Date post: | 08-Nov-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jose-bryan-gonzalez |
View: | 259 times |
Download: | 6 times |
Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Neuropsychologia
jo u rn al hom epa ge : www.elsev ier .com/ loca
The ne citHuntin
Philippe f,g , Clarisse eriPhilippe a Dpartement b Centre Mmoc Laboratoire dd URA CEA-CNRS 2210, Orsay, Francee CEA Service hospitalier Frdric Joliot, DRM, Orsay, Francef Sint Maartenskliniek Research, Development and Education, Nimgue, Hollandeg Radboud University Nijmegen, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nimgue, Hollandeh Dpartement de Gntique, CHU Angers, Francei INSERM U955, Equipe 1, Neuropsychologie Interventionnelle, IMRB, Crteil, Francej Dpartement k Universit Pal Service de Neum Dpartement
a r t i c l
Article history:Received 17 SeReceived in reAccepted 20 MAvailable onlin
Keywords:Huntingtons dScript knowledPETHypometaboli
1. Introdu
In cognorganized sresentationsuch as Goare similar tion about tinstrument
Correspongie, Centre HoTel.: +33 0 2 4
E-mail add
0028-3932/$ doi:10.1016/j.dEtudes Cognitives, ENS, Paris, Franceris-Est XII, Facult de Mdecine, Crteil, Francerologie, CHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Crteil, France
de Neurosciences, CHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Crteil, France
e i n f o
ptember 2010vised form 7 April 2011ay 2011e 30 May 2011
iseasege
sm
a b s t r a c t
Introduction: Previous neuropsychological investigations have suggested that both the prefrontal cortexand the basal ganglia are involved in the management of script event knowledge required in planningbehavior.Methods: This study was designated to map, the correlations between resting-state brain glucose utiliza-tion as measured by FDG-PET (positron emission tomography) and scores obtained by means of a seriesof script generation and script sorting tasks in 8 patients with early Huntingtons disease.Results: These patients exhibited a selectively greater impairment for the organizational aspects of scriptscompared to the semantic aspects of scripts. We showed signicant negative correlations between thenumber of sequencing, boundary, perseverative and intrusion errors and the metabolism of severalcortical regions, not only including frontal, but also posterior regions.Conclusion: Our ndings suggest that, within the fronto-striatal system, the cortical frontal regions aremore crucial in script retrieval and script sequencing than the basal ganglia.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
ction
itive psychology, scripts are dened as a class oftructures stored as knowledge networks for the rep-
of frequent activities undertaken by almost everyoneing to a restaurant (Schank & Abelson, 1977). They
in structure to lexical knowledge, and provide informa-ypical actors and their role within the scripts, particulars and objects important for the actions in scripts, typical
ding author at: Unit de Neuropsychologie, Dpartement de Neurolo-spitalier Universitaire, 4 rue Larrey, 49033 Angers Cdex 09, France.1 35 55 46; fax: +33 0 2 41 35 35 94.ress: [email protected] (P. Allain).
locations in which scripts are performed, and typical sequences ofactions.
Over the last 25 years the frontal lobes have been consis-tently shown to play a major role in script events processing. Thisinvolvement of frontal regions was reected in several types ofexperimental tasks: script generation tasks (the subjects are askedto verbally generate, in the correct temporal order, the sequencesof actions corresponding to scripts), script sorting tasks (the sub-jects are asked to select and cluster together, from a larger set,actions belonging to the same script) and/or script sequencing tasks(the subjects are asked to rearrange script actions in the correcttemporal order).
