Buscar en
Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental
Toda la web
Inicio Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental Precuneus and insular hypoactivation during cognitive processing in first-episod...
Información de la revista
Vol. 15. Núm. 2.
Páginas 101-116 (Abril - Junio 2022)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Visitas
1336
Vol. 15. Núm. 2.
Páginas 101-116 (Abril - Junio 2022)
Review article
Acceso a texto completo
Precuneus and insular hypoactivation during cognitive processing in first-episode psychosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of fMRI studies
Hipoactivación precúnea e insular durante el procesamiento cognitivo en el primer episodio psicótico: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis de estudios de fMRI
Visitas
1336
Pau Soldevila-Matíasa,b,1, Anton Albajes-Eizagirrec,d,e,1, Joaquim Raduac,d,e,f,g,
Autor para correspondencia
radua@clinic.cat

Corresponding author.
, Gracián García-Martíe,h, José M. Rubioi,j, Diana Tordesillas-Gutierreze,k,l, Inmaculada Fuentes-Duráe,m, Aleix Solanesc,e, Lydia Forteac,e, Dominic Oliverg,n, Julio Sanjuána,e,o
a Research Institute of the Hospital Clínic Universitari of Valencia (INCLIVA), Valencia, Spain
b Department of Basic Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
c Imaging of Mood- and Anxiety-Related Disorders (IMARD) Group, Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain
d FIDMAG Germanes Hospitalàries, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
e Center for Networking Biomedical Research in Mental Health (CIBERSAM), Spain
f Centre for Psychiatric Research and Education, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
g Early Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
h Biomedical Engineering Unit/Radiology Department, Quirónsalud Hospital, Spain
i Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New York, USA
j The Feinstein Institute, Northwell Health Hospital, New York, USA
k University Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla (IDIVAL), Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Cantabria, Spain
l Neuroimaging Unit, Technological Facilities, Valdecilla Biomedical Research Institute IDIVAL, Santander, Cantabria, Spain
m Department of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatment, Faculty of Psychology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
n OASIS Service, South London and the Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
o Department of Psychiatric, University of Valencia, School of Medicine, Valencia, Spain
Ver más
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Figuras (83)
Mostrar másMostrar menos
Tablas (1)
Table 2. Brain activation abnormalities in individuals with First Episode Psychosis (systematic review).
Material adicional (1)
Abstract
Introduction

The neural correlates of the cognitive dysfunction in first-episode psychosis (FEP) are still unclear. The present review and meta-analysis provide an update of the location of the abnormalities in the fMRI-measured brain response to cognitive processes in individuals with FEP.

Methods

Systematic review and voxel-based meta-analysis of cross-sectional fMRI studies comparing neural responses to cognitive tasks between individuals with FEP and healthy controls (HC) according to PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Twenty-six studies were included, comprising 598 individuals with FEP and 567 HC. Individual studies reported statistically significant hypoactivation in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (6 studies), frontal lobe (8 studies), cingulate (6 studies) and insula (5 studies). The meta-analysis showed statistically significant hypoactivation in the left anterior insula, precuneus and bilateral striatum.

Conclusions

While the studies tend to highlight frontal hypoactivation during cognitive tasks in FEP, our meta-analytic results show that the left precuneus and insula primarily display aberrant activation in FEP that may be associated with salience attribution to external stimuli and related to deficits in perception and regulation.

Keywords:
First-episode psychosis
Cognitive tasks
Frontal lobe
Insula
Functional MRI
Resumen
Introducción

Los correlatos neurales de la disfunción cognitiva en el primer episodio psicótico (PEP) aún no están claros. Esta revisión y este metaanálisis proporcionan una actualización de la localización de las anormalidades en la respuesta cerebral medida por fMRI a los procesos cognitivos en individuos con PEP.

Métodos

Revisión sistemática y metaanálisis basado en vóxeles de estudios cros-seccionales de fMRI que comparen respuestas neuronales a tareas cognitivas entre individuos con PEP y controles sanos de acuerdo con las guías PRISMA.

Resultados

Se incluyeron 26 estudios, que comprendían 598 individuos con PEP y 567 controles sanos. Los estudios individuales reportaban hipoactivación estadísticamente significativa en la corteza prefrontal dorsolateral (6 estudios), el lóbulo frontal (8 estudios), el cíngulo (6 estudios) y la ínsula (5 estudios). El metaanálisis mostró hipoactivación estadísticamente significativa en la ínsula anterior izquierda, el precúneo y el cuerpo estriado bilateral.

Conclusiones

Si bien los estudios tienden a resaltar la hipoactivación frontal durante las tareas cognitivas en PEP, nuestros resultados metaanalíticos muestran que el precúneo izquierdo y la ínsula presentan principalmente una activación aberrante en PEP que puede estar asociada con la atribución de saliencia a estímulos externos y relacionada con déficits en la percepción y la regulación.

Palabras clave:
Primer episodio psicótico
Tareas cognitivas
Lóbulo frontal
Ínsula
Resonancia magnética funcional
Texto completo
Introduction

First-episode psychosis (FEP) is characterized by the first period experiencing suprathreshold psychotic symptoms in an individual's life. Psychotic disorders are associated with impairment in many areas of life and the risk of all-cause mortality associated with these disorders is more than twice that of the general population.1 Therefore, understanding the mechanisms involved throughout the course of the illness is crucial.2 The clinical symptoms of psychosis have been described and conceptualized as positive and negative. Positive symptoms include hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized thinking, while negative symptoms include affective flattening, apathy, anhedonia and cognitive impairment.3 In addition, recent studies in FEP show that functional deficits of the right middle frontal gyrus (Broadman area, BA, 9) during attentional and memory performance may be central in the pathophysiology of psychosis.4 However, these results must be cautiously interpreted given the complexity and heterogeneity of existing studies.5,6 That said, sufficient evidence exists to support improving and developing tools for early intervention in FEP to reduce dysfunction and enhance the quality of life of patients.7

One instrument used in biomarker research for FEP is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Unfortunately, no fMRI technique has proven to be sufficiently specific or sensitive for clinical diagnosis. Furthermore, results from different studies do not appear to be consistent, likely due to heterogeneity of samples, cognitive tasks, neuroimaging methodologies, and statistical analyses. A single fMRI study may provide insights about the abnormalities observed using a specific task in patients with specific characteristics, and thus results may change from one study to another. Therefore, meta-analyses may be useful because they focus on the commonalities (across patients, across tasks, etc.) and discard the specificities. Multivariate patterns of functional dysconnectivity across FEP, as suggested by Fusar-Poli et al.8, and a recent systematic review of functional brain changes in task-based and resting state fMRI suggest impairment of the fronto-temporal pathways are the core issue in FEP.9 These findings align with the classical hypothesis of fronto-temporal dysfunction in chronic patients with schizophrenia.10

Nevertheless, many questions remain regarding the patterns of activation according to the cognitive task fMRI studies in FEP. Thus, the primary question compares the main areas of dysfunction in FEP vs HC. We hypothesized that FEP patients show reduced functional activity in frontal and temporal lobes, across cognitive tasks, compared with HC.

