Prefrontal control of the amygdala during real-time fMRI neurofeedback training of emotion regulation

Vadim Zotev, Raquel Phillips, Kymberly D Young, Wayne C Drevets, Jerzy Bodurka, Vadim Zotev, Raquel Phillips, Kymberly D Young, Wayne C Drevets, Jerzy Bodurka

Abstract

We observed in a previous study (PLoS ONE 6:e24522) that the self-regulation of amygdala activity via real-time fMRI neurofeedback (rtfMRI-nf) with positive emotion induction was associated, in healthy participants, with an enhancement in the functional connectivity between the left amygdala (LA) and six regions of the prefrontal cortex. These regions included the left rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC), bilateral dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC), bilateral superior frontal gyrus (SFG), and right medial frontopolar cortex (MFPC). Together with the LA, these six prefrontal regions thus formed the functional neuroanatomical network engaged during the rtfMRI-nf procedure. Here we perform a structural vector autoregression (SVAR) analysis of the effective connectivity for this network. The SVAR analysis demonstrates that the left rACC plays an important role during the rtfMRI-nf training, modulating the LA and the other network regions. According to the analysis, the rtfMRI-nf training leads to a significant enhancement in the time-lagged effect of the left rACC on the LA, potentially consistent with the ipsilateral distribution of the monosynaptic projections between these regions. The training is also accompanied by significant increases in the instantaneous (contemporaneous) effects of the left rACC on four other regions - the bilateral DMPFC, the right MFPC, and the left SFG. The instantaneous effects of the LA on the bilateral DMPFC are also significantly enhanced. Our results are consistent with a broad literature supporting the role of the rACC in emotion processing and regulation. Our exploratory analysis provides, for the first time, insights into the causal relationships within the network of regions engaged during the rtfMRI-nf procedure targeting the amygdala. It suggests that the rACC may constitute a promising target for rtfMRI-nf training along with the amygdala in patients with affective disorders, particularly posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Wayne Drevets, M.D., is an employee of Johnson & Johnson, Inc., and has consulted for Myriad/Rules Based Medicine and for Eisai, Inc. The other authors have declared that no competing interests exist. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Figure 1. Regions of interest for the…
Figure 1. Regions of interest for the effective connectivity analysis.
Six brain regions exhibited a significant enhancement in functional connectivity with the left amygdala during the rtfMRI neurofeedback training with positive emotion induction . They included: the left rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC, BA 24), bilateral dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC, BA 9), bilateral superior frontal gyrus (SFG, BA 6,8), and right medial frontopolar cortex (MFPC, BA 10). The 10 mm diameter regions of interest (ROIs) in those areas are projected onto the standard anatomical template (TT_N27) in the stereotaxic array of Talairach and Tournoux .
Figure 2. Learned enhancement of control over…
Figure 2. Learned enhancement of control over BOLD activity and emotion induction.
(A) Mean BOLD signal activity of the left amygdala during the rtfMRI neurofeedback (rtfMRI-nf) training for the experimental group (EG). The EG subjects received rtfMRI-nf based on the BOLD activity in the left amygdala ROI. Each bar represents a group average (mean±sem) of percent BOLD signal changes for the Happy Memories condition vs Rest condition for each of the six experimental runs: Rest (RE), Practice (PR), Run 1 (R1), Run 2 (R2), Run 3 (R3), and Transfer (TR). The enhancement in the left amygdala activity (red) was accompanied by increased activities of the left rACC (magenta), the right DMPFC (orange), as well as the other ROIs depicted in Fig. 1. (B) Lack of learned control over BOLD activity of the left amygdala and other regions for the control (sham) group (CG). The CG subjects received sham rtfMRI-nf based on BOLD activity in the left horizontal segment of the intraparietal sulcus (HIPS), presumably not involved in emotion regulation.
Figure 3. Interactions within the network suggested…
Figure 3. Interactions within the network suggested by the multivariate VAR analysis.
Results of the multivariate first-order vector autoregression (VAR) analysis for the network of seven ROIs depicted in Fig. 1. The four subplots show meta-analytic group statistics for path coefficients for the following groups and contrasts. (A) Experimental group (EG), neurofeedback Run 3. (B) Control group (CG), Run 3. (C) Difference between Run 3 and Rest for EG. (D) Difference between Run 3 for EG and Run 3 for CG. Red arrows denote augmentation effects (path coefficient α>0), and blue arrows – inhibition effects (path coefficient αq<0.05, and dotted arrows – to effects with 0.05≤q<0.1. In (C) and (D), solid arrows correspond to results with uncorrected P<0.05, and dotted arrows – to results with 0.05≤P<0.1.
