An investigation into aripiprazole's partial D(2) agonist effects within the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during working memory in healthy volunteers

Rationale: Working memory impairments in schizophrenia have been attributed to dysfunction of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) which in turn may be due to low DLPFC dopamine innervation. Conventional antipsychotic drugs block DLPFC D2 receptors, and this may lead to further dysfunction and working memory impairments. Aripiprazole is a D2 receptor partial agonist hypothesised to enhance PFC dopamine functioning, possibly improving working memory. Objectives: We probed the implications of the partial D2 receptor agonist actions of aripiprazole within the DLPFC during working memory. Investigations were carried out in healthy volunteers to eliminate confounds of illness or medication status. Aripiprazole’s prefrontal actions were compared with the D2/5-HT2A blocker risperidone to separate aripiprazole’s unique prefrontal D2 agonist actions from its serotinergic and striatal D2 actions that it shares with risperidone. Method: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel design was implemented. Participants received a single dose of either 5 mg aripiprazole, 1 mg risperidone or placebo before performing the n-back task whilst undergoing fMRI scanning. Results: Compared with placebo, the aripiprazole group demonstrated enhanced DLPFC activation associated with a trend for improved discriminability (d’) and speeded reaction times. In contrast to aripiprazole’s neural effects, the risperidone group demonstrated a trend for reduced DLPFC recruitment. Unexpectedly, the risperidone group demonstrated similar effects to aripiprazole on d’ and additionally had reduced errors of commission compared with placebo. Conclusion: Aripiprazole has unique DLPFC actions attributed to its prefrontal D2 agonist action. Risperidone’s serotinergic action that results in prefrontal dopamine release may have protected against any impairing effects of its prefrontal D2 blockade

In vivo hippocampal subfield volumes in bipolar disorder—A mega-analysis from The Enhancing Neuro Imaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis Bipolar Disorder Working Group

The hippocampus consists of anatomically and functionally distinct subfields that may be differentially involved in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder (BD). Here we, the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta‐Analysis Bipolar Disorder workinggroup, study hippocampal subfield volumetry in BD. T1‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans from 4,698 individuals (BD = 1,472, healthy controls [HC] = 3,226) from 23 sites worldwide were processed with FreeSurfer. We used linear mixed‐effects models and mega‐analysis to investigate differences in hippocampal subfield volumes between BD and HC, followed by analyses of clinical characteristics and medication use. BD showed significantly smaller volumes of the whole hippocampus (Cohen's d = −0.20), cornu ammonis (CA)1 (d = −0.18), CA2/3 (d = −0.11), CA4 (d = −0.19), molecular layer (d = −0.21), granule cell layer of dentate gyrus (d = −0.21), hippocampal tail (d = −0.10), subiculum (d = −0.15), presubiculum (d = −0.18), and hippocampal amygdala transition area (d = −0.17) compared to HC. Lithium users did not show volume differences compared to HC, while non‐users did. Antipsychotics or antiepileptic use was associated with smaller volumes. In this largest study of hippocampal subfields in BD to date, we show widespread reductions in nine of 12 subfields studied. The associations were modulated by medication use and specifically the lack of differences between lithium users and HC supports a possible protective role of lithium in BD

Characterization of affective lability across subgroups of psychosis spectrum disorders

Background Affective lability is elevated and associated with increased clinical burden in psychosis spectrum disorders. The extent to which the level, structure and dispersion of affective lability varies between the specific disorders included in the psychosis spectrum is however unclear. To have potential value as a treatment target, further characterization of affective lability in these populations is necessary. The main aim of our study was to investigate differences in the architecture of affective lability in different psychosis spectrum disorders, and if putative differences remained when we controlled for current symptom status. Methods Affective lability was measured with The Affective Lability Scale Short Form (ALS-SF) in participants with schizophrenia (SZ, n = 76), bipolar I disorder (BD-I, n = 105), bipolar II disorder (BD-II, n = 68) and a mixed psychosis-affective group (MP, n = 48). Multiple analyses of covariance were conducted to compare the ALS-SF total and subdimension scores of the diagnostic groups, correcting for current psychotic, affective and anxiety symptoms, substance use and sex. Double generalized linear models were performed to compare the dispersion of affective lability in the different groups. Results Overall group differences in affective lability remained significant after adjusting for covariates (p = .001). BD-II had higher affective lability compared to SZ and BD-I (p = .004), with no significant differences between SZ and BD-I. There were no significant differences in the contributions of ALS-SF dimensions to the total affective lability or in dispersion of affective lability between the groups. Conclusions This study provides the construct of affective lability in psychosis spectrum disorders with more granular details that may have implications for research and clinical care. It demonstrates that despite overlap in core symptom profiles, BD-I is more similar to SZ than it is to BD-II concerning affective lability and the BD groups should consequently be studied apart. Further, affective lability appears to be characterized by fluctuations between depressive- and other affective states across different psychosis spectrum disorders, indicating that affective lability may be related to internalizing problems in these disorders. Finally, although the level varies between groups, affective lability is evenly spread and not driven by extremes across psychosis spectrum disorders and should be assessed irrespective of diagnosis

Brain Heterogeneity in Schizophrenia and Its Association With Polygenic Risk

Between-individual variability in brain structure is determined by gene-environment interactions, possibly reflecting differential sensitivity to environmental and genetic perturbations. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have revealed thinner cortices and smaller subcortical volumes in patients with schizophrenia. However, group-level comparisons may mask considerable within-group heterogeneity, which has largely remained unnoticed in the literature

Brain scans from 21297 individuals reveal the genetic architecture of hippocampal subfield volumes

The hippocampus is a heterogeneous structure, comprising histologically distinguishable subfields. These subfields are differentially involved in memory consolidation, spatial navigation and pattern separation, complex functions often impaired in individuals with brain disorders characterized by reduced hippocampal volume, including Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and schizophrenia. Given the structural and functional heterogeneity of the hippocampal formation, we sought to characterize the subfields’ genetic architecture. T1-weighted brain scans (n = 21,297, 16 cohorts) were processed with the hippocampal subfields algorithm in FreeSurfer v6.0. We ran a genome-wide association analysis on each subfield, co-varying for whole hippocampal volume. We further calculated the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based heritability of 12 subfields, as well as their genetic correlation with each other, with other structural brain features and with AD and schizophrenia. All outcome measures were corrected for age, sex and intracranial volume. We found 15 unique genome-wide significant loci across six subfields, of which eight had not been previously linked to the hippocampus. Top SNPs were mapped to genes associated with neuronal differentiation, locomotor behaviour, schizophrenia and AD. The volumes of all the subfields were estimated to be heritable (h2 from 0.14 to 0.27, all p < 1 × 10–16) and clustered together based on their genetic correlations compared with other structural brain features. There was also evidence of genetic overlap of subicular subfield volumes with schizophrenia. We conclude that hippocampal subfields have partly distinct genetic determinants associated with specific biological processes and traits. Taking into account this specificity may increase our understanding of hippocampal neurobiology and associated pathologies

Genetic Architecture of Hippocampal Subfield Volumes:Shared and Specific Influences

The hippocampus is a heterogeneous structure, comprising histologically distinguishable subfields. These subfields are known to be differentially involved in memory consolidation, spatial navigation and pattern separation, complex functions often found to be impaired in individuals with brain disorders associated with reduced hippocampal volume, including Alzheimer's disease (AD) and schizophrenia. Given these structural and functional differences, we sought to characterize the subfields’ shared and specific genetic architecture