We conducted a systematic review and a meta-analysis using anisotropic effect-size seed-based mapping11 to investigate the patterns of activation according to the cognitive tasks used during fMRI acquisition in FEP patients versus HC with a specific focus on the relevance of methodology, the different cognitive tasks used during scans and the mode of presentation. This review intends to show different methodological biases and activation results to explore their relationships and contribute to the methodological optimization of cognitive fMRI task studies. In addition, we expect to identify and compare cerebral activation correlates of FEP patients and HC during cognitive task performance to clarify the areas most associated with differences in brain activation.

MethodsSearch strategy and study selection

The systematic review was performed in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) recommendations,12 and the meta-analysis according to the best practice recommendations by Müller et al.13 We searched PubMed and the Web of Science databases to identify functional neuroimaging studies (Fig. 1 for an outline of this process). We used the following key terms: “(fMRI AND (First episode psychosis))”. The automatic searches were accompanied by manually reviewing the references of the eligible articles after the final selection. We identified 704 articles that were published between January 2000 and July 2017.

Figure 1.

PRISMA flow diagram of study inclusion.

(0,38MB).

Inclusion criteria were: (a) studies comparing the blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) response to a cognitive task such as attention, perception, memory, or cognitive control between individuals with a first-episode sample, defined as individuals who had been diagnosed with a psychotic disorder for the first time in their lives; (b) the diagnosis (schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, brief psychotic episode, and psychosis not otherwise specified) must be verified by structured clinical interviews; and (c) the BOLD response must be measured using task-based fMRI. Exclusion criteria were: (a) studies using resting state and structural MRI modalities; (b) studies using non-cognitive tasks; (c) reviews and meta-analyses; and (d) studies that included participants with >1 acute psychotic episode. Finally, specific exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were (a) region of interest and small volume correction results; (b) studies using partial coverage of the gray matter; and (c) studies that do not report the required data (coordinates and t-values of the peaks of abnormal brain response).

Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review, 16 of which also met the criteria to be included in the voxel-based meta-analysis (Fig. 1).

Data extraction

Two researchers (PSM and GGM) independently read the full text of each potentially eligible article, and disagreements regarding eligibility criteria were resolved by consensus. The selection of these studies was performed hierarchically.12 A primary screening was performed based on title, a second screening on abstract, and a third screening on a full text review. When data were either unpublished or incomplete, the corresponding author was invited to send additional information.

Relevant data of selected articles were extracted in a predefined structured table (Table 1). The following variables were included in the review: author and year of publication; sample size (FEP patients and HC); sex and mean age of participants; medication, duration of untreated illness, stimulus modality; cognitive task paradigm and summary of brain activation. Moreover, we included an additional table listing the location and activation of brain areas according to the experimental cognitive task applied in the studies. For the meta-analysis, we also extracted the peak coordinates and t-values of the findings.

Table 1.

fMRI studies comparing individuals with a first episode psychosis (FEP) and healthy controls included in the systematic review.