Figure 4. Effects of the rACC on…
Figure 4. Effects of the rACC on the other six network regions suggested by the multivariate VAR analysis.
Average path coefficient values (mean±sem) describing the effects of the left rACC on the other six network regions based on the analysis illustrated in Fig. 3. The results for each of the six experimental runs are shown in red for the experimental group (EG) and in blue for the control group (CG).
Figure 5. Schematics of structural models used…
Figure 5. Schematics of structural models used in the multivariate SVAR analyses.
(A) An example of a star model for instantaneous effects. A model of this kind was defined for each of the seven ROIs and examined in the multivariate structural vector autoregression (SVAR) analysis. (B,C) Two models for instantaneous effects, Model I and Model II, that provided the best χ2 fits to the experimental group data in the SVAR analyses for the system of three ROIs. A total of 24 structural models were optimized and compared for the system consisting of the left amygdala, the left rACC, and the right DMPFC (see text for details).
Figure 6. Interactions suggested by the multivariate…
Figure 6. Interactions suggested by the multivariate SVAR analyses for seven ROIs.
(A) Results of the multivariate first-order structural vector autoregression (SVAR) analysis for the network of seven ROIs using a star model for instantaneous effects of the left rACC (Fig. 5A). (B) Results of a similar SVAR analysis using a star model for instantaneous effects of the left amygdala. For the experimental group (EG), average path coefficients (mean±sem) for the instantaneous effects are depicted in magenta and denoted EG0, and those for the lagged effects are depicted in red and denoted EG1. For the control group (CG), average path coefficients for the instantaneous effects are shown in cyan and denoted CG0, and those for the lagged effects are shown in blue and denoted CG1.
Figure 7. Interactions suggested by the multivariate…
Figure 7. Interactions suggested by the multivariate SVAR analyses for three ROIs.
Results of the multivariate SVAR analyses for the system of three ROIs – the left rACC, the left amygdala, and the right DMPFC – with the models for instantaneous effects depicted in Fig. 5 B,C. (A) Effects that are common to both Model I (Fig. 5B) and Model II (Fig. 5C). (B) Interactions between the left rACC and the left amygdala in the SVAR analysis with Model I (Fig. 5B). (C) Interactions between the left rACC and the left amygdala in the SVAR analysis with Model II (Fig. 5C). Notations are the same as in Fig. 6.

References

    1. Phillips ML, Ladouceur CD, Drevets WC (2008) A neural model of voluntary and automatic emotion regulation: implications for understanding the pathophysiology and neurodevelopment of bipolar disorder. Mol Psychiatry 13: 833–857.
    1. Ochsner KN, Bunge SA, Gross JJ, Gabrieli JDE (2002) Rethinking feelings: an fMRI study of the cognitive regulation of emotion. J Cogn Neurosci 14: 1215–1229.
    1. Ochsner KN, Ray RD, Cooper JC, Robertson ER, Chopra S, et al. (2004) For better or for worse: neural systems supporting the cognitive down- and up-regulation of negative emotion. NeuroImage 23: 483–499.
    1. Phan KL, Fitzgerald DA, Nathan PJ, Moore GJ, Uhde TW, et al. (2005) Neural substrates for voluntary suppression of negative affect: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Biol Psychiatry 57: 210–219.
    1. Urry HL, van Reekum CM, Johnstone T, Kalin NH, Thurow ME, et al. (2006) Amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex are inversely coupled during regulation of negative affect and predict the diurnal pattern of cortisol secretion among older adults. J Neurosci 26: 4415–4425.
    1. Banks SJ, Eddy KT, Angstadt M, Nathan PJ, Phan KL (2007) Amygdala-frontal connectivity during emotion regulation. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2: 303–312.
    1. Wager TD, Davidson ML, Hughes BL, Lindquist MA, Ochsner KN (2008) Prefrontal-subcortical pathways mediating successful emotion regulation. Neuron 59: 1037–1050.
    1. Lee H, Heller AS, van Reekum CM, Nelson B, Davidson RJ (2012) Amygdala-prefrontal coupling underlies individual differences in emotion regulation. NeuroImage 62: 1575–1581.
    1. Beauregard M, Levesque J, Bourgouin P (2001) Neural correlates of conscious self-regulation of emotion. J Neurosci 21: RC165 (1–6)..
    1. Levesque J, Eugene F, Joanette Y, Paquette V, Mensour B, et al. (2003) Neural circuitry underlying voluntary suppression of sadness. Biol Psychiatry 53: 502–510.
    1. Goldin PR, McRae K, Ramel W, Gross JJ (2008) The neural bases of emotion regulation: reappraisal and suppression of negative emotion. Biol Psychiatry 63: 577–586.
