Illness-related variables and abnormalities of resting-state brain activity in schizophrenia.

Background

The development of neuroimaging biomarkers in patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) requires a refined clinical characterization. A limitation of the neuroimaging literature is the partial uptake of progress in characterizing disease-related features, particularly negative symptoms (NS) and cognitive impairment (CI). In the present study, we assessed NS and CI using up-to-date instruments and investigated the associations of abnormalities in brain resting-state (rs)-activity with disease-related features.

Methods

Sixty-two community-dwelling SCZ subjects participated in the study. Multiple regression analyses were performed with the rs-activity of nine regions of interest as dependent variables and disease-related features as explanatory variables.

Results

Attention/vigilance deficits were negatively associated with dorsal anterior cingulate rs-activity and, together with depression, were positively associated with right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex rs-activity. These deficits and impairment of Reasoning/problem-solving, together with conceptual disorganization, were associated with right inferior parietal lobule and temporal parietal junction rs-activity. Independent of other features, the NS Expressive Deficit domain was associated with the left ventral caudate, while the Motivational Deficit was associated with the dorsal caudate rs-activity.

Conclusion

Neurocognitive deficits and the two negative symptom domains are associated with different neural markers. Replications of these findings could foster the identification of clinically actionable biomarkers of poor functional outcomes.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Giuliani, Pezzella, Giordano, Fazio, Mucci, Perrottelli, Blasi, Amore, Rocca, Rossi, Bertolino, Galderisi and Maj.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.