Cognitive reserve proxies do not differentially account for cognitive performance in patients with focal frontal and non-frontal lesions

Objective: Cognitive reserve (CR) suggests that premorbid efficacy, aptitude, and flexibility of cognitive processing can aid the brain\u2019s ability to cope with change or damage. Our previous work has shown that age and literacy attainment predict the cognitive performance of frontal patients on frontal-executive tests. However, it remains unknown whether CR also predicts the cognitive performance of non-frontal patients. Method: We investigated the independent effect of a CR proxy, National Adult Reading Test (NART) IQ, as well as age and lesion group (frontal vs. non-frontal) on measures of executive function, intelligence, processing speed, and naming in 166 patients with focal, unilateral frontal lesions; 91 patients with focal, unilateral non-frontal lesions; and 136 healthy controls. Results: Fitting multiple linear regression models for each cognitive measure revealed that NART IQ predicted executive, intelligence, and naming performance. Age also significantly predicted performance on the executive and processing speed tests. Finally, belonging to the frontal group predicted executive and naming performance, while membership of the non-frontal group predicted intelligence. Conclusions: These findings suggest that age, lesion group, and literacy attainment play independent roles in predicting cognitive performance following stroke or brain tumour. However, the relationship between CR and focal brain damage does not differ in the context of frontal and non-frontal lesions

Cognitive estimation:Performance of patients with focal frontal and posterior lesions

The Cognitive Estimation Test (CET) is a widely used test to investigate estimation abilities requiring complex processes such as reasoning, the development and application of appropriate strategies, response plausibility checking as well as general knowledge and numeracy (e.g., Shallice and Evans, 1978; MacPherson et al., 2014). Thus far, it remains unknown whether the CET is both sensitive and specific to frontal lobe dysfunction. Neuroimaging techniques may not represent a useful methodology for answering this question since the complex processes involved are likely to be associated with a large network of brain regions, some of which are not functionally necessary to successfully carry out the CET. Instead, neuropsychological studies may represent a more promising investigation tool for identifying the brain areas necessary for CET performance. We recently developed two new versions of the CET (CET-A and CET-B; MacPherson et al., 2014). We investigated the overall performance and conducted an error analysis on CET-A in patients with focal, unilateral, frontal (n= 38) or posterior (n= 22) lesions and healthy controls (n=39). We found that frontal patients' performance was impaired compared to healthy controls on CET demonstrating that our CET-A is affected by frontal lobe damage. We also found that frontal patients generated significantly poorer estimates than posterior patients on CET-A. This could not be explained by impairments in fluid intelligence. The error analyses suggested that for CET-A, extreme and very extreme responses are impaired following frontal lobe damage. However, only very extreme responses are significantly more impaired following frontal lobe than posterior damage and so represent a measure restricted to frontal "executive" impairment, in addition to overall CET performance

A generative network model of neurodevelopmental diversity in structural brain organization

Funder: RCUK | Medical Research Council (MRC); doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100000265Funder: James S. McDonnell Foundation (McDonnell Foundation); doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/100000913Funder: Cambridge Commonwealth, European and International Trust (Cambridge Commonwealth, European & International Trust); doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100003343Abstract: The formation of large-scale brain networks, and their continual refinement, represent crucial developmental processes that can drive individual differences in cognition and which are associated with multiple neurodevelopmental conditions. But how does this organization arise, and what mechanisms drive diversity in organization? We use generative network modeling to provide a computational framework for understanding neurodevelopmental diversity. Within this framework macroscopic brain organization, complete with spatial embedding of its organization, is an emergent property of a generative wiring equation that optimizes its connectivity by renegotiating its biological costs and topological values continuously over time. The rules that govern these iterative wiring properties are controlled by a set of tightly framed parameters, with subtle differences in these parameters steering network growth towards different neurodiverse outcomes. Regional expression of genes associated with the simulations converge on biological processes and cellular components predominantly involved in synaptic signaling, neuronal projection, catabolic intracellular processes and protein transport. Together, this provides a unifying computational framework for conceptualizing the mechanisms and diversity in neurodevelopment, capable of integrating different levels of analysis—from genes to cognition