    1. Friston KJ, Buechel C, Fink GR, Morris J, Rolls E, et al. (1997) Psychophysiological and modulatory interactions in neuroimaging. NeuroImage 6: 218–229.
    1. Whalen PJ, Bush G, McNally RJ, Wilhelm S, McInerney SC, et al. (1998) The emotional counting Stroop paradigm: a functional magnetic resonance imaging probe of the anterior cingulate affective division. Biol Psychiatry 44: 1219–1228.
    1. Vuilleumier P, Armony JL, Driver J, Dolan RJ (2001) Effects of attention and emotion on face processing in the human brain: an event-related fMRI study. Neuron 30: 829–841.
    1. Blair KS, Smith BW, Mitchell DGV, Morton J, Vythilingam M, et al. (2007) Modulation of emotion by cognition and cognition by emotion. NeuroImage 35: 430–440.
    1. Mohanty A, Engels AS, Herrington JD, Heller W, Ho MR, et al. (2007) Differential engagement of anterior cingulate cortex subdivisions for cognitive and emotional function. Psychophysiol 44: 343–351.
    1. Etkin A, Egner T, Peraza DM, Kandel ER, Hirsch J (2006) Resolving emotional conflict: a role for the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in modulating activity in the amygdala. Neuron 51: 871–882.
    1. Egner T, Etkin A, Gale S, Hirsch J (2008) Dissociable neural systems resolve conflict from emotional versus nonemotional distracters. Cereb Cortex 18: 1475–1484.
    1. Etkin A, Prater KE, Hoeft F, Menon V, Schatzberg AF (2010) Failure of anterior cingulate activation and connectivity with the amygdala during implicit regulation of emotional processing in generalized anxiety disorder. Am J Psychiatry 167: 545–554.
    1. Friston KJ, Harrison L, Penny W (2003) Dynamic causal modelling. NeuroImage 19: 1273–1302.
    1. Etkin A, Egner T, Kalisch R (2011) Emotional processing in anterior cingulate and medial prefrontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci 15: 85–98.
    1. Zotev V, Krueger F, Phillips R, Alvarez RP, Simmons WK, et al. (2011) Self-regulation of amygdala activation using real-time fMRI neurofeedback. PLoS ONE 6: e24522 (1–17)..
    1. Sulzer J, Haller S, Scharnowski F, Weiskopf N, Birbaumer N, et al. (2013) Real-time fMRI neurofeedback: progress and challenges. NeuroImage 76: 386–399.
    1. Caria A, Veit R, Sitaram R, Lotze M, Weiskopf N, et al. (2007) Regulation of anterior insular cortex activity using real-time fMRI. NeuroImage 35: 1238–1246.
    1. Johnston SJ, Boehm SG, Healy D, Goebel R, Linden DEJ (2010) Neurofeedback: a promising tool for the self-regulation of emotion networks. NeuroImage 49: 1066–1072.
    1. Hamilton JP, Glover GH, Hsu JJ, Johnson RF, Gotlib IH (2011) Modulation of subgenual anterior cingulate cortex activity with real-time neurofeedback. Hum Brain Mapp 32: 22–31.
    1. Johnston S, Linden DEJ, Healy D, Goebel R, Habes I, et al. (2011) Upregulation of emotion areas through neurofeedback with a focus on positive mood. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 11: 44–51.
    1. Hampson M, Stoica T, Saksa J, Scheinost D, Qiu M, et al. (2012) Real-time fMRI biofeedback targeting the orbitofrontal cortex for contamination anxiety. J Vis Exp 59: e3535 (1–8)..
    1. Linden DEJ, Habes I, Johnston SJ, Linden S, Tatineni R, Subramanian L, Sorger B, Healy D, Goebel R (2012) Real-time self-regulation of emotion networks in patients with depression. PLoS ONE 7: e38115 (1–10)..
    1. Ruiz S, Lee S, Soekadar SR, Caria A, Veit R, et al. (2013) Acquired self-control of insula cortex modulates emotion recognition and brain network connectivity in schizophrenia. Hum Brain Mapp 34: 200–212.
    1. Zotev V, Phillips R, Yuan H, Misaki M, Bodurka J (2013) Self-regulation of human brain activity using simultaneous real-time fMRI and EEG neurofeedback. NeuroImage, in press,
    1. Koush Y, Rosa MJ, Robineau F, Heinen K, Rieger W, et al. (2013) Connectivity-based neurofeedback: dynamic causal modeling for real-time fMRI. NeuroImage 81: 422–430.
    1. Chen G, Glen DR, Saad ZS, Hamilton JP, Thomason ME, et al. (2011) Vector autoregression, structural equation modeling, and their synthesis in neuroimaging data analysis. Comput Biol Med 41: 1142–1155.
