4.5 Article

Specifically altered brain responses to threat in generalized anxiety disorder relative to social anxiety disorder and panic disorder

期刊

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 698-706

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.09.023

关键词

Cingulate cortex; Prefrontal cortex; Anterior insula; Threat processing; RDoC

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG: SFB/TRR 58]
  2. Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Muenster

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite considerable effort, the neurobiological underpinnings of hyper-responsive threat processing specific to patients suffering fromgeneralized anxiety disorder (GAD) remain poorly understood. The current functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study aims to delineate GAD-specific brain activity during immediate threat processing by comparing GAD patients to healthy controls (HC), to social anxiety disorder (SAD) and to panic disorder (PD) patients. Method: Brain activation and functional connectivity patterns to threat vs. neutral pictures were investigated using event-related fMRI. The sample consisted of 21 GAD, 21 PD, 21 SAD and 21 HC. Results: GAD-specific elevated activity to threat vs. neutral pictures was found in cingulate cortex, dorsal anterior insula/frontal operculum (daI/FO) and posterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). Defining these effects as seed regions, we detected GAD-specific increased functional connectivity to threat vs. neutral pictures between posterior dlPFC and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, between cingulate cortex and amygdala, between cingulate cortex and anterior insula, as well as decreased functional connectivity between daI/FO and mid-dlPFC. Conclusion: The findings present the first evidence for GAD-specific neural correlates of hyper-responsive threat processing, possibly reflecting exaggerated threat sensitivity, maladaptive appraisal and attention-allocation processes. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据