So, in several studies script generation tasks (Godbout & Doyon,1995; Fortin, Godbout, & Braun, 2003; Godbout, Cloutier, Bouchard,Braun, & Gagnon, 2004; Sirigu et al., 1995; Zanini, 2008) have
see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.neuropsychologia.2011.05.015ural substrates of script knowledge degtons disease
Allaina,b,c, , Vronique Gaurad,e , Luciano FasottiSherer-Gagoua , Dominique Bonneauh , Anne-CathRemyd,e,k,m, Didier Le Gall a,b,c, Christophe Vernya
de Neurologie, CHU Angers, Franceire de Ressources et de Recherche, CHU Angers, Francee Psychologie (UPRES EA 2646), Universit dAngers, Francete /neuropsychologia
s as revealed by a PET study in
Valrie Chauvira,b , Adriana Prundeana ,ne Bachoud-Levi i,j,k,l , Frdric Dubasa,b ,
2674 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
been associated with severe frontal pathology due to focal lesions(sequencing errors and/or violation errors and/or perseverations).Similar ndings were reported by Godbout and Bouchard (1999),but only in a backward script generation task. However, nor-mal sequenwith lesion& Shallice, but withouAgar, & Burstudies excpatients weof relevant/formances m(organizatioedge (gener
Script sotrasting ressorting perpatients wisistently shsingle-caseVorano, & 1996; Zallaonly for novever, opposgroup studycase study studies, we Gall, Etcharwell-localizand withouof executiowith frontahealthy conrejected thexhibited aanalysis revwere consisregion (Brorolandic regregion. Theregion (BA ated with inet al., 2001)conrmed tsequencingevant actioresults foundue to the frontal lobein action selow performproposals rnot examin
Neuroimtion in heaInvestigatinmagnetic rfound activfrontal gyru(BA 22). Knthese ndinalso Wood,and Kruegetions betweIn a positro
Sadato, Flitman, and Wild (1996) found that when healthy subjectswere asked to make a judgment about the correct temporal orderof script actions, activations were seen in the right frontal lobe (BA8), the left temporal gyrus (BA 22) and the middle temporal gyrus
ally (ith th
eral procanglnizets wits wintaly seqientsso Zthe r
nonte scrwation.ed ofantlwardoduchan , wepressantlere ctioer, ttoget
pat pativel tents ed bl andifferealamk, 19
havmplegenducethat en reGodb
se efron
scripn ananglaborae & Bly dis) wilhe Suions ich lingn famanglcing performance has also been reported in patientss mainly involving the frontal lobe (Zanini, Rumiati,2002) and in TBI patients with dysexecutive disorderst focal lesions in frontal regions (Cazalis, Azouvi, Sirigu,nod, 2001). It should be noted however, that in all theseept two (Chevignard et al., 2000; Godbout et al., 2004),re as accurate as healthy controls in terms of the numbercentral actions evoked. This suggests that patients per-ost likely reveal a deterioration of the script sequencen) rather than an inability to access intact script knowl-ation).rting and/or sequencing tasks have also yielded con-ults. Both impaired (Sirigu et al., 1996) and normalformances (Sirigu et al., 1998) have been observed inth frontal lesions. Sequencing tasks were more con-own to be sensitive to frontal lobe lesions in both
studies (Humphreys & Forde, 1998; Rumiati, Zanini,Shallice, 2001) and group studies (Sirigu et al., 1995,
et al., 1998; Zanini et al., 2002), although in some casesel scripts (Swain, Polkey, Bullock, & Morris, 1998). How-ite ndings were also reported in the above-mentioned
with TBI patients (Cazalis et al., 2001) and in the single-(TBI patient JK) of Schwartz et al. (1995). In our ownalso found evidence for some of these ndings (Allain, Lery-Bouyx, Aubin, & Emile, 1999). We asked patients withed frontal lobe damage to sort script actions given witht irrelevant actions, according to their putative ordern. In fact, we found a dual dissociation. Some patientsl lesions made signicantly more sorting errors thantrols and patients with posterior brain damage, but
e irrelevant actions. Other frontally lesioned patients completely reversed pattern of performances. Lesionealed that three out of ve left lateral frontal regionstently related to sequencing scores: the left prefrontaldmanns area [BA] 8, 9 and 46), the left premotor andion (BA 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6), and the left paraventricular
left paraventricular region and the left posterior orbital11, 12, 13 and 47) were found to be strongly associ-trusion errors. Later, in a second investigation (Allain, using several script sorting and sequencing tasks, wehe role of the left frontal regions in script information
and the involvement of the left orbital region in irrel-n processing. Our ndings suggest that the equivocald in the above-mentioned studies might be partially
neuroanatomical localization of the lesions within the. So, a left lateral lesion would entail low performancesquencing, while a left latero-orbital lesion would lead toances in aberrant action identication. However, our
emain highly speculative, because some of them wereed by subsequent post-hoc analyses.aging techniques have also shown frontal lobe activa-lthy subjects during the performance of script tasks.g script sequencing in normal subjects with functionalesonance imaging, Crozier et al. (1999) for example,ations predominantly in bilateral middle and medials areas (BA 8, 6, 44, 45) and superior temporal regionsutson, Wood, and Grafman (2004) replicated most ofgs using a very similar script-ordering task (BA 8, 6; see
Knutson, & Grafman, 2005). Kuchinke, van der Meer,r (2009) found that the processing of sequential rela-en two script events activated the left frontal gyrus.n emission tomography (PET) study, Partiot, Grafman,
bilatertent w2001).
