Refine
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (14) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (14)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (14)
Keywords
- ADHD (9)
- Depression (2)
- L-DOPA (2)
- attention (2)
- continuous performance test (2)
- hyperactivity (2)
- impulsivity (2)
- polygenic risk score (2)
- ADHD differential diagnosis (1)
- Affect (1)
Institute
- Medizin (14)
- Psychologie (1)
The precise understanding of the dopaminergic (DA) system and its pharmacological modifications is crucial for diagnosis and treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, as well as for understanding basic processes, such as motivation and reward. We probed the functional connectivity (FC) of subcortical nuclei related to the DA system according to seed regions defined according to an atlas of subcortical nuclei. We conducted a large pharmaco-fMRI study using a double-blind, placebo-controlled design, where we examined the effect of l -DOPA, a dopamine precursor, and amisulpride, a D2/D3-receptor antagonist on resting-state FC in 45 healthy young adults using a cross-over design. We examined the FC of subcortical nuclei with connection to the reward system and their reaction to opposing pharmacological probing. Amisulpride increased FC from the putamen to the precuneus and from ventral striatum to precentral gyrus. l -DOPA increased FC from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) to the insula/operculum and between ventral striatum and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and it disrupted ventral striatal and dorsal caudate FC with the medial prefrontal cortex. In an exploratory analysis, we demonstrated that higher self-rated impulsivity goes together with a significant increase in VTA-mid-cingulate gyrus FC during l -DOPA-challenge. Therefore, our DA challenge modulated distinct large-scale subcortical connectivity networks. A dopamine-boost can increase midbrain DA nuclei connectivity to the cortex. The involvement of the VTA-cingulum connectivity in dependence of impulsivity has implications for diagnosis and therapy in disorders like ADHD.
Rationale: Dysregulation of dopaminergic neurotransmission, specifically altered reward processing assessed via the reward anticipation in the MID task, plays a central role in the etiopathogenesis of neuropsychiatric disorders. Objectives: We hypothesized to find a difference in the activity level of the reward system (measured by the proxy reward anticipation) under drug administration versus placebo, in that amisulpride reduces, and L-DOPA enhances, its activity. Methods: We studied the influence of dopamine agonist L-DOPA and the antagonist amisulpride on the reward system using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during a monetary incentive delay (MID) task in n = 45 healthy volunteers in a randomized, blinded, cross-over study. Results: The MID paradigm elicits strong activation in reward-dependent structures (such as ventral striatum, putamen, caudate, anterior insula) during reward anticipation. The placebo effect demonstrated the expected significant blood oxygen level–dependent activity in reward-dependent brain regions. Neither amisulpride nor L-DOPA led to significant changes in comparison with the placebo condition. This was true for whole-brain analysis as well as analysis of a pre-defined nucleus accumbens region-of-interest mask. Conclusion: The present results cast doubt on the sensitivity of reward anticipation contrast in the MID task for assessing dopamine-specific changes in healthy volunteers by pharmaco-fMRI. While our task was not well-suited for detailed analysis of the outcome phase, we provide reasonable arguments that the lack of effect in the anticipation phase is not due to an inefficient task but points to unexpected behavior of the reward system during pharmacological challenge. Group differences of reward anticipation should therefore not be seen as simple representatives of dopaminergic states.
New innovative neuropsychological tests in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD have been proposed as objective measures for diagnosis and therapy. The current study aims to investigate two different commercial continuous performance tests (CPT) in a head-to-head comparison regarding their comparability and their link with clinical parameters. The CPTs were evaluated in a clinical sample of 29 adult patients presenting in an ADHD outpatient clinic. Correlational analyses were performed between neuropsychological data, clinical rating scales, and a personality-based measure. Though inattention was found to positively correlate between the two tests (r = 0.49, p = 0.01), no association with clinical measures and inattention was found for both tests. While hyperactivity did not correlate between both tests, current ADHD symptoms were positively associated with Nesplora Aquarium’s motor activity (r = 0.52 to 0.61, p < 0.05) and the Qb-Test’s hyperactivity (r = 0.52 to 0.71, p < 0.05). Conclusively, the overall comparability of the tests was limited and correlation with clinical parameters was low. While our study shows some interesting correlation between clinical symptoms and sub-scales of these tests, usage in clinical practice is not recommended.
