Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN · 2020
Neural bases of the clinical and neurocognitive differences between earlyand late-onset obsessive–compulsive disorder.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Taekwan, Kwak Seoyeon, Hur Ji-Won, Lee Junhee, Shin Won-Gyo, Lee Tae Young, Kim Minah, Kwon Jun Soo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Using biological evidence to define subtypes within the heterogeneous population with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is important for improving treatment response. Based on age at onset, OCD can be clustered into 2 groups, each of which is more homogeneous with respect to clinical and cognitive phenotype. However, the neural bases for these phenotypic differences need to be established to construct evidence-based homogeneous groups.
METHODS: We compared brain volumes, clinical symptoms, and neurocognitive function for 49 people with early-onset OCD and 52 with late-onset OCD (participants in both groups were unmedicated or drug-naïve), and 103 healthy controls. We performed regression analyses to examine group × volume interaction effects on clinical outcomes or neurocognitive function in people with OCD.
RESULTS: We observed larger volumes in the precentral, orbitofrontal, middle frontal, and middle temporal gyri in people with early-onset OCD compared to those with late-onset OCD. Poorer visuospatial construction in early-onset OCD was correlated with a larger left middle frontal gyrus volume. Impaired visuospatial memory in people with early-onset OCD and cognitive inflexibility in people with late-onset OCD were correlated with increased and decreased volume in the left middle frontal gyrus, respectively. We found group × volume interactions for obsessive–compulsive symptom scores in the left middle temporal gyrus of people with OCD.
LIMITATIONS: Although we divided the subtypes using the commonly adopted criterion of age at onset, this criterion is still somewhat controversial.
CONCLUSION: We provided the neural bases for clinical and neurocognitive differences to demonstrate that biological evidence underlies the distinctions between early- and late-onset OCD. This study suggests that different treatment options should be considered for the OCD subtypes, because their neurobiology differs and is related to distinct phenotypic profiles.
METHODS: We compared brain volumes, clinical symptoms, and neurocognitive function for 49 people with early-onset OCD and 52 with late-onset OCD (participants in both groups were unmedicated or drug-naïve), and 103 healthy controls. We performed regression analyses to examine group × volume interaction effects on clinical outcomes or neurocognitive function in people with OCD.
RESULTS: We observed larger volumes in the precentral, orbitofrontal, middle frontal, and middle temporal gyri in people with early-onset OCD compared to those with late-onset OCD. Poorer visuospatial construction in early-onset OCD was correlated with a larger left middle frontal gyrus volume. Impaired visuospatial memory in people with early-onset OCD and cognitive inflexibility in people with late-onset OCD were correlated with increased and decreased volume in the left middle frontal gyrus, respectively. We found group × volume interactions for obsessive–compulsive symptom scores in the left middle temporal gyrus of people with OCD.
LIMITATIONS: Although we divided the subtypes using the commonly adopted criterion of age at onset, this criterion is still somewhat controversial.
CONCLUSION: We provided the neural bases for clinical and neurocognitive differences to demonstrate that biological evidence underlies the distinctions between early- and late-onset OCD. This study suggests that different treatment options should be considered for the OCD subtypes, because their neurobiology differs and is related to distinct phenotypic profiles.