Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-5xszh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T06:22:55.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Manifest disease and motor cortex reactivity in twins discordant for schizophrenia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Martin Schürmann*
Affiliation:
Brain Research Unit, Low Temperature Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Juha Järveläinen
Affiliation:
Brain Research Unit, Low Temperature Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Sari Avikainen
Affiliation:
Brain Research Unit, Low Temperature Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Tyrone D. Cannon
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology, Psychiatry and Human Genetics, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA
Jouko Lönnqvist
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health and Alcohol Research, National Public Health Institute of Finland
Matti Huttunen
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health and Alcohol Research, National Public Health Institute of Finland
Hari Riitta
Affiliation:
Brain Research Unit, Low Temperature Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
*
Dr Martin Schürmann, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK. Email: martin.schuermann@nottingham.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Schizophrenia is often associated with difficulties in distinguishing between actions of self and of others. This could reflect dysfunction of the mirror neuron system which directly matches observed and executed actions. We studied 11 people with schizophrenia and their co-twins without manifest disease, using stimulus-induced changes in the magnetoencephalographic $20 Hz rhythm as an index of activation in the motor cortex part of the mirror neuron system. During action observation and execution, motor cortex reaction was weaker in those with schizophrenia than in their co-twins, suggesting a disease-related dysfunction of motor cognition.

Type
Short Report
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2007 

During psychotic episodes people with schizophrenia often have difficulties with awareness of their own actions and recognition of other individuals’ actions, evident from beliefs of alien control (Reference Daprati, Franck and GeorgieffDaprati et al, 1997). Such difficulties, like echopraxia (see e.g. Reference Chapman and McGhieChapman & McGhie, 1964) and activity delusions (patients feel that they influence others to act; Reference Stanghellini and Rossi MontiStanghellini & Rossi Monti, 1993), could be related to dysfunction of the mirror neuron system, which matches executed and observed motor actions (Reference Rizzolatti, Fadiga and MatelliRizzolatti et al, 1996). The core system comprises the inferior frontal gyrus (Broca's region in the left hemisphere), the inferior parietal lobule and the primary motor cortex.

Here we tested whether people with schizophrenia would show abnormalities in the motor cortex part of their mirror neuron system during observation and execution of finger movements. Earlier studies have indicated abnormal motor cortex function in patients with schizophrenia compared with healthy participants (reviewed by Reference Spence and RobbinsSpence, 2003). We applied a well-established method to monitor motor cortex ∼20 Hz magnetoencephalographic (MEG) activity (Reference Hari, Forss and AvikainenHari et al, 1998). In response to electrical median nerve stimuli, this ∼20 Hz rhythm is first transiently and bilaterally suppressed, and then 200–400 ms later is strongly enhanced (Fig. 1a), probably reflecting cortical inhibition (Reference Salmelin and HariSalmelin & Hari, 1994; Reference Chen, Corwell and HallettChen et al, 1999). Consequently, the size of the ‘rebound’ reflects the functional state of the primary motor cortex; for example the rebound is abolished when the person manipulates an object (Reference Hari, Forss and AvikainenHari et al, 1998).

Fig. 1 (a) The level of the ∼20 Hz rhythm recorded from the left motor cortex (see inset) in a representative participant after right median nerve stimulation (0 ms). In the ‘rest’ condition the ∼20 Hz rhythm is blocked for about 400 ms after which it shows a ‘rebound’ enhancement as a signature of motor cortex stabilisation. In the ‘action’ condition (Act) the motor cortex is active during the participant's own finger movements and no rebound is observed. In the ‘observation’ condition (Obs) the rebound is of lower amplitude than during rest, indicating partial activation of the motor cortex during action observation. (b) (c) The ∼20 Hz reactivity in all participants, quantified as the difference between rest and observation and displayed as a function of the difference between rest and action. In accordance with earlier studies on healthy individuals, nearly all data points are to the right of the diagonal (dashed line), meaning that the suppression of the ∼20 Hz rebound is less marked in the observation than the action condition. In most cases (see text for statistics), values for the twin with manifest disease (•) are lower (on both axes) than for the non-affected twin (○, data for twin pairs connected with lines), indicating lower motor cortex reactivity during both action observation and action execution.

We compared motor cortex reactivity within schizophrenia-discordant twin pairs, thereby controlling for a portion of the genetic influences on brain physiology. Some of the non-affected co-twins resembled their twin in possessing features of schizotypal personality, which further increased the suitability of this comparison for pinpointing brain abnormalities related to manifest schizophrenia.

METHOD

Participants were derived from a randomly selected subset of 335 schizophrenia-discordant twin pairs, identified (for another study) in a cohort of all 9562 pairs of same-sex twins born in Finland between 1940 and 1957 (Reference Cannon, Huttunen and LönnqvistCannon et al, 2000). The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM–III–R Axis I Disorders (patient or non-patient edition; Reference Spitzer, Williams and GibbonSpitzer et al, 1989) served for verification of the diagnoses in all participants. Interviewers were masked to zygosity and diagnostic status. A diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, affective type in a twin with manifest disease or a psychotic disorder diagnosis in a non-affected twin led to exclusion of that twin pair (Reference Cannon, Huttunen and LönnqvistCannon et al, 2000). Eleven twin pairs (aged 49–64 years, mean age 54.4 years, s.d.=4.8, five monozygotic and six dizygotic) participated in the study after informed consent and ethics committee approval. All the participants with manifest disease were out-patients in stable clinical condition (further details in a data supplement to the online version of this report). For all pairs, zygosity was determined by DNA analysis (for details see Reference Cannon, Huttunen and LönnqvistCannon et al, 2000).

Neuromagnetic data were acquired during three experimental conditions: (a) rest – the participants rested in a relaxed state; (b) observation – the participants observed the experimenter manipulate a small object with her right-hand fingers; (c) action – the participants manipulated the small object with their right-hand fingers without seeing their own hand.

The left and right median nerves were stimulated alternately at the wrists (0.2 ms constant current pulses at intensities exceeding the motor threshold), once every 1.5 s. Signals from 204 planar gradiometers of a helmet-shaped whole-scalp neuromagnetometer (Vectorview, Neuromag, Helsinki, Finland) were analysed. Stimulus-related changes in the level of the ∼20 Hz rhythm were quantified by first filtering signals through 14–30 Hz, then rectifying them and finally averaging them time-locked to the median nerve stimuli (approximately 100 signals averaged per condition). The strength of the rebound in each condition was then quantified (from the MEG channel with the strongest rebound suppression during action observation) as the mean level from 300 ms to 1300 ms after stimuli (Reference Salmelin and HariSalmelin & Hari, 1994).

RESULTS

Figure 1a shows the ∼20 Hz motor cortex level for one participant. The rebound, peaking at 700 ms, was abolished during object manipulation and significantly suppressed during observation, as shown previously (Schnitzler et al, 1997; Reference Hari, Forss and AvikainenHari et al, 1998). Figure 1b and 1c illustrate the ∼20 Hz reactivity in all twin pairs. For both hemispheres and for both observation and action conditions, the twins with schizophrenia showed weaker reactivity of the ∼20 Hz rhythm than their non-affected co-twins (binomial test for n=11 pairs: rest–action P=0.033 and rest–observation NS in left hemisphere; rest–action P=0.006 and rest–observation P=0.006 in right hemisphere).

The rest levels of the ∼20 Hz rhythm did not differ between affected and non-affected co-twins, nor was there any statistically significant difference between the groups in the strengths of cortical responses peaking in the primary somatosensory cortex 20 ms and 35 ms after median nerve stimuli (t-test, P≥0.2). The ∼20 Hz reactivity and the dosages of antipsychotic medication were not correlated (Pearson's r=0.43, P=0.19) (further details in a data supplement to the online version of this report).

DISCUSSION

The ∼20 Hz motor cortex rhythm in the twins with schizophrenia was systematically less reactive than in their non-affected co-twins, both during action observation and execution, with no sign of an additional mirror neuron system abnormality. Since the observed effects were not correlated with medication, we attribute them to the disease itself. The similar somatosensory cortical responses and the comparable resting levels of the rhythmic activity in non-affected and affected participants render implausible any general dysfunctioning of cortical responsiveness in the patient group. The weakened ∼20 Hz reactivity, specific to clinically manifest disease in the affected twins, could be related to a deficit in motor cognition affecting both the command and the experience of action, both important for delusions of control (Reference FrithFrith, 2005). Further studies should test more extensively the functionality of motor and sensory mirroring in people with schizophrenia, focusing on subgroups displaying special abnormalities in the experience of action.

Acknowledgements

Supported by the Academy of Finland (National Centers of Excellence Programme 2006–2011), Sigrid Jusélius Foundation, and the National Institute of Mental Health, USA (MH52857). We thank Ulla Mustonen for help in recruiting the participants.

Footnotes

Declaration of interest

None. Funding detailed in Acknowledgements.

Declaration of interest None. Funding detailed in Acknowledgements.

References

Cannon, T. D., Huttunen, M. O., Lönnqvist, J., et al (2000) The inheritance of neuropsychological dysfunction in twins discordant for schizophrenia. American Journal of Human Genetics, 67, 369382.Google Scholar
Chapman, J. & McGhie, A. (1964) Echopraxia in schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 110, 365374.Google Scholar
Chen, R., Corwell, B. & Hallett, M. (1999) Modulation of motor cortex excitability by median nerve and digit stimulation. Experimental Brain Research, 129, 7786.Google Scholar
Daprati, E., Franck, N., Georgieff, N., et al (1997) Looking for the agent: an investigation into consciousness of action and self-consciousness in schizophrenic patients. Cognition, 65, 7186.Google Scholar
Frith, C. (2005) The self in action: lessons from delusions of control. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 752770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hari, R., Forss, N., Avikainen, S., et al (1998) Activation of human primary motor cortex during action observation: a neuromagnetic study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 95, 1506115065.Google Scholar
Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Matelli, M., et al (1996) Localization of grasp representations in humans by PET: 1. Observation versus execution. Experimental Brain Research, 111, 246252.Google Scholar
Salmelin, R. & Hari, R. (1994) Characterization of spontaneous MEG rhythms in healthy adults. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 91, 237248.Google Scholar
Spence, S. A. (2003) Cognitive neurobiology of volition and agency in schizophrenia. In Disorders of Brain and Mind 2 (ed. Robbins, T. W.), pp. 223242. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Gibbon, M., et al (1989) Instruction Manual for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R SCID. Biometrics Research.Google Scholar
Stanghellini, G. & Rossi Monti, M. (1993) Influencing and being influenced: the other side of ‘bizarre delusions'. 2. Clinical investigation. Psychopathology, 26, 165169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1 (a) The level of the ∼20 Hz rhythm recorded from the left motor cortex (see inset) in a representative participant after right median nerve stimulation (0 ms). In the ‘rest’ condition the ∼20 Hz rhythm is blocked for about 400 ms after which it shows a ‘rebound’ enhancement as a signature of motor cortex stabilisation. In the ‘action’ condition (Act) the motor cortex is active during the participant's own finger movements and no rebound is observed. In the ‘observation’ condition (Obs) the rebound is of lower amplitude than during rest, indicating partial activation of the motor cortex during action observation. (b) (c) The ∼20 Hz reactivity in all participants, quantified as the difference between rest and observation and displayed as a function of the difference between rest and action. In accordance with earlier studies on healthy individuals, nearly all data points are to the right of the diagonal (dashed line), meaning that the suppression of the ∼20 Hz rebound is less marked in the observation than the action condition. In most cases (see text for statistics), values for the twin with manifest disease (•) are lower (on both axes) than for the non-affected twin (○, data for twin pairs connected with lines), indicating lower motor cortex reactivity during both action observation and action execution.

Supplementary material: PDF

Schürmann et al. supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Download Schürmann et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 23.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Schürmann et al. supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Download Schürmann et al. supplementary material(File)
File 574 Bytes
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.