effect of group with respect to GE, density, LE and CC, siblings had a significantly higher CC compared to patients (B = 0.0039, p = .002). In patients, none of the PANSS symptom domains were significantly associated with any of the four network-connectivity measures. The two-way interaction between group and SIR-r positive score in the model of LE was significant (χ
CONCLUSION
The findings indicate absence of structural network-connectivity alterations in individuals with psychotic disorder and in individuals at higher than average genetic risk for psychotic disorder, in comparison with healthy subjects. The differential subclinical symptom-network connectivity associations in siblings with respect to controls may be a sign of psychosis vulnerability in the siblings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31491817
pii: S2213-1582(19)30281-5
doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101931
pmc: PMC6658824
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
101931Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2016 Feb;22(2):240-9
pubmed: 26888620
Schizophr Res. 2017 Dec;190:107-114
pubmed: 28325573
Neurosci Bull. 2015 Apr;31(2):207-19
pubmed: 25761914
Phys Rev Lett. 2000 Mar 20;84(12):2758-61
pubmed: 11017318
Schizophr Bull. 1987;13(2):261-76
pubmed: 3616518
Brain Behav. 2016 Jun 29;6(9):e00508
pubmed: 27688938
Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1999;395:68-79
pubmed: 10225335
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2006 Feb;113(2):81
pubmed: 16423157
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1988 Dec;45(12):1069-77
pubmed: 2848472
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Aug;70(8):783-92
pubmed: 23739835
Schizophr Bull. 2018 Feb 15;44(2):409-418
pubmed: 28520931
Br J Psychol. 1970 Aug;61(3):303-21
pubmed: 5457503
Schizophr Res. 2006 Jul;85(1-3):273-9
pubmed: 16730430
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015 Jul;16(7):430-9
pubmed: 26081790
Biol Psychiatry. 2010 Jul 1;68(1):61-9
pubmed: 20497901
Neuroimage. 2013 Oct 15;80:515-26
pubmed: 23623973
Brain Struct Funct. 2015 Mar;220(2):1145-59
pubmed: 24449342
Schizophr Bull. 2014 Mar;40(2):438-48
pubmed: 24298172
Schizophr Bull. 2017 May 1;43(3):583-591
pubmed: 27481826
Neurosci Bull. 2017 Aug;33(4):445-454
pubmed: 28646350
Neuroimage. 2002 Jan;15(1):273-89
pubmed: 11771995
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Aug 25;8:653
pubmed: 25202257
Neurosci Bull. 2015 Jun;31(3):275-87
pubmed: 25813916
Science. 2003 Sep 26;301(5641):1870-4
pubmed: 14512617
Schizophr Bull. 2016 May;42(3):782-9
pubmed: 26644605
Schizophr Res. 2016 Mar;171(1-3):149-57
pubmed: 26811255
Cereb Cortex. 2017 Jan 1;27(1):602-615
pubmed: 26503264
Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Sep;8(9):418-25
pubmed: 15350243
Biometrics. 1982 Dec;38(4):963-74
pubmed: 7168798
Brain Res. 2017 Sep 15;1671:121-130
pubmed: 28709907
Schizophr Res. 2012 Nov;141(2-3):109-18
pubmed: 22981811
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2009 Feb;43(2):118-28
pubmed: 19153919
J Neurosci. 2010 Nov 24;30(47):15915-26
pubmed: 21106830
Schizophr Bull. 2000;26(3):619-29
pubmed: 10993402
Biol Psychiatry. 2010 Feb 1;67(3):255-62
pubmed: 19897178
J Neurosci. 2011 Nov 2;31(44):15775-86
pubmed: 22049421
Neuroimage. 2012 Jan 16;59(2):1085-93
pubmed: 21963918
Neuroimage. 2010 Sep;52(3):1059-69
pubmed: 19819337
Magn Reson Med. 2000 Oct;44(4):625-32
pubmed: 11025519
Neuroimage. 2014 Nov 15;102 Pt 1:184-91
pubmed: 24103849
Hum Brain Mapp. 2015 Jul;36(7):2629-43
pubmed: 25832856
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2013 Sep;15(3):339-49
pubmed: 24174905
Biol Psychiatry. 2011 Jan 1;69(1):80-9
pubmed: 21035793
Schizophr Res. 2009 Mar;108(1-3):3-10
pubmed: 19128945
Brain Connect. 2011;1(6):473-83
pubmed: 22432904