First author and year  Patients information  Healthy controls  Scales  Medication  DUI  Field strength of scanners  Space coordinates  Software for analysis of fMRI  Stimulus modality  Cognitive task paradigm  Summary of brain activation 
Braus et al., 2000*  N=12Age: 25Men: 50%Diagnosis: FES  N=12Age: 28Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  BPRS  Antipsychotic-Naive  34 months  1.5Talairach  SPM99  Visual  Sequential finger opposition  Reduce in motor cortical dysfunction 
Braus et al., 2002*  N=12Age: 25Men: 50%Diagnosis: FES  N=11Age: 29Men: 55%Diagnosis: NA  BPRS  Antipsychotic-Naive  Not specified  1.5Talairach  SPM99  Auditory and visual  Information processing  Reduce thalamus, LSTG, and parietal lobe 
Boksman et al., 2005*  N=10Age: 22Men: 90%Diagnosis: FES  N=10Age: 23Men: 90%Diagnosis: NA  SANSSANP  Antipsychotic-Naive  17 months  4.0Talairach  SPM99  Visual  Word fluency  Reduce DLPFC, STG.Increase LFL, anterior cingulate, thalamus, insula, IFL, IOG and FG 
Tan et al., 2005*  N=11Age: 25Men: 45%Diagnosis: FES  N=11Age: 26Men: 45%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSGAF  2.3mg/day: risperidone (n=6)11mg/day: olanzapine (n=5)  2 months  3.0Talairach  Brainvoyager  Visual and verbal  Working memory  Reduce bilateral DLPFC.Increase VLPFC 
Schneider et al., 2007*  N=48Age: 31Men: 54%Diagnosis: FES (42 paranoid, 2 disorganized, 3 undifferentiated, 1 schizophreniform disorder)  N=57Age: 30Men: 59%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSGAFHAMD  Medication was double blind and presently unknown (risperidone vs. haloperidol)  Not specified  1.5MNI  SPM2  Visual  Working memory (N-back)  Reduce STG, thalamus, and hippocampusIncrease VLPFC 
Bleich-Cohen et al., 2007  N=12Age: 30Men: 50%Diagnosis: FES  N=17Age: 31Men: %Diagnosis: NA  PANSS  3.2mg/day: risperidone (n=9)700mg/day quetiapine (n=1)16mg/day perphenazine (n=1), 2mg/day haloperidol (n=1)  Not specified  1.5Talairach  Brainvoyager  Auditory  Word Fluency  Reduce LIFG and Wernicke area.Increase RSTS 
Achim et al., 2007*  N=26Age: 22Men: 69%Diagnosis: FES (15 schizophrenia, 4 schizoaffective disorder, 7 psychosis not otherwise specified  N=20Age: 23Men: 55%Diagnosis: NA  SAPSSAPNHAMD  2.11mg/day risperidone (n=11), 10.5mg/day olanzapine (n=5), 325mg/day quetiapine (n=2), 300mg/day clozapine (n=1), 1.5mg/day haloperidol (n=1), Mixed (n=2)Antipsychotic-Naïve (n=4)  18 months  1.5Talairach  SPM2  Visual and verbal  Encoding strategies; subsequent memory effect; semantic relatedness  Reduce bilateral MTG. 
Fusar-Poli et al., 2007  N=10Age: 25Men: 100%Diagnosis: FES  NONE  PANSSNART  1.7mg/day risperidone63.75mg/day quetiapine  Not specified  1.5Talairach  SCM  Visual  Word Fluency  Reduce DLPFC, cingulate, thalamus and FPC.Increase VLPFC 
Benetti et al., 2009  N=10Age: 25Men: 70%Diagnosis: FES  N=14Age: 26Men: 64%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSNART  Antipsychotic-Naïve (n=3)121mg/day chlorpromazine equivalents (n=7)  Not specified  1.5MNI  SPM5  Visual  Encoding strategies; maintenance; recognition  Increase in encoding SPG, SMG. In maintenance bilateral anterior insula, right anterior cingulate. In recognition Bilateral (IFG and STG), insula and MTG 
Crossley et al., 2009*  N=10Age: No specifiedMen: No specifiedDiagnosis: FES  N=13Age: No specifiedMen: No specifiedDiagnosis: NA  None  Antipsychotic-Naïve (n=3)1.7mg/day risperidone63.75mg/day quetiapine  12 months  1.5MNI  SPM5  Visual  Working memory  Increase in STL and MFG 
Woodward et al., 2009*  N=15Age: 22Men: 80%Diagnosis: FES  N= 32Age: 22Men: 71%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSGAF  Antipsychotic-Naïve  5 months  1.5Talairach  SPMs  Visual  Choice reaction time  Increase SMA and MFG 
Lencer et al., 2011*  N=40Age: 23Men: 70%Diagnosis: FES (21 schizophrenia, 2 schizoaffective disorder, 1 schizophreniform disorder, 13 bipolar I disorder)  N=20Age: 24Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSWASI  2.5mg/day risperidone (n=35), 20mg/day olanzapine (n=1), 15mg/day aripiprazole (n=1)  Not specified  3.0Talairach  AFNI  Visual  Motion processing  Reduce intraparietal sulcus, DLPFC.Increase Dorsomedial thalamus and insula. 
Purdon et al., 2011  N=17Age: 21Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=17Age: 22Men: 76%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSGAF  Antipsychotic-Naïve  4 Months  1.5Talairach  MPRAGE  Visual  Serial reaction time  Reduce Bilateral MFGStriatum-thalamus-cortical circuits.Increase Left STG 
Guerrero-Pedraza et al., 2012  N=30Age: 26Men: 70%Diagnosis: FES (7 schizophrenia, 9 schizophreniform disorder, 1 delusional disorder, 3 brief psychosis, 10 unspecified psychosis)  N=28Age: 27Men: 71%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSTAP  299mg/day chlorpromazine equivalents  18 months  1.5MNI  FSL  Visual  Working memory (N-back)  Reduce MFC, thalamus and cingulate. Increase DLPFC, VLPFC, insula. 
Smieskova et al., 2012  N=21Age: 28Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=20Age: 26Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  BPRSSANSSANPGAFBSIP  Antipsychotic-naïve (n=7), Antipsychotic free (n=6), Quetiapine (n=5), Paliperidone (n=2)Olanzapine (n=1)  Not specified  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Working memory (N-back)  Reduce Precuneus, SFG, MFG, IFG, insula 
Yoon et al., 2012  N=51Age: 20Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=51Age: 20Men: 51%Diagnosis: NA  GAFSANSSAPSBPRS  Antipsychotic-naïve (n=19)Antipsychotic treatment not specified (n= 32)  12 months  1.5MNI  SPM5  Visual  Attentional processing (AX continuous Performance)  Reduce DLPFC 
Kambeitz-Ilankovic et al., 2013*  N=20Age: 25Men: 70%Diagnosis: FES  N=20Age: 26Men: 70%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSPSYRATS  252mg/day Chlorpromazine equivalents  18 months  3.0Talairach  SPM8  Visual  Attentional processing  Reduce MTG, insula and precuneus 
Lesh et al., 2013  N=43Age: 28Men: 79%Diagnosis: FES (41 schizophrenia, 1 schizoaffective, 1 schizophreniform)  N=54Age:Men: 64%Diagnosis: NA  SANSSAPSBPRS  Antipsychotic-naïve (n=15), Atypical antipsychotic (n=27), Typical and Atypical antipsychotic (n=1)  12 months  1.5MNI  SPM8  Visual  Attentional processing (AX continuous Performance)  Reduce DLPFC and parietal 
Schmidt et al., 2013*  N=21Age: 28Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=20Age: 26Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  BPRSGAFBSIP  Antipsychotic-naïve (n=7), Antipsychotic free (n=6), Quetiapine (n=5) Paliperidone (n=2), Olanzapine (n=1)  Not specified  3.0Talairach  SPM  Visual  Working memory  Reduce MFG and superior parietal lobe 
Benetti et al., 2015  N=46Age: 25Men: 59%Diagnosis: FES  N=22Age: 24Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSPSYRATS  197mg/day Chlorpromazine equivalents  Not specified  3.0MNI  SPM8  Auditory  Word fluency  Reduce LIFG and left MTG.Increase MTG and VLPFC 
Bendfeld et al., 2015  N=19Age: 28Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=19Age: 26Men: 50%Diagnosis: NA  BPRSSANSSANPGAFBSIP  Antipsychotic free (n=9), Antipsychotic naïve (n=4), Antipsychotic medicated without specified either mg/day or type of antipsychotic (n=6)  Not specified  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Working memory and verbal fluency  Reduce Parietal lobe and precuneus.Increase Cingulate and Frontal lobe 
Buchy et al., 2015  N=25Age: 24Men: 80%Diagnosis: FES  N=24Age: 25Men: 79%Diagnosis: NA  SANSSAPS  Antipsychotic medicated without specified either mg/day or type of antipsychotic (n=17)  16 months  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Memory processing  Increase VLPFC 
Hawco et al., 2015*  N=26Age: 24Men: 85%Diagnosis: FES  N=24Age: 25Men: 79%Diagnosis: NA  SANSSAPSHAMD  Antipsychotic free (n=26)  16 months  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Memory processing  Reduce: frontal lobe, parietal lobe.Increase Cingulate, FG and DLPFC 
Keedy et al., 2015*  N=21Age: 24Men: 76%Diagnosis: FES  N=21Age: 24Men: 47%Diagnosis: NA  PANSSHAMD  Antipsychotic naïve (n=14)  1 month  3.0Talairach  AFNI  Visual  Attentional processing  Reduce SFG, insula, SMG, cingulate and bilateral, ILC 
Raij et al., 2015*  N=20Age: 27Men: 60%Diagnosis: FES (6 schizophrenia, 2 schizophreniform disorder, 2 psychotic disorder not otherwise specified)  N=20Age: 29Men: 60%Diagnosis: NA  BPRS  462mg/day Chlorpromazine equivalents.  Not specified  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Attentional processing  Reduce Putamen, cingulate and insula. 
Schmidt et al., 2016*  N=29Age: 24Men: 65%Diagnosis: FES  N=19Age: 26Men: 52%Diagnosis: NA  BPRS SANSSANPGAF  Antipsychotic medicated without specified mg/day.  Not specified  3.0MNI  SPM8  Visual  Reward task.  Reduce Insula and cingulate cortex 

FEP: First-Episode Psychosis; FES: First Episode Schizophrenia; NA: Not Applicable; BSIP: Basel Screening Instrument for Psychosis; PSYRATS: Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale; SPM: Statistical Parametric Mapping; AFNI: Analysis of Functional NeuroImages; MPRAGE: Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Gradient-Echo; PANSS: Positive and Negative Scale Syndrome; SANS: Scale of the Assessments of Negative Syndrome; SAPS: Scale for the Assessment of Positive Syndrome; TAP: Word Accentuation test; DUI: Duration of Untreated Illness; GAF: Global Functional Scale; BPRS: Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale; NART: National Adult Reading Test; HAM-D: Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; AG: Angular Gyrus; CPT: Continuous Performance Test; DLPFC: Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex; FG: Fusiform Gyrus; FPC: Frontal Posterior Cingulate; HPC: Hippocampus; IFG: Inferior Frontal Gyrus; IFL: Inferior frontal lobe; ILC: Inferior Lingual Cortex; IOG: Inferior Occipital Gyrus; LFL: Left Frontal Lobe; LG: Lingual Gyrus; LIFG: Left Inferior Frontal Gyrus; LSTG: Left Superior Temporal Gyrus; LTG: Left temporal Gyrus; MFG: Middle Frontal Gyrus; MOFG: Medial Orbitofrontal gyrus; MNI: Montreal Neurological Institute space coordinates; MTG: Middle Temporal Gyrus; RSTS: Right Superior Temporal Sulcus; SFG: Superior Frontal Gyrus; SMA: Supplementary Motor Area; SMG: Supramarginal gyrus; SPG: Superior Parietal Gyrus; STG: Superior Temporal Gyrus; STL: Superior Temporal Lobe; VLPFC: Ventrolateral Prefrontal Cortex; VS: Ventral Striatal; WASI: Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence.

*

Studies included in the meta-analysis.

Meta-analysis

The quantitative approach was carried out meta-analyzing 16 studies with SDM software version 5 using anisotropic effect-size seed-based mapping (AES-SDM, https://www.sdmproject.com/).14 Studies included in the meta-analysis are marked with an asterisk (*) in Table 1.

First, AES-SDM used the coordinates (converted to MNI space) and t-values of the peaks of maximum statistical significance reported in the studies to generate a three-dimensional image of the effect-size of the differences in activation between patients and HC, separately for each study. Specifically, AES-SDM assigned each voxel an effect size that depended on the spatial covariance with the close peaks, of which the effect size was known. Second, a three-dimensional image of the variance of the effect size was generated – again, separately for each study. This step is straightforward because the variance of a given effect size depends only on the effect size and the samples sizes. Third, a standard random-effects meta-analysis was fitted separately for each voxel. Finally, a permutation test for spatial convergence was conducted to detect those regions that showed larger effect sizes between groups compared with most regions.15

We also conducted several complementary analyses. First, for each of the identified clusters in the results, we created the funnel plot of the effect size of the peak with regards to its standard error for visual detection of potential publication bias. Additionally, we quantitatively assessed the potential publication bias with the Egger test, and the heterogeneity with the I2 statistic. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed using a jackknife leave-one-out procedure, which consisted of sequentially removing each study individually and repeating the analysis as many times as studies we had include in the main analysis (i.e., 16 sub-analyses, each including 15 studies). If a region were detected abnormal in all 16 iterations, we concluded that we would have detected this region in the meta-analysis even if any of the studies had not been published. We used a composite threshold for statistical significance (uncorrected voxel P<0.005, peak SDM-Z value >1, plus cluster extent >100 voxels), which is more conservative than the recommended threshold for ES-SDM.11

Results

A total of 704 records were identified through database searching, with 26 studies meeting eligibility criteria. The pooled sample size in the FEP group was n=598, the mean age was 24 years old (range 20–31), 30% of subjects were women and 80% were receiving antipsychotic medication. The HC group had a sample size of n=567 and a mean age of 25 years old (range 20–34 years old), and 46% of the subjects were women. FEP and HC groups were already age- and sex-matched in all eligible studies.

Characteristics from included studies

The included studies demonstrated reduced activation of the temporal lobe, parietal lobe, frontal lobe and limbic areas.16–21 Conversely, five studies reported increased activation in the ventro-lateral prefrontal cortex.22–24 Furthermore, nine studies showed reduced and increased activation in different brain regions, including the frontal and prefrontal cortex, insula, temporal lobe, occipital lobe and thalamus.22,25–29

The most significant finding in the systematic review of cognitive task fMRI and brain activation was found in the prefronto-temporal pathways (Table 2).16,23,30–33 Interestingly, activity appears to be decreased in the left inferior frontal gyrus,26,34,35 orbital frontal gyrus,21,27 superior parietal lobe35,36 and thalamus17,20,23,30 in FEP patients compared with HC.

Table 2.

Brain activation abnormalities in individuals with First Episode Psychosis (systematic review).

First author and year  Cognitive task paradigm  Stimulus modality  FLDLPFCVLPFCTLPLCingulateInsulaPutamenThalamus
      Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side  Activity  Side 
Braus et al.2000  Repetitive sequential finger  Visual 
 
Braus et al.2002  Information processing  Auditory visual 
 
 
 
Boksman et al.2005  Word fluency  Visual 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tan et al.2005  Working memory  Visual and verbal 
 
 
 
B,A 
Schneider et al.2007  Working memoryN-back  Visual 
 
 
 
Bleich-Cohen et al.2007  Word fluency  Auditory verbal 
 
 
 
Achim et al. 2007  Encoding strategies subsequent memory effect; semantic relatedness  Visual verbal 
 
R,M 
Fusar-Poli et al.2007  Word fluency  Visual 
 
 
 
L,A 
 
Benetti et al.2009  Encoding strategies; maintenance; recognition  Visual 
 
L,I 
 
 
 
R,A 
Crossley et al.2009  Working memory  Visual 
 
L,M 
 
L,S 
Woodward et al.2009  Choice reaction time  Visual 
 
R,B 
 
Lencer et al.2011  Visual motion processing  Visual 
 
 
 
 
Purdon et al.2011  Serial reaction time  Visual 
 
 
 
R,A 
Guerrero-Pedraza et al.2012  Working memory N-back  Visual 
 
I,M 
 
 
 
 
B,A 
 
Smieskova et al.2012  Working memory N-back  Visual 
 
B,S,M 
 
 
Yoon et al.2012  Attentional processing(AX continuous Performance)  Visual 
 
Kambeitz-Ilankovic et al.2013  Attentional processing  Visual 
 
 
 
Lesh et al.2013  Attentional processing(AX continuous Performance)  Visual 
 
 
Schmidt et al.2013  Working memory  Visual 
 
 
Benetti et al.2015  Word task  Auditory 
 
 
 
B,I 
 
Bendfeld et al.2015  Working memory and verbal fluency  Visual 
 
R,M 
 
L,I,S 
 
Buchy et al.2015  Memory  Visual 
 
Hawco et al.2015  Memory  Visual 
 
L,I 
 
R,M 
 
B,S 
 
 
L,A 
Keedy et al.2015  Attentional processing  Visual 
 
B,S 
 
B,S 
 
L,P 
 
 
Raij et al.2015  Attentional processing  Visual 
 
L,A 
 
 
Schmidt et al.2016  Reward task  Visual 
 
R,A 
 

A: Anterior; B: Bilateral; DLPFC: Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; FL: Frontal lobe; I: Inferior; L: Left side; M: Medial; P: Posterior; PL: Parietal lobe; R: Right side; S: Superior; TL: Temporal lobe; VLPFC: Ventrolateral prefrontal cortex;

: significant differences (P<0.05) in increased activation;
: significant differences (P<0.05) in reduced activation;
: non-significant difference; Hyphen (-): indeterminate data. Note. (1) The data were collected based on the accuracy rate reported in the included studies.

However, numerous studies reported an increased task-related BOLD activity in the insula29,31 and inferior frontal gyrus31,37 of FEP patients compared with HC.

An Ontario group25 showed that antipsychotic-naïve first-episode patients exhibited relatively lower activation in the prefrontal and anterior cingulate during a word fluency task. Further, Bleich-Cohen et al.26 reported reduced activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus and increased activity in the right superior temporal sulcus in FEP patients compared with HC during an auditory language task.

Achim et al.18 examined encoding strategies and detected reduced activation in the bilateral medial temporal lobes in FEP patients relative to HC. Yoon et al.38 reported decreased activation in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), suggesting that neurophysiological markers of illness may not be less evident in FEP patients versus patients with a more established psychotic illness. In addition, Lesh et al.39 determined that FEP patients exhibited reduced activity in the DLPFC and inferior parietal cortex, which was not seen in HC. In contrast, in a study of patients after treatment, Keedy et al.28 reported a marked increase in activity in the DLPFC in FEP, similar to that shown in HC. Another study reported that putamen signaling was lower in the FEP group, and the degree of this alteration was positively correlated with delusion scores and negatively correlated with the antipsychotic equivalent dose,40 which was in accordance with the dysfunction of striate-cortical connectivity.32

Meta-analysis of functional response to cognitive processing in FEP

Four clusters with >100 voxels were identified. Patients with FEP showed statistically significant increased activation in paracentral lobule (MNI 8,−30,58 with Z=1.75 and P=2×10−4) and statistically significant decreased activation in precuneus (BA7, MNI −12,−64,58 with Z=3.351 and P=3×10−7) extending to bilateral superior parietal gyrus, left insula (mostly BA47, MNI −34,18,−12 with Z=2.62 and P=3.7×10−5) extending to left striatum, and right striatum (BA48, MNI 26,4,−4 with Z=1.965 and P=1.4×10−3) (Figs. 2 and 3 and Table 3).

Figure 2.

Increased activation in the paracentral lobule.

(0,38MB).
Figure 3.

Decreased activation in precuneus and insula.

(0,55MB).
Table 3.

Brain activation abnormalities in individuals with First Episode Psychosis (meta-analysis).

Peak MNI coordinate  Peak SDM-Z  Peak P  Voxels  Description 
8,−30,58  1.753  0.0002  202  Paracentral lobule 
−12,−64,58  −3.351  0.0000003  2052  Left precuneus, BA 7 
−34,18,−12  −2.620  0.00004  492  Left insula, BA 47 
26,4,−4  −1.965  0.001  136  Right striatum 

Threshold for statistical significance (uncorrected voxel P<0.005, peak SDM-Z value>1, plus cluster extent>100 voxels).

The analysis revealed no heterogeneity (I2=0% in all clusters). In the jackknife analysis, the paracentral lobule and the left insula clusters were present in all sub-analyses except for the sub-analysis excluding Schneider et al.,23 showing that the significance of these results hinges on the inclusion of this study in the meta-analysis. The right striatum cluster was not present in the sub-analyses excluding Schneider et al.23 or Keedy et al.,28 indicating that the significance of these results depends on the inclusion of both studies in the meta-analysis. The left precuneus cluster was present in all the jackknife sub-analysis, indicating that this result is not dependent on the inclusion on any single study in the meta-analysis.

No publication biases could be identified from the Egger tests or the funnel plots (eFigures 1–4). For the activation at the paracentral lobule, the Egger test was statistically significant (P=9×10−3) and the funnel plot showed a slight asymmetry. Larger studies were associated with larger effects, which is the opposite pattern expected in the existence of publication bias. Similarly, for the right striatum deactivation, the Egger test was statistically significant (P=0.016) but the funnel plot showed again asymmetry in the direction opposite to that expected of publication bias.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this report is the largest review and meta-analysis of studies comparing brain activity between FEP patients and HC.

The primary findings of the systematic review are that there are differences in activation in several brain regions during cognitive tasks between FEP and HC, including in DLPFC, frontal lobe, thalamus, cingulate cortex, precuneus and insula. This is consistent with the classical model of fronto-temporal abnormality being a key issue in schizophrenia.3,41,42 This finding is also commensurate with previous meta-analytic findings on altered frontal activation in chronic patients43 and with a recent study comparing fMRI of FEP patients with chronic patients.44

However, our voxel-based meta-analysis reveals that the frontal lobe might not be the most extensively altered region when comparing FEP patients with HC. Our results showed significant differences in only two brain areas with decreased functional activity in the left insula (BA47) and left precuneus (BA7). These differences in the results between individual studies and the meta-analysis highlight the important effect of methodological differences between studies; as more studies were included, more brain areas appeared to be significantly different between groups. The number of studies included in the systematic review (N=26) is larger than in the meta-analysis (N=16). This assumes that the meta-analysis, as a set of quantitative procedures, generates conclusions that are more accurate, reliable, and more rigorous than those generated from any single study or in a non-quantitative review.45

The present meta-analyses of all 16 studies indicated that the left precuneus, part of the parietal lobe, is the most clearly implicated area.

Functional experiments have shown the precuneus to be part of the default mode network (DMN).46 The precuneus is an association area with wide-spread extra parietal connections, and there is evidence that the fronto-parietal control network is disrupted in psychosis.47 The precuneus has been recently shown to alter the DMN in FEP48 and also in FEP during auditory verbal hallucinations.49 This alteration in DMN intrinsic activity is associated with poor cognitive function.50 In addition, decreased functional connectivity between the hippocampus and precuneus has been demonstrated in unmedicated patients.51 This structure plays an important role in memory retrieval and self-related visuospatial imagery,46 both of which have been shown to be altered in psychosis.

The other main area implicated in the meta-analysis is the left insula, which is a brain area with broad influences on numerous parts of the cortex and limbic system, primarily the amygdala. The insula incorporates external sensory input with the limbic system.52 Many deficits reported in psychosis include insula functions, which may be associated with altered processing of emotions, visual and auditory perceptions and representations of the self.53 In addition, most studies have reported reduced functional activity of the insula in FEP patients relative to HC.28,54,55 We must note that insula hypoactivation lost statistical significance when we excluded the study by Schneider et al.,23 though this may well be an problem of statistical power given that this study had the largest sample size (n=105) in the meta-analysis.

In contrast, several studies reported increased activation in the insula during different cognitive tasks25,29,31,56 and with auditory verbal hallucinations.49 Although there is no clear explanation for these inconsistencies, we can speculate different reasons for either the increased or decreased activation in the insula. First, the results may depend on the clinical state of the patients at the time of the fMRI, such as their cognitive state, positive symptoms, and the duration of the illness. Many studies have used structural MRI to explore the longitudinal course of FEP finding progressive cortical changes after the onset of a FEP, most notably in anterior cingulate cortex and insula.57,58

There are few longitudinal studies of FEP using fMRI. In a systematic review of this issue,59 we showed that most studies reported a hypoactivation in the limbic system, hippocampus and striatum at baseline. At follow-up, almost all studies reported normalization of activation in these regions. Still, fMRI is not currently used in clinical practice as a predictor of treatment response. The primary explanation for this gap is the heterogeneity in the methodology, particularly in the use of different tasks and fMRI acquisition procedures.

The meta-analysis also showed hypoactivation in the striatum, although this result should be taken with more caution given that it failed to reach statistical significance in two subgroup analyses of the jackknife procedure. Once was when excluding the study by Schneider et al.,23 though as we noted earlier this may well be related to statistical power as this was the largest study in the meta-analysis. The other sub-analysis involved the exclusion of Keedy et al.,28 a smaller study with no apparent particularities other than a short duration of untreated illness (Table 1). We speculate that its relevance in the jackknife analysis is mostly due to chance.

Role of methodological differences in the comparability of results across studies

Both MR equipment hardware (magnet's strength, manufacturer, antenna, etc.)60,61 and software (acquisition sequence, processing and analysis pipeline, etc.)62–67 have impact in final results published. Unfortunately, the full list of parameters, thresholds, and critical values are not usually included in the methods section of published papers; thus, many of these parameters cannot be clearly considered and analyzed separately. This contributes a confounding effect when considering findings from FEP fMRI studies.

It must be noted that this review has some limitations. First, the meta-analysis was limited to studies with t values of activation peaks to provide the quantitative data. Second, we cannot reject the possibility that the medication effects may be confounded by factors such as the length and severity of psychosis, socioeconomic status, or neurocognitive variables. Third, another potential limitation is that many studies chose to include patients only when they were considered stable enough to undergo the imaging procedure and comply with the task requirements, and thus there may be a gap between the onset of the episode and the scan. Unfortunately, few studies reported these data accurately, which prevented a covariate analysis. Similarly, only some studies reported the actual medication doses, thus a meta-regression with chlorpromazine equivalents was not possible. Finally, the review and meta-analyses were limited to studies using cognitive tasks. Results may be different in studies using other tasks68,69. However, the study has several strengths. First, to our knowledge, this is the first meta-analytic study presenting comprehensive evidence to suggest that the frontal lobe might not be the most extensive altered region related to the pathophysiology of the illness at an early stage of psychosis. Second, the strict selection criteria for the meta-analysis resulted in very low heterogeneity. This study improves our understanding of the neurobiology of comparing the response to cognitive tasks in FEP and HC and provides a foundation that will hopefully lead to greater precision and tailoring of the treatment offered to patients.

Conclusions

Our meta-analytic results show that the left precuneus and insula primarily display aberrant activation in FEP that may be associated with salience attribution to external stimuli and related to the deficits in perception and regulation. Further studies with identical technical procedures in larger samples are warranted to obtain clear conclusions regarding differences in task-related brain activation in FEP patients and HC.

Authors’ contributions

Pau Soldevila-Matias: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Writing – Original draft preparation, Visualization. Anton Albajes-Eizagirre: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – Original draft preparation. Joaquim Radua: Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – Reviewing and Editing, Supervision. Gracián García-Martí: Writing – Original draft preparation. José M. Rubio: Supervision. Diana Tordesillas-Gutierrez: Writing – Original draft preparation. Inmaculada Fuentes-Dura: Writing – Original draft preparation. Aleix Solanes: Writing – Review and Editing. Lydia Fortea: Writing – Review and Editing. Dominic Oliver: Writing – Review and Editing. Julio Sanjuán: Conceptualization, Writing – Reviewing and Editing, Supervision.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by grants from the Conselleria de Educación (PROMETEO/2016/082) and from the Plan Nacional de I+D+i, the Instituto de Salud Carlos III-Subdirección General de Evaluación y Fomento de la Investigación and the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) (CP14/00041, FI16/00311, PI14/00292, PI17/00402, CPII19/00009 and PI19/00394). The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Appendix A
Supplementary data

The following are the supplementary data to this article:

References
[1]
S. Saha, D. Chant, J. McGrath.
A systematic review of mortality in schizophrenia: is the differential mortality gap worsening over time?.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, 64 (2007), pp. 1123-1131
[2]
P. Fusar-Poli, P.D. McGorry, J.M. Kane.
Improving outcomes of first-episode psychosis: an overview.
World Psychiatry, 16 (2017), pp. 251-265
[3]
N.C. Andreasen, S. Olsen.
Negative v positive schizophrenia. Definition and validation.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, 39 (1982), pp. 789-794
[4]
A. Casale, G.D. Kotzalidis, C. Rapinesi, S. Sorice, N. Girardi, S. Ferracuti, et al.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging correlates of first-episode psychoses during attentional and memory task performance.
Neuropsychobiology, 74 (2016), pp. 22-31
[5]
M. Aas, P. Dazzan, V. Mondelli, I. Melle, R.M. Murray, C.M. Pariante.
A systematic review of cognitive function in first-episode psychosis, including a discussion on childhood trauma, stress, and inflammation.
Front Psychiatry, (2014), pp. 4
[6]
P. Fusar-Poli, M.R. Broome.
Conceptual issues in psychiatric neuroimaging.
Curr Opin Psychiatry, 19 (2006), pp. 608-612
[7]
C. Arango.
First-episode psychosis research: time to move forward (by looking backwards).
Schizophr Bull, 41 (2015), pp. 1205-1206
[8]
P. Fusar-Poli, A. Placentino, F. Carletti, P. Landi, P. Allen, S. Surguladze, et al.
Functional atlas of emotional faces processing: a voxel-based meta-analysis of 105 functional magnetic resonance imaging studies.
J Psychiatry Neurosci, 6 (2009), pp. 418-432
[9]
T.E. Mwansisya, A. Hu, Y. Li, X. Chen, G. Wu, X. Huang, et al.
Task and resting-state fMRI studies in first-episode schizophrenia: a systematic review.
Schizophr Res, 189 (2017), pp. 1-9
[10]
N.C. Andreasen, D.S. O’Leary, T. Cizadlo, S. Arndt, K. Rezai, L.L. Ponto, et al.
Schizophrenia and cognitive dysmetria: a positron-emission tomography study of dysfunctional prefrontal-thalamic-cerebellar circuitry.
[11]
J. Radua, D. Mataix-Cols, M.L. Phillips, W. El-Hage, D.M. Kronhaus, N. Cardoner, et al.
A new meta-analytic method for neuroimaging studies that combines reported peak coordinates and statistical parametric maps.
[12]
D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D.G. Altman, The Prisma Group.AT Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
PLoS Med, 6 (2009), pp. e1000097
[13]
V.I. Müller, E.C. Cieslik, A.R. Laird, P.T. Fox, J. Radua, D. Mataix-Cols, et al.
Ten simple rules for neuroimaging meta-analysis.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 84 (2018), pp. 151-161
[14]
J. Radua, K. Rubia, E.J. Canales-Rodríguez, E. Pomarol-Clotet, P. Fusar-Poli, D. Mataix-Cols.
Anisotropic kernels for coordinate-based meta-analyses of neuroimaging studies.
Front Psychiatry, 10 (2014), pp. 5-13
[15]
A. Albajes-Eizagirre, J. Radua.
What do results from coordinate-based meta-analyses tell us?.
Neuroimage, 176 (2018), pp. 3-550
[16]
D.F. Braus, G. Ende, P. Hubrich-Ungureanu, F.A. Henn.
Cortical response to motor stimulation in neuroleptic-naive first episode schizophrenics.
Psychiatry Res – Neuroimaging, 98 (2000), pp. 145-154
[17]
D.F. Braus, W. Weber-Fahr, H. Tost, M. Ruf, F.A. Henn.
Sensory information processing in neuroleptic-naive first-episode schizophrenic patients.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, 8 (2002), pp. 696-701
[18]
A.M. Achim, M.C. Bertrand, H. Sutton, A. Montoya, Y. Czechowska, A.K. Malla, et al.
Selective abnormal modulation of hippocampal activity during memory formation in first-episode psychosis.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, 9 (2007), pp. 999-1014
[19]
R. Smieskova, P. Fusar-Poli, J. Aston, A. Simon, K. Bendfeldt, C. Lenz, et al.
Insular volume abnormalities associated with different transition probabilities to psychosis.
Psychol Med, 42 (2012), pp. 1613-1625
[20]
D. Bergé, S. Carmona, P. Salgado, M. Rovira, A. Bulbena, O. Vilarroya.
Limbic activity in antipsychotic naïve first-episode psychotic subjects during facial emotion discrimination.
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci, 264 (2014), pp. 271-283
[21]
H.H. Tseng, J.P. Roiser, G. Modinos, I. Falkenberg, C. Samson, P.K. McGuire, et al.
Corticolimbic dysfunction during facial and prosodic emotional recognition in first-episode psychosis patients and individuals at ultra-high risk.
NeuroImage Clin, 12 (2016), pp. 54-645
[22]
H.Y. Tan, W.C. Choo, C.S.L. Fones, M.W.L. Chee.
fMRI study of maintenance and manipulation processes within working memory in first-episode schizophrenia.
Am J Psychiatry, 10 (2005), pp. 58-1849
[23]
F. Schneider, U. Habel, M. Reske, T. Kellermann, T. Stöcker, N.J. Shah, et al.
Neural correlates of working memory dysfunction in first-episode schizophrenia patients: an fMRI multi-center study.
Schizophr Res, 89 (2007), pp. 198-210
[24]
N.A. Crossley, A. Mechelli, P. Fusar-Poli, P. Matthiasson, L.C. Johns, E. Bramon, et al.
Superior temporal lobe dysfunction and frontotemporal dysconnectivity in subjects at risk of psychosis and in first-episode psychosis.
Hum Brain Mapp, 30 (2009), pp. 37-4129
[25]
K. Boksman, J. Théberge, P. Williamson, D.J. Drost, A. Malla, M. Densmore, et al.
A 4.0-T fMRI study of brain connectivity during word fluency in first-episode schizophrenia.
Schizophr Res, 3 (2005), pp. 63-247
[26]
M. Bleich-Cohen, T. Hendler, M. Kotler, R.D. Strous.
Reduced language lateralization in first-episode schizophrenia: an fMRI index of functional asymmetry.
Psychiatry Res – Neuroimaging, 2 (2009), pp. 82-93
[27]
M. Reske, U. Habel, T. Kellermann, V. Backes, N.J. Shah, M. von Wilmsdorff, et al.
Differential brain activation during facial emotion discrimination in first-episode schizophrenia.
J Psychiatr Res, 6 (2009), pp. 9-592
[28]
S.K. Keedy, J.L. Reilly, J.R. Bishop, P.J. Weiden, J.A. Sweeney.
Impact of antipsychotic treatment on attention and motor learning systems in first-episode schizophrenia.
Schizophr Bull, 41 (2015), pp. 355-365
[29]
A. Guerrero-Pedraza, P.J. McKenna, J.J. Gomar, et al.
First-episode psychosis is characterized by failure of deactivation but not by hypo- or hyperfrontality.
Psychol Med, 1 (2012), pp. 73-84
[30]
P. Fusar-Poli, M.R. Broome, P. Matthiasson, S.C. Williams, M. Brammer, P.K. McGuire.
Effects of acute antipsychotic treatment on brain activation in first episode psychosis: an fMRI study.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol, 7 (2007), pp. 492-500
[31]
S. Benetti, A. Mechelli, M. Picchioni, M. Broome, S. Williams, P. McGuire.
Functional integration between the posterior hippocampus and prefrontal cortex is impaired in both first episode schizophrenia and the at risk mental state.
Brain A J Neurol, 132 (2009), pp. 36-2426
[32]
A. Fornito, J. Yoon, A. Zalesky, E.T. Bullmore, C.S. Carter.
General and specific functional connectivity disturbances in first-episode schizophrenia during cognitive control performance.
Biol Psychiatry, 1 (2011), pp. 64-72
[33]
L. Kambeitz-Ilankovic, K. Hennig-Fast, S. Benetti, et al.
Attentional modulation of source attribution in first-episode psychosis: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study.
Schizophr Bull, 5 (2013), pp. 36-1027
[34]
N.M.J. Van Veelen, M. Vink, N.F. Ramsey, M. van Buuren, J.M. Hoogendam, R.S. Kahn.
Prefrontal lobe dysfunction predicts treatment response in medication-naive first-episode schizophrenia.
Schizophr Res, 2 (2011), pp. 156-162
[35]
S. Benetti, W. Pettersson-Yeo, P. Allen, M. Catani, S. Williams, A. Barsaglini, et al.
Auditory verbal hallucinations and brain dysconnectivity in the perisylvian language network: a multimodal investigation.
Schizophr Bull, 1 (2015), pp. 192-200
[36]
R. Smieskova, P. Allen, A. Simon, K. Bendfeldt, J. Drewe, K. Gruber, et al.
Different duration of at-risk mental state associated with neurofunctional abnormalities. A multimodal imaging study.
Hum Brain Mapp, 10 (2012), pp. 94-2281
[37]
K. Bendfeldt, R. Smieskova, N. Koutsouleris, S. Klöppel, A. Schmidt, A. Walter, et al.
Classifying individuals at high-risk for psychosis based on functional brain activity during working memory processing.
NeuroImage Clin, 9 (2015), pp. 63-555
[38]
J.H. Yoon, D.V. Nguyen, L.M. McVay, P. Deramo, M.J. Minzenberg, J.D. Ragland, et al.
Automated classification of fMRI during cognitive control identifies more severely disorganized subjects with schizophrenia.
Schizophr Res, 3 (2012), pp. 28-33
[39]
T.A. Lesh, A.J. Westphal, T.A. Niendam, J.H. Yoon, M.J. Minzenberg, J.D. Ragland, et al.
Proactive and reactive cognitive control and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex dysfunction in first episode schizophrenia.
NeuroImage Clin, 2 (2013), pp. 590-599
[40]
T.T. Raij, T. Mäntylä, T. Kieseppä, J. Suvisaari.
Aberrant functioning of the putamen links delusions, antipsychotic drug dose, and compromised connectivity in first episode psychosis – preliminary fMRI findings.
Psychiatry Res – Neuroimaging, 233 (2015), pp. 201-211
[41]
E. Kraepelin.
Dementia praecox and paraphrenia.
J Nerv Ment Dis, 29 (1921), pp. 4-11
[42]
D.R. Weinberger, K.F. Berman, B.P. Illowsky.
Physiological dysfunction of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in schizophrenia: III. A new cohort and evidence for a monoaminergic mechanism.
[43]
M.J. Minzenberg, A.R. Laird, S. Thelen, C.S. Carter, D.C. Glahn.
Meta-analysis of 41 functional neuroimaging studies of executive function in schizophrenia.
Arch Gen Psychiatry, 66 (2009), pp. 811-822
[44]
T. Li, Q. Wang, J. Zhang, E.T. Rolls, W. Yang, L. Palaniyappan, et al.
Brain-wide analysis of functional connectivity in first-episode and chronic stages of schizophrenia.
Schizophr Bull, 2 (2017), pp. 436-448
[45]
R. Rosenthal, M.R. DiMatteo.
Meta-analysis: recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews.
Annu Rev Psychol, 52 (2001), pp. 59-82
[46]
A.E. Cavanna, M.R. Trimble.
The precuneus: a review of its functional anatomy and behavioural correlates.
Brain, 129 (2006), pp. 564-583
[47]
J.T. Baker, A.J. Holmes, G.A. Masters, B.T. Thomas Yeo, F. Krienen, R.L. Buckner, et al.
Disruption of cortical association networks in schizophrenia and psychotic bipolar disorder.
JAMA Psychiatry, 71 (2014), pp. 109-118
[48]
E. Rikandi, T. Mäntylä, M. Lindgren, T. Kieseppä, J. Suvisaari, T.T. Raij.
Connectivity of the precuneus-posterior cingulate cortex with the anterior cingulate cortex-medial prefrontal cortex differs consistently between control subjects and first-episode psychosis patients during a movie stimulus.
Schizophr Res, 199 (2018), pp. 235-242
[49]
P.K. Mallikarjun, P.A. Lalousis, T.F. Dunne, K. Heinze, R.L. Reiners, M.R. Broome, et al.
Aberrant salience network functional connectivity in auditory verbal hallucinations: a first episode psychosis sample.
Transl Psychiatry, 8 (2018), pp. 69
[50]
C. Zhou, M. Yu, X. Tang, W. Wang, X. Zhang, X. Zhang, et al.
Convergent and divergent altered patterns of default mode network in deficit and non-deficit schizophrenia.
Prog Neuro-Psychopharmacology Biol Psychiatry, 89 (2019), pp. 427-434
[51]
N.V. Kraguljac, D.M. White, J. Hadley, M.A. Reid, A.C. Lahti.
Hippocampal-parietal dysconnectivity and glutamate abnormalities in unmedicated patients with schizophrenia.
Hippocampus, 24 (2014), pp. 1524-1532
[52]
K.P. Wylie, J.R. Tregellas.
The role of the insula in schizophrenia.
Schizophr Res, 3 (2010), pp. 93-104
[53]
J. Radua, O.A. Van Den Heuvel, S. Surguladze, D. Mataix-Cols.
Meta-analytical comparison of voxel-based morphometry studies in obsessive-compulsive disorder vs other anxiety disorders.
[54]
A. Schmidt, L. Palaniyappan, R. Smieskova, A. Simon, A. Riecher-Rössler, U.E. Lang, et al.
Dysfunctional insular connectivity during reward prediction in patients with first-episode psychosis.
J Psychiatry Neurosci, 6 (2016), pp. 367-376
[55]
Y. Wang, W. Tang, X. Fan, J. Zhang, D. Geng, K. Jiang, et al.
Resting-state functional connectivity changes within the default mode network and the salience network after antipsychotic treatment in early-phase schizophrenia.
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 13 (2017), pp. 397-406
[56]
R. Lencer, S.K. Keedy, J.L. Reilly, B.E. McDonough, M.S.H. Harris, A. Sprenger, et al.
Altered transfer of visual motion information to parietal association cortex in untreated first-episode psychosis: implications for pursuit eye tracking.
Psychiatry Res – Neuroimaging, 1 (2011), pp. 30-38
[57]
P. Fusar-Poli, J. Radua, P. McGuire, S. Borgwardt.
Neuroanatomical maps of psychosis onset: voxel-wise meta-analysis of antipsychotic-naive vbm studies.
Schizophr Bull, 38 (2012), pp. 1297-1307
[58]
J. Radua, S. Borgwardt, A. Crescini, D. Mataix-Cols, A. Mayer-Lindenberg, P.K. McGuire, et al.
Multimodal meta-analysis of structural and functional brain changes in first episode psychosis and the effects of antipsychotic medication.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 36 (2012),
[59]
C. González-Vivas, P. Soldevila-Matías, O. Sparano, G. García-Martí, L. Martí-Bonmatí, B. Crespo-Farroco, et al.
Longitudinal studies of functional magnetic resonance imaging in first-episode psychosis: a systematic review.
Eur Psychiatry, 5 (2019), pp. 60-69
[60]
T. Meindl, C. Born, S. Britsch, M. Reiser, S. Schoenberg, B.O.L.D. Functional.
MRI: comparison of different field strengths in a motor task.
Eur Radiol, 6 (2008), pp. 13-1102
[61]
G. Krüger, A. Kastrup, G.H. Glover.
Neuroimaging at 1.5T and 3.0T: comparison of oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging.
Magn Reson Med, 45 (2001), pp. 595-604
[62]
K.J. Friston, A.P. Holmes, J.-B. Poline, P.J. Grasby, S.C. Williams, R.S. Frackowiak, et al.
Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited.
Neuroimage, 2 (1995), pp. 45-53
[63]
R. Goebel, F. Esposito, E. Formisano.
Analysis of FIAC data with BrainVoyager QX: from single-subject to cortically aligned group GLM analysis and self-organizing group ICA.
Hum Brain Mapp, 27 (2006), pp. 392-401
[64]
M. Jenkinson, C.F. Beckmann, T.E.J. Behrens, M.W. Woolrich, S.M. Smith.
FSL.
Neuroimage, 62 (2012), pp. 782-790
[65]
A.M. Tahmasebi, P. Abolmaesumi, Z.Z. Zheng, K.G. Munhall, I.S. Johnsrude.
Reducing inter-subject anatomical variation: effect of normalization method on sensitivity of functional magnetic resonance imaging data analysis in auditory cortex and the superior temporal region.
Neuroimage, 47 (2009), pp. 31-1522
[66]
E.K. Molloy, M.E. Meyerand, R.M. Birn.
The influence of spatial resolution and smoothing on the detectability of resting-state and task fMRI.
Neuroimage, 86 (2014), pp. 30-221
[67]
Z. Chen, V. Calhoun.
Effect of spatial smoothing on task fMRI ICA and functional connectivity.
Front Neurosci, 2 (2018), pp. 12-15
[68]
V. Villalta-Gil, I. Meléndez-Pérez, T. Russell, S. Surguladze, J. Radua, M. Fusté, et al.
Functional similarity of facial emotion processing between people with a first episode of psychosis and healthy subjects.
Schizophr Res., 149 (2013), pp. 35-41
[69]
J. Radua, A. Schmidt, S. Borgwardt, A. Heinz, F. Schlagenhauf, P. McGuire, et al.
Ventral Striatal Activation During Reward Processing in Psychosis: A Neurofunctional Meta-Analysis.
JAMA Psychiatry., 72 (2015), pp. 1243-1251

Dual first authorship (PSM and AAE contributed equally to this article).

Copyright © 2020. SEP y SEPB
Opciones de artículo
Herramientas
Material suplementario
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos