@article {4464, title = {Intracranial stimulation and EEG feature analysis reveal affective salience network specialization.}, journal = {Brain}, year = {2023}, month = {06/2023}, abstract = {

Emotion is represented in limbic and prefrontal brain areas herein termed the Affective Salience Network (ASN). Within the ASN, there are substantial unknowns about how valence and emotional intensity are processed - specifically, which nodes are associated with affective bias (a phenomenon in which participants interpret emotions in a manner consistent with their own mood). A recently developed feature detection approach ("specparam") was used to select dominant spectral features from human intracranial electrophysiological data, revealing affective specialization within specific nodes of the ASN. Spectral analysis of dominant features at the channel level suggests that dorsal anterior cingulate (dACC), anterior insula (aINS) and ventral-medial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) are sensitive to valence and intensity, while the amygdala is primarily sensitive to intensity. AIC model comparisons corroborated the spectral analysis findings, suggesting all four nodes are more sensitive to intensity compared to valence. The data also revealed that activity in dACC and vmPFC was predictive of the extent of affective bias in the ratings of facial expressions - a proxy measure of instantaneous mood. To examine causality of the dACC in affective experience, 130 Hz continuous stimulation was applied to dACC while patients viewed and rated emotional faces. Faces were rated significantly happier during stimulation, even after accounting for differences in baseline ratings. Together the data suggest a causal role for dACC during the processing of external affective stimuli.

}, issn = {1460-2156}, doi = {10.1093/brain/awad200}, author = {Metzger, Brian A and Kalva, Prathik and Mocchi, Madaline M and Cui, Brian and Adkinson, Joshua A and Wang, Zhengjia and Mathura, Raissa and Kanja, Kourtney and Gavvala, Jay and Krishnan, Vaishnav and Lin, Lu and Maheshwari, Atul and Shofty, Ben and Magnotti, John F and Willie, Jon T and Sheth, Sameer A and Bijanki, Kelly R} } @article {4456, title = {Multisensory Flicker Modulates Widespread Brain Networks and Reduces Interictal Epileptiform Discharges in Humans.}, journal = {medRxiv}, year = {2023}, month = {03/2023}, abstract = {

Modulating brain oscillations has strong therapeutic potential. However, commonly used non-invasive interventions such as transcranial magnetic or direct current stimulation have limited effects on deeper cortical structures like the medial temporal lobe. Repetitive audio- visual stimulation, or sensory flicker, modulates such structures in mice but little is known about its effects in humans. Using high spatiotemporal resolution, we mapped and quantified the neurophysiological effects of sensory flicker in human subjects undergoing presurgical intracranial seizure monitoring. We found that flicker modulates both local field potential and single neurons in higher cognitive regions, including the medial temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex, and that local field potential modulation is likely mediated via resonance of involved circuits. We then assessed how flicker affects pathological neural activity, specifically interictal epileptiform discharges, a biomarker of epilepsy also implicated in Alzheimer{\^a}{\texteuro}{\texttrademark}s and other diseases. In our patient population with focal seizure onsets, sensory flicker decreased the rate interictal epileptiform discharges. Our findings support the use of sensory flicker to modulate deeper cortical structures and mitigate pathological activity in humans.

}, doi = {10.1101/2023.03.14.23286691}, author = {Blanpain, Lou T and Chen, Emily and Park, James and Walelign, Michael Y and Gross, Robert E and Cabaniss, Brian T and Willie, Jon T and Singer, Annabelle C} } @article {4455, title = {Patients with Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson{\textquoteright}s Disease Benefit from Deep Brain Stimulation: A Case-Control Study.}, journal = {Mov Disord Clin Pract}, volume = {10}, year = {2023}, month = {03/2023}, pages = {382-391}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson{\textquoteright}s disease (PD) is generally contraindicated in persons with dementia but it is frequently performed in people with mild cognitive impairment or normal cognition, and current clinical guidelines are primarily based on these cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if moderately cognitive impaired individuals including those with mild dementia could meaningfully benefit from DBS in terms of motor and non-motor outcomes.

METHODS: In this retrospective case-control study, we identified a cohort of 40 patients with PD who exhibited moderate (two or more standard deviations below normative scores) cognitive impairment (CI) during presurgical workup and compared their 1-year clinical outcomes to a cohort of 40 matched patients with normal cognition (NC). The surgery targeted subthalamus, pallidus or motor thalamus, in a unilateral, bilateral or staged approach.

RESULTS: At preoperative baseline, the CI cohort had higher Unified Parkinson{\textquoteright}s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) subscores, but similar levodopa responsiveness compared to the NC cohort. The NC and CI cohorts demonstrated comparable degrees of postoperative improvement in the OFF-medication motor scores, motor fluctuations, and medication reduction. There was no difference in adverse event rates between the two cohorts. Outcomes in the CI cohort did not depend on the target, surgical staging, or impaired cognitive domain.

CONCLUSIONS: Moderately cognitively impaired patients with PD can experience meaningful motor benefit and medication reduction with DBS.

}, issn = {2330-1619}, doi = {10.1002/mdc3.13660}, author = {Block, Cady K and Patel, Margi and Risk, Benjamin B and Staikova, Ekaterina and Loring, David and Esper, Christine D and Scorr, Laura and Higginbotham, Lenora and Aia, Pratibha and DeLong, Mahlon R and Wichmann, Thomas and Factor, Stewart A and Au Yong, Nicholas and Willie, Jon T and Boulis, Nicholas M and Gross, Robert E and Buetefisch, Cathrin and Miocinovic, Svjetlana} } @article {4459, title = {A somato-cognitive action network alternates with effector regions in motor cortex.}, journal = {Nature}, volume = {617}, year = {2023}, month = {05/2023}, pages = {351-359}, abstract = {

Motor cortex (M1) has been thought to form a continuous somatotopic homunculus extending down~the precentral gyrus from foot to face representations, despite evidence for concentric functional zones and maps of complex actions. Here, using precision functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) methods, we find that the classic homunculus is interrupted by regions with distinct connectivity, structure and function, alternating with effector-specific (foot, hand and mouth) areas. These inter-effector regions exhibit decreased cortical thickness and strong functional connectivity to each other, as well as to the cingulo-opercular network (CON), critical for action and physiological control, arousal, errors and pain. This interdigitation of action control-linked and motor effector regions was verified in the three largest fMRI datasets. Macaque and pediatric (newborn, infant and child) precision fMRI suggested cross-species homologues and developmental precursors of the inter-effector system. A battery of motor and action fMRI tasks documented concentric effector somatotopies, separated by the CON-linked inter-effector regions. The inter-effectors lacked movement specificity and co-activated during action planning (coordination of hands and feet) and axial body movement (such as of the abdomen or eyebrows). These results, together with previous studies demonstrating stimulation-evoked complex actions and connectivity to internal organs such as the adrenal medulla, suggest that M1 is punctuated by a system for whole-body action planning, the somato-cognitive action network (SCAN). In M1, two parallel systems intertwine, forming an integrate-isolate pattern: effector-specific regions (foot, hand and mouth) for isolating fine motor control and the SCAN for integrating goals, physiology and body movement.

}, keywords = {Animals, Brain Mapping, Child, Cognition, Datasets as Topic, Foot, Hand, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Macaca, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Motor Cortex, Mouth}, issn = {1476-4687}, doi = {10.1038/s41586-023-05964-2}, author = {Gordon, Evan M and Chauvin, Roselyne J and Van, Andrew N and Rajesh, Aishwarya and Nielsen, Ashley and Newbold, Dillan J and Lynch, Charles J and Seider, Nicole A and Krimmel, Samuel R and Scheidter, Kristen M and Monk, Julia and Miller, Ryland L and Metoki, Athanasia and Montez, David F and Zheng, Annie and Elbau, Immanuel and Madison, Thomas and Nishino, Tomoyuki and Myers, Michael J and Kaplan, Sydney and Badke D{\textquoteright}Andrea, Carolina and Demeter, Damion V and Feigelis, Matthew and Ramirez, Julian S B and Xu, Ting and Barch, Deanna M and Smyser, Christopher D and Rogers, Cynthia E and Zimmermann, Jan and Botteron, Kelly N and Pruett, John R and Willie, Jon T and Brunner, Peter and Shimony, Joshua S and Kay, Benjamin P and Marek, Scott and Norris, Scott A and Gratton, Caterina and Sylvester, Chad M and Power, Jonathan D and Liston, Conor and Greene, Deanna J and Roland, Jarod L and Petersen, Steven E and Raichle, Marcus E and Laumann, Timothy O and Fair, Damien A and Dosenbach, Nico U F} }