    1. Talairach J, Tournoux P (1988) Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers.
    1. Sergerie K, Chochol C, Armony JL (2008) The role of the amygdala in emotional processing: a quantitative meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32: 811–830.
    1. Dehaene S, Piazza M, Pinel P, Cohen L (2003) Three parietal circuits for number processing. Cogn Neuropsychol 20: 487–506.
    1. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P (1999) SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 42: 952–962.
    1. Goebel R, Roebroeck A, Kim DS, Formisano E (2003) Investigating directed cortical interactions in time-resolved fMRI data using vector autoregressive modeling and Granger causality mapping. Magn Reson Imaging 21: 1251–1261.
    1. Cox RW (1996) AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Comput Biomed Res 29: 162–173.
    1. Cox RW, Hyde JS (1997) Software tools for analysis and visualization of fMRI data. NMR Biomed 10: 171–178.
    1. Hamilton JP, Chen G, Thomason ME, Schwartz ME, Gotlib IH (2011) Investigating neural primacy in major depressive disorder: multivariate Granger causality analysis of resting-state fMRI time-series data. Mol Psychiatry 16: 763–772.
    1. Glover GH, Li TQ, Ress D (2000) Image-based method for retrospective correction of physiological motion effects in fMRI: RETROICOR. Magn Reson Med 44: 162–167.
    1. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Royal Statist Soc Ser B 57: 289–300.
    1. Gilbert SJ, Spengler S, Simons JS, Steele JD, Lawrie SM, et al. (2006) Functional specialization within rostral prefrontal cortex (area 10): a meta-analysis. J Cogn Neurosci 18: 932–948.
    1. Rushworth MFS, Walton ME, Kennerley SW, Bannerman DM (2004) Action sets and decisions in the medial frontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci 8: 410–417.
    1. Ghashghaei HT, Hilgetag CC, Barbas H (2007) Sequence of information processing for emotions based on the anatomic dialogue between prefrontal cortex and amygdala. NeuroImage 34: 905–923.
    1. Ray RD, Zald DH (2012) Anatomical insights into the interaction of emotion and cognition in the prefrontal cortex. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 36: 479–501.
    1. Kober H, Barrett LF, Joseph J, Bliss-Moreau E, Lindquist K, et al. (2008) Functional grouping and cortical-subcortical interactions in emotion: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. NeuroImage 42: 998–1031.
    1. Kim J, Zhu W, Chang L, Bentler PM, Ernst T (2007) Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data. Hum Brain Mapp 28: 85–93.
    1. Kim KR, Ku J, Lee JH, Lee H, Jung YC (2012) Functional and effective connectivity of anterior insula in anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. Neurosci Lett 521: 152–157.
    1. Stoeckel LE, Kim J, Weller RE, Cox JE, Cook EW, et al. (2009) Effective connectivity of a reward network in obese women. Brain Res Bul 79: 388–395.
    1. Lee JH, Kim J, Yoo SS (2012) Real-time fMRI-based neurofeedback reinforces causality of attention networks. Neurosci Res 72: 347–354.
    1. Seth AK, Chorley P, Barnett LC (2013) Granger causality analysis of fMRI BOLD signals is invariant to hemodynamic convolution but not downsampling. NeuroImage 65: 540–555.
    1. Deshpande G, Sathian K, Hu X (2010) Effect of hemodynamic variability on Granger causality analysis of fMRI. NeuroImage 52: 884–896.
    1. Friston K, Moran R, Seth AK (2013) Analysing connectivity with Granger causality and dynamic causal modeling. Curr Opin Neurobiol 23: 172–178.
    1. Zotev V, Yuan H, Phillips R, Bodurka J (2012) EEG-assisted retrospective motion correction for fMRI: E-REMCOR. NeuroImage 63: 698–712.
    1. Likhtik E, Pelletier JG, Paz R, Pare D (2005) Prefrontal control of the amygdala. J Neurosci 25: 7429–7437.
    1. Vidal-Gonzalez I, Vidal-Gonzalez B, Rauch SL, Quirk GJ (2006) Microstimulation reveals opposing influences of prelimbic and infralimbic cortex on the expression of conditioned fear. Learn Mem 13: 728–733.
    1. Etkin A, Wager TD (2007) Functional neuroimaging of anxiety: a meta-analysis of emotional processing in PTSD, social anxiety disorder, and specific phobia. Am J Psychiatry 164: 1476–1488.
    1. Shin LM, Wright CI, Cannistraro PA, Wedig MM, McMullin K, et al. (2005) A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of amygdala and medial prefrontal cortex responses to overtly presented fearful faces in posttraumatic stress disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62: 273–281.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever