Search

The association between childhood trauma exposure and risk of developing psychopathology may in part be mediated by the effects of chronic stress on dopaminergic neurotransmission. However, little is known about the differential effects of distinct trauma types on reward processing, particularly in adults without concurrent medical or psychiatric disorders. We examined the association of childhood trauma exposure, including the differential effects of abuse and neglect, with reward processing in healthy adults (n = 114). Functional magnetic resonance imaging during a monetary incentive delay task was used to assess neural activity in the ventral striatum and orbitofrontal cortex in relation to reward anticipation and reward outcome, respectively. Exposure to childhood trauma, including abuse and neglect, was assessed using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form. We found a significant effect for abuse on ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation, adjusting for age, sex, scanner site, educational level, and household monthly income. There were no effects for abuse or neglect, independently or combined, on orbitofrontal cortex activation during reward outcome. Our findings suggest differential effects of childhood abuse on ventral striatum activation during reward anticipation in healthy adults.

Healthy aging is associated with a progressive decline across a range of cognitive functions. An important factor underlying this decline may be the age-related impairment in stimulus-reward processing. Several studies have investigated age-related effects, but compared young versus old subjects. This is the first study to investigate the effect of aging on brain activation during reward processing within a continuous segment of the adult life span. We scanned 49 healthy adults aged 40-70 years, using functional MRI. We adopted a simple reward task, which allowed separate evaluation of neural responses to reward anticipation and receipt. The effect of reward on performance accuracy and speed was not related to age, indicating that all subjects could perform the task correctly. We identified a whole-brain significant age-related decline of ventral striatum activation during reward anticipation as compared to neutral anticipation. Importantly, the specificity of this finding was underscored by the observation that there was no general decline in activation during anticipation. Activation in the ventral striatum increased with age during reward receipt as compared to receiving neutral outcome. Finally, activation in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex during outcome was not affected by age. Our data demonstrate that the typical shift in striatal activation from reward receipt to reward anticipation in young adults disappears with healthy aging. These changes are consistent the well-ocumented age-related decline of striatal dopamine availability, and may provide a stepping stone for further research of age-related neurodegenerative diseases.

During adolescence, functional and structural changes in the brain facilitate the transition from childhood to adulthood. Because the cortex and the striatum mature at different rates, temporary imbalances in the frontostriatal network occur. Here, we investigate the development of the subcortical and cortical components of the frontostriatal network from early adolescence to early adulthood in 60 subjects in a cross-sectional design, using functional MRI and a stop-signal task measuring two forms of inhibitory control: reactive inhibition (outright stopping) and proactive inhibition (anticipation of stopping). During development, reactive inhibition improved: older subjects were faster in reactive inhibition. In the brain, this was paralleled by an increase in motor cortex suppression. The level of proactive inhibition increased, with older subjects slowing down responding more than younger subjects when anticipating a stop-signal. Activation increased in the right striatum, right ventral and dorsal inferior frontal gyrus, and supplementary motor area. Moreover, functional connectivity during proactive inhibition increased between striatum and frontal regions with age. In conclusion, we demonstrate that developmental improvements in proactive inhibition are paralleled by increases in activation and functional connectivity of the frontostriatal network. These data serve as a stepping stone to investigate abnormal development of the frontostriatal network in disorders such as schizophrenia and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The ability to stop a prepared response (reactive inhibition) appears to depend on the degree to which stopping is expected (proactive inhibition). Functional MRI studies have shown that activation during proactive and reactive inhibition overlaps, suggesting that the whole neural network for reactive inhibition becomes already activated in anticipation of stopping. However, these studies measured proactive inhibition as the effect of stop-signal probability on activation during go trials. Therefore, activation could reflect expectation of a stop-signal (evoked by the stop-signal probability cue), but also violation of this expectation because stop-signals do not occur on go trials. We addressed this problem, using a stop-signal task in which the stop-signal probability cue and the go-signal were separated in time. Hence, we could separate activation during the cue, reflecting expectation of the stop-signal, from activation during the go-signal, reflecting expectation of the stop-signal or violation of that expectation. During the cue, the striatum, the supplementary motor complex (SMC), and the midbrain activated. During the go-signal, the right inferior parietal cortex (IPC) and the right inferior frontal cortex (IFC) activated. These findings suggest that the neural network previously associated with proactive inhibition can be subdivided into two components. One component, including the striatum, the SMC, and the midbrain, activated during the cue, implicating this network in proactive inhibition. Another component, consisting of the right IPC and the right IFC, activated during the go-signal. Rather than being involved in proactive inhibition, this network appears to be involved in processes associated with violation of expectations. Hum Brain Mapp 34:2015–2024, 2013. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

18th Annual Conference of the International Society for Bipolar Disorders & 8th Biennial Conference of the InternationalSociety for Affective Disorders, July 13–16, 2016, Amsterdam, The Netherlands