Search

Background: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and anxiety disorders often co-occur, with poorer treatment response and long-term outcomes. However, little is known about the shared and distinct neural mechanisms of comorbid MDD and anxiety (MDD+Anx). This study examined how MDD and MDD+Anx differentially impact cognitive control., Methods: Eighteen MDD, 29 MDD+Anx, and 54 healthy controls (HC) completed the Parametric Go/No-Go (PGNG) during fMRI, including Target, Commission, and Rejection trials., Results: MDD+Anx had more activation in the anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, and caudate during Rejections, and inferior parietal lobule during correct Targets than MDD and HC. During Rejections HC had greater activation in a number of cognitive control regions compared to MDD; in the posterior cingulate compared to MDD+Anx; and in the fusiform gyrus compared to all MDD. During Commissions HC had greater activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus than all MDD. MDD had more activation in the mid-cingulate, inferior parietal lobule, and superior temporal gyrus than MDD+Anx during Commissions., Conclusions: Despite similar performance, MDD and MDD+Anx showed distinct differences in neural mechanisms of cognitive control in relation to each other, as well as some shared differences in relation to HC. The results were consistent with our hypothesis of hypervigilance in MDD+Anx within the cognitive control network, but inconsistent with our hypothesis that there would be greater engagement of salience and emotion network regions. Comorbidity of depression and anxiety may cause increased heterogeneity in study samples, requiring further specificity in detection and measurement of intermediate phenotypes and treatment Targets., Competing Interests: SAL reports consulting work with Easter Seals, Inc. that was not related to the study. The authors declare no other real or potential conflicts of interest., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder share symptoms that may reflect core mood disorder features. This has led to the pursuit of intermediate phenotypes and a dimensional approach to understand neurobiological disruptions in mood disorders. Executive dysfunction, including cognitive control, may represent a promising intermediate phenotype across major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder. This study examined dimensions of cognitive control in women with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in comparison to healthy control subjects using two separate, consecutive experiments. For Experiment 1, participants completed a behavioural cognitive control task (healthy controls = 150, major depressive disorder = 260, bipolar disorder = 202; age range 17-84 years). A sample of those participants (healthy controls = 17, major depressive disorder = 19, and bipolar disorder = 16) completed a similar cognitive control task in an event-related design functional magnetic resonance imaging protocol for Experiment 2. Results for Experiment 1 showed greater impairments on the cognitive control task in patients with mood disorders relative to healthy controls (P < 0.001), with more of those in the mood disorder group falling into the 'impaired' range when using clinical cut-offs (<5th percentile). Experiment 2 revealed only a few areas of shared activation differences in mood disorder greater than healthy controls. Activation analyses using performance as a regressor, irrespective of diagnosis, revealed within and extra-network areas that were more active in poor performers. In summary, performance and activation during cognitive control tasks may represent an intermediate phenotype for mood disorders. However, cognitive control dysfunction is not uniform across women with mood disorders, and activation is linked to performance more so than disease. These findings support subtype and dimensional approaches to understanding risk and expression of mood disorders and are a promising area of inquiry, in line with the Research Domain Criteria initiative of NIMH., (© The Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)