Dopaminergic Influences on Emotional Decision Making in Euthymic Bipolar Patients

We recently reported that the D2/D3 agonist pramipexole may have pro-cognitive effects in euthymic patients with bipolar disorder (BPD); however, the emergence of impulse-control disorders has been documented in Parkinson\u27s disease (PD) after pramipexole treatment. Performance on reward-based tasks is altered in healthy subjects after a single dose of pramipexole, but its potential to induce abnormalities in BPD patients is unknown. We assessed reward-dependent decision making in euthymic BPD patients pre- and post 8 weeks of treatment with pramipexole or placebo by using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). The IGT requires subjects to choose among four card decks (two risky and two conservative) and is designed to promote learning to make advantageous (conservative) choices over time. Thirty-four BPD patients completed both assessments (18 placebo and 16 pramipexole). Baseline performance did not differ by treatment group (F = 0.63; p = 0.64); however, at week 8, BPD patients on pramipexole demonstrated a significantly greater tendency to make increasingly high-risk, high-reward choices across the five blocks, whereas the placebo group\u27s pattern was similar to that reported in healthy individuals (treatment x time x block interaction,

Dissociation of Motor Task-Induced Cortical Excitability and Pain Perception Changes in Healthy Volunteers

Background: There is evidence that interventions aiming at modulation of the motor cortex activity lead to pain reduction. In order to understand further the role of the motor cortex on pain modulation, we aimed to compare the behavioral (pressure pain threshold) and neurophysiological effects (transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induced cortical excitability) across three different motor tasks. Methodology/Principal Findings Fifteen healthy male subjects were enrolled in this randomized, controlled, blinded, cross-over designed study. Three different tasks were tested including motor learning with and without visual feedback, and simple hand movements. Cortical excitability was assessed using single and paired-pulse TMS measures such as resting motor threshold (RMT), motor-evoked potential (MEP), intracortical facilitation (ICF), short intracortical inhibition (SICI), and cortical silent period (CSP). All tasks showed significant reduction in pain perception represented by an increase in pressure pain threshold compared to the control condition (untrained hand). ANOVA indicated a difference among the three tasks regarding motor cortex excitability change. There was a significant increase in motor cortex excitability (as indexed by MEP increase and CSP shortening) for the simple hand movements. Conclusions/Significance: Although different motor tasks involving motor learning with and without visual feedback and simple hand movements appear to change pain perception similarly, it is likely that the neural mechanisms might not be the same as evidenced by differential effects in motor cortex excitability induced by these tasks. In addition, TMS-indexed motor excitability measures are not likely good markers to index the effects of motor-based tasks on pain perception in healthy subjects as other neural networks besides primary motor cortex might be involved with pain modulation during motor training

Alcohol affects the emotional modulation of cognitive control: an event-related brain potential study

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to determine whether alcohol affects the emotional modulation of cognitive control and its underlying neural mechanisms, which is pivotal to an understanding of the socially maladaptive behaviors frequently seen in alcohol-intoxicated individuals. METHOD: Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded in male participants receiving either a moderate dose of alcohol (0.65 g/kg alcohol; n = 32) or a non-alcoholic placebo beverage (n = 32) while performing an emotional Go/No-Go task that required response execution (Go trials) to pictures of a “target” emotional facial expression (angry, happy, neutral) and response inhibition (No-Go trials) to a different “non-target” expression. RESULTS: Overall, N200 and P300 amplitudes were more enhanced during No-Go than Go trials. Interestingly, alcohol-intoxicated individuals displayed larger No-Go N200 amplitudes across all emotional conditions than controls, accompanied by decreased task performance (i.e., more errors), particularly in response to angry faces. P300 amplitude in the alcohol group was significantly reduced for both Go and No-Go trials, but only following angry and happy emotional expressions. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that alcohol-intoxicated individuals need to effortfully activate more cognitive resources during the early inhibition process in order to regulate a response than controls. Moreover, alcohol affected the emotional modulation of both response inhibition and execution in the later stages of cognitive control. Alcohol dampened emotional responsiveness, which may restrict the availability of attentional resources for cognitive control. Yet, these findings may underlie the lack of control in alcohol-intoxicated individuals when faced with emotionally or socially challenging situations