The quantified behavioral test - a confirmatory test in the diagnostic process of adult ADHD?
(2020)
The differential diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adulthood is complicated by comorbid disorders, but also by the overlapping of main symptoms such as inattentiveness, impulsivity, and hyperactivity with other disorders. Neuropsychological tests like continuous performance tests (CPT) try to solve this dilemma by objectively measurable parameters. We investigated in a cohort of n=114 patients presenting to an ADHD outpatient clinic how well a commercially available CPT test (QbTest®) can differentiate between patients with ADHD (n=94) and patients with a disconfirmed ADHD diagnosis (n=20). Both groups showed numerous comorbidities, predominantly depression (27.2% in the ADHD group vs. 45% in the non-ADHD group) and substance-use disorders (18.1% vs. 10%, respectively). Patients with ADHD showed significant higher activity (2.07 ± 1.23) than patients without ADHD (1.34 ± 1.27, dF=112; p=0.019), whereas for the other core parameters, inattention and impulsivity no differences could be found. Reaction time variability has been discussed as a typical marker for inattention in ADHD. Therefore, we investigated how well ex-Gaussian analysis of response time can differentiate between ADHD and other patients, showing, that it does not help to identify patients with ADHD. Even though patients with ADHD showed significantly higher activity, this parameter differed only poorly between patients (accuracy AUC 65% of an ROC-Curve). We conclude that CPTs do not help to identify patients with ADHD in a specialized outpatient clinic. The usability of this test for differentiating between ADHD and other psychiatric disorders is poor and a sophisticated analysis of reaction time did not decisively increase the test accuracy.
Background: Recent research has shown an increased risk of accidents and injuries in ADHD patients, which could potentially be reduced by stimulant treatment. Therefore, the first aim of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of adult ADHD in a trauma surgery population. The second aim was to investigate accident mechanisms and circumstances which could be specific to ADHD patients, in comparison to the general population.
Methods: We screened 905 accident victims for ADHD using the ASRS 18-item self-report questionnaire. The basic demographic data and circumstances of the accidents were also assessed.
Results: Prevalence of adult ADHD was found to be 6.18% in our trauma surgery patient sample. ADHD accident victims reported significantly higher rates of distraction, stress and overconfidence in comparison to non-ADHD accident victims. Overconfidence and being in thoughts as causal mechanisms for the accidents remained significantly higher in ADHD patients after correction for multiple comparison. ADHD patients additionally reported a history of multiple accidents.
Conclusion: The majority of ADHD patients in our sample had not previously been diagnosed and were therefore not receiving treatment. The results subsequently suggest that general ADHD screening in trauma surgery patients may be useful in preventing further accidents in ADHD patients. Furthermore, psychoeducation regarding specific causal accident mechanisms could be implemented in ADHD therapy to decrease accident incidence rate.
Depressive symptoms in youth with ADHD: the role of impairments in cognitive emotion regulation
(2022)
Youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at increased risk to develop co-morbid depression. Identifying factors that contribute to depression risk may allow early intervention and prevention. Poor emotion regulation, which is common in adolescents, is a candidate risk factor. Impaired cognitive emotion regulation is a fundamental characteristic of depression and depression risk in the general population. However, little is known about cognitive emotion regulation in youth with ADHD and its link to depression and depression risk. Using explicit and implicit measures, this study assessed cognitive emotion regulation in youth with ADHD (N = 40) compared to demographically matched healthy controls (N = 40) and determined the association with depressive symptomatology. As explicit measure, we assessed the use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies via self-report. As implicit measure, performance in an ambiguous cue-conditioning task was assessed as indicator of affective bias in the processing of information. Compared to controls, patients reported more frequent use of maladaptive (i.e., self-blame, catastrophizing, and rumination) and less frequent use of adaptive (i.e., positive reappraisal) emotion regulation strategies. This pattern was associated with the severity of current depressive symptoms in patients. In the implicit measure of cognitive bias, there was no significant difference in response of patients and controls and no association with depression. Our findings point to depression-related alterations in the use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies in youth with ADHD. The study suggests those alterations as a candidate risk factor for ADHD-depression comorbidity that may be used for risk assessment and prevention strategies.
ADHD is a neurodevelopmental disorder with a long trajectory into adulthood where it is often comorbid with depression, substance use disorder (SUD) or obesity. Previous studies described a dysregulated dopaminergic system, reflected by abnormal reward processing, both in ADHD as well as in depression, SUD or obesity. No study so far however tested systematically whether pathologies in the brain’s reward system explain the frequent comorbidity in adult ADHD. To test this, we acquired MRI scans from 137 participants probing the reward system by a monetary incentive delay task (MIDT) as well as assessing resting-state connectivity with ventral striatum as a seed mask. No differences were found between comorbid disorders, but a significant linear effect pointed toward less left intrastriatal connectivity in patients depending on the number of comorbidities. This points towards a neurobiologically impaired reward- and decision-making ability in patients with more comorbid disorders. This suggests that less intrastriatal connectivity parallels disorder severity but not disorder specificity, while MIDT abnormalities seem mainly to be driven by ADHD.
While impulsivity is a basic feature of attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), no study explored the effect of different components of the Impulsiveness (Imp) and Venturesomeness (Vent) scale (IV7) on psychiatric comorbidities and an ADHD polygenic risk score (PRS). We used the IV7 self-report scale in an adult ADHD sample of 903 patients, 70% suffering from additional comorbid disorders, and in a subsample of 435 genotyped patients. Venturesomeness, unlike immediate Impulsivity, is not specific to ADHD. We consequently analyzed the influence of Imp and Vent also in the context of a PRS on psychiatric comorbidities of ADHD. Vent shows a distinctly different distribution of comorbidities, e.g., less anxiety and depression. PRS showed no effect on different ADHD comorbidities, but correlated with childhood hyperactivity. In a complementary analysis using principal component analysis with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition ADHD criteria, revised NEO Personality Inventory, Imp, Vent, and PRS, we identified three ADHD subtypes. These are an impulsive–neurotic type, an adventurous–hyperactive type with a stronger genetic component, and an anxious–inattentive type. Our study thus suggests the importance of adventurousness and the differential consideration of impulsivity in ADHD. The genetic risk is distributed differently between these subtypes, which underlines the importance of clinically motivated subtyping. Impulsivity subtyping might give insights into the organization of comorbid disorders in ADHD and different genetic background.
Exercise interventions in mental disorders have evidenced a mood-enhancing effect. However, the association between physical activity and affect in everyday life has not been investigated in adult individuals with ADHD, despite being important features of this disorder. As physical activity and affect are dynamic processes in nature, assessing those in everyday life with e-diaries and wearables, has become the gold standard. Thus, we used an mHealth approach to prospectively assess physical activity and affect processes in individuals with ADHD and controls aged 14–45 years. Participants wore accelerometers across a four-day period and reported their affect via e-diaries twelve times daily. We used multilevel models to identify the within-subject effects of physical activity on positive and negative affect. We split our sample into three groups: 1. individuals with ADHD who were predominantly inattentive (n = 48), 2. individuals with ADHD having a combined presentation (i.e., being inattentive and hyperactive; n = 95), and 3. controls (n = 42). Our analyses revealed a significant cross-level interaction (F(2, 135.072)=5.733, p = 0.004) of physical activity and group on positive affect. In details, all groups showed a positive association between physical activity and positive affect. Individuals with a combined presentation significantly showed the steepest slope of physical activity on positive affect (slope_inattentive=0.005, p<0.001; slope_combined=0.009, p<0.001; slope_controls=0.004, p = 0.008). Our analyses on negative affect revealed a negative association only in the individuals with a combined presentation (slope=-0.003; p = 0.001). Whether this specifically pronounced association in individuals being more hyperactive might be a mechanism reinforcing hyperactivity needs to be empirically clarified in future studies.