Seveventsbasal gto orgapatienpatienthe fro(mainlPD pat(see algated askinggeneratine, fogeneradeprivsignicthe foralso prsions tstudiesnondesignicthey wscript aHowevTaken seen infrontalto unrain patiexplainparallefrom dand th& Stricgangliafor exatheir dand redition has be2007; 2006).
Thethe prwithinNormabasal gther elShallicitative(scriptFirst, toperatand whSchedutions ibasal gBA 21). The ndings by Partiot et al. (1996) are inconsis-e results of our own clinical studies (Allain et al., 1999,
neuropsychological studies have shown that scriptessing was also impaired in patients with lesions in theia. Zalla et al. (1998), for instance, studied the ability
script event sequences given with irrelevant actions inth mild to severe degrees of Parkinsons disease (PD),th frontal lobe lesions and healthy controls. Whereasly lesioned patients manifested severe impairmentsuencing errors and poor processing of distractors), the
exhibited similarly signicant but less severe decitsalla et al., 2000). Godbout and Doyon (2000) investi-ole of the basal ganglia in the generation of scriptsdemented and nondepressed PD patients to verballyript actions under two experimental conditions; rou-rd script generation and nonroutine, backward script
PD patients generated scripts that were signicantly contextual elements in the forward condition and madey more sequencing and perseverative errors in both
and backward conditions than healthy subjects. Theyed a signicantly higher number of irrelevant intru-controls in both conditions. In accordance with these
showed (Allain et al., 2004) that nondemented anded patients with Huntington disease (HD) committedy more chronological errors than normal controls whenasked to re-establish the sequential order of series ofns in the presence or in the absence of irrelevant actions.heir ability to eliminate aberrant actions was intact.her, these results suggest that script processing decitsients with basal ganglia lesions resemble those seen inents. A neuroanatomical explanation has been proposedhe frontal prole of neuropsychological impairmentswith lesions in the basal ganglia. This prole could bey strong anatomical evidence for the existence of ve, at least partially, segregated circuits, which projectnt areas of the frontal cortex through the basal gangliaus, and back to the frontal lobes (Alexander, Delong,86). Consequently, patients with lesions in the basale particular difculties performing frontal tasks (seee Lawrence et al., 1996; Watkins et al., 2000) becauseerative brain disorders affect fronto-striatal systems
frontal activity. Normal ageing, which is also a con-reduces frontal lobe activity (Tisserand & Jolles, 2003),ported to impair script events processing (Allain et al.,out, Doucet, & Fiola, 2000; Helmes, Bush, Pike, & Drake,
ndings also suggest that both the basal ganglia andtal cortex are involved in the organization of eventsts. This idea is consistent with the theory developed byd Shallice (1980) to explain the respective roles of theia and the prefrontal cortex in action planning (for fur-tions, see Cooper & Shallice, 2000; Shallice, 1988, 2002;urgess, 1998). These authors have proposed two qual-tinct processes to determine which particular schemal be activated to establish an appropriate plan of action.pervisory Attentional System (SAS), which modulateswhen situations are non-routine (novel or unusual)depend upon the prefrontal cortex. Second, Contention
(CS), an automatic process which modulates opera-iliar situations, depending upon the integrity of the
ia. The model suggests that the frontal lobes are not
P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684 2675
involved in the storage of script information, which is representedin the retro-rolandic cortices that store semantic representations,but that they have a role in script information manipulation condi-tions making extensive demands on executive functions. In Normanand Shalliceinvolve exescript-memtemporal osubjects hawritten on as referenccontinuallyments of thabstract scrfrontal patiimpairmentation in wothe Normancic sequenbut overall the other hglia would (schemas) sufcient to(1982), damformance owould causing irreleva
In the ligand subcorting impairmlesions, parcessing. Hounderlying cerning thepartially inccortex in scseems relatsuch as the processing have been rin script ma
In orderease (HD) regions whoknowledge characterizit was thouearly stagesis increasinareas, are aLandwehrmpatients havalready shoscript tasksrole of sub-processing.
To this emapping (Sglucose utileration andof an activatasks durinstudy frontotion of scripsub-cortica
Table 1Mean UHDRS executive scores (with standard deviations in parentheses) for HDpatients.
HD patients Normal
intery PRVl-digiect in
s ares ares are
difds inus stur ine of ifferets (i.euch a20044; P
mildn, 20uanlinkan, agrateal/syes dihe prl andpothing t
scri
rials
jects
atient t patierimenrs (SD
mean wereyearsHDRSal capg mil
.6). Thtients.5 (SDcognitneurotive fuer, 19ntion 973).
all th.ench version of the Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale) was also administered. Patients scored a mean of 10.9 (SD = 3.9). Seven
scored above the cut-off score of 15 for mild depression and one patient5. HD patients also underwent a clinical assessment interview conducted byatrist, showing that none of them showed signs of signicant depression.tients were receiving small doses of medication at the time of testing in
reduce motor symptoms (Cyammazine, Tiapride).
ontrol subjectsthe script sorting tasks, the patient group was compared with a group ofal control volunteers (NC). These subjects were 7 females and 5 maless terms, script sequencing tasks are expected to heavilycutive functions. First, they require subjects to retrieveory representations and to mentally simulate the wholerganization of actions in working memory. Second,ve to create a correspondence between each actiona card and the internal abstract representations usedes. Third, during the sequencing stage, subjects must
shift attention back and forth from the individual ele-e scripts to the general display dictated by the internalipt representations. Hence, the errors committed byents in script sequencing tasks might reect executivets such as a difculty in maintaining abstract represen-rking memory or a diminished shifting ability. Further,
and Shallice model would not predict an action spe-cing decit in script tasks following frontal lobe lesions,sequencing decits in task recruiting sequencing. Onand, the same model puts forward that the basal gan-be involved in situations where thought operations
automatically activated by contention scheduling are carry out the task satisfactorily. According to Shalliceage to the basal ganglia should impair the patients per-n a routine task. More specically, basal ganglia damagee difculties in maintaining the right script and inhibit-nt ones (Godbout & Doyon, 2000).ht of the Norman and Shallice model, both prefrontalical regions seem involved in the script events process-ents observed in patients with frontal or basal ganglia
ticularly in sequencing errors and poor distractor pro-wever, the precise localization of the neural networksthese impairments remains unclear. First, ndings con-
role of frontal regions in script event processing areonsistent. In addition, while the role of the prefrontalript generation, script sequencing and script sorting
ively well established, the role of sub-cortical structuresstriatum and the way they impact on script informationis still poorly understood. Finally, no neuroimaging dataeported yet, showing that the basal ganglia play a rolenagement.
to clarify these questions, we used Huntington dis-as a model to identify the cortical and sub-corticalse dysfunction is responsible for impairments in scriptprocessing. It is well known that, pathologically, HD ised by neuronal loss and cerebral atrophy. Until recently,ght that the striatum was selectively targeted in the
of the disease (Aylward et al., 2000). However, thereg evidence that cortical areas, in particular frontallso affected (Henley et al., 2008; Kassubek, Gaus, &eyer, 2004; Rosas et al., 2002), suggesting that early HDe cortical and sub-cortical atrophy. In addition, we havewn (Allain et al., 2004) that HD patients are impaired on. As a result, HD represents a reliable model to study thecortical and cortical areas involved in script information
nd, we have used FDG-PET with statistical parametricPM) to map the correlation between resting state brainization and the scores obtained in several script gen-
script ordering tasks in HD patients. Although the usetion paradigm (the execution of more specic script
g a fMRI session) might have been more appropriate to-striatal dysfunctions in HD patients during the execu-t tasks, in order to discriminate between cortical and
l contributions to action script processing, such stud-
StroopFluencSymbo
corr
a Normb Normc Norm
ies aredemanprevioform othe uswith dpatieneases set al., al., 2002010) Reima2009; Hrosis (BRothmof inteneuronsynapsedge, tcorticaWe hybelongexplain
2. Mate
2.1. Sub
2.1.1. PEigh
this expe38.6 yeawhereasSubjectswas 3.1 Scale (Ufunctionindicatin(SD = 20of the pawas 133
The prises a of execu& Hamshtive atteSmith, 1range onpatients
A Fr(MADRSpatientsscored 1a psychiThree paorder to
2.1.2. CFor
12 normpublished range
ference (total correct in 45 s) 25.6 (7.9) >35a
(total correct in 360 s) 40.2 (13) >56b
t modalities test (total90 s)
26.7 (8.1) >37c
issued from Golden (1978). issued from Cardebat, Doyon, Puel, Goulet, & Joanette (1990). issued from Wechsler (1981).
cult to perform in these patients since task attentioncrease movement disorders critically. Therefore, as inudies, we relied on resting state metabolic data to per-vestigation. There is an abundant literature reportingFDG-PET in the resting state to measure correlationsnt cognitive and motor tasks in patients, either in HD., Teichmann et al., 2008) or in many other brain dis-s Alzheimers disease (Desgranges et al., 2002; Eustache; Lozza et al., 2004; Mentis et al., 2002; Mosconi etenniello et al., 1995; Piolino et al., 2007; Woo et al.,
cognitive impairment (Caselli, Chen, Lee, Alexander, &08; Nishi et al., 2010), Parkinsons Disease (Abe et al.,g et al., 2007; Nagano-Saito et al., 2004) or multiple scle-enberg et al., 2000). According to Magistretti, Pellerin,nd Shulman (1999), regional metabolic rate is a markerd local synaptic activity and it is sensitive to both directnaptic damage and secondary functional disruption atstant from the primary site of pathology. To our knowl-esent study is the rst attempt to discriminate between
subcortical contributions to action script processing.esize that there is a hypometabolism in cerebral areaso cortical-sub-cortical frontal circuits, contributing topt processing impairments.
and methods
groupnts with clinical symptoms and genetically identied HD were seen int. The 8 HD patients were 4 females and 4 males whose mean age was
= 7.5). Their mean number of years of education was 11.1 (SD = 2.2), estimated IQ was 106 (SD = 7.6) on the AVB test (Beauregard, 1971).
early in the course of their disease: the mean duration of symptoms (SD = 2.9). Mean scores on the Unied Huntingtons Disease Rating; Huntington Study Group, 1996) activities of daily living and totalacity scales were 18.4/25 (SD = 4.9) and 11.7/13 (SD = 2.1) respectively,d functional impairment. The UHDRS total motor score was 33.8/124e mean Mini Mental State Examination score was 26.6 (SD = 1.7; none
scored below 24) and the mean Mattis Dementia Rating Scale score = 6.7), indicating very mild cognitive impairments.ive part of the UHDRS was also administered to the patients. It com-psychological battery of three subtests that measure several domainsnctioning: spontaneous exibility with a letter uency task (Benton89), inhibition with the Stroop Color-Word Test (Stroop, 1935), selec-and working memory with the Symbol-Digit Modalities Test (SDMT,As can be seen in Table 1, HD patients performed below the normalese measures, suggesting the presence of executive disorders in these
2676 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
whose mean age was 41.5 years (SD = 12.4). Their mean total years of educationwere 11.1 (SD = 3.3) and their mean IQ was 108 (SD = 8.9) on the AVB test. Noneof them reported a history of nervous system disease or psychiatric problems.The HD patients and the NC groups did not differ signicantly with respect toage [t(18) = 0.58, P = 0.56]. The 2 groups were also matched on educational level[t(18) = 0.03, P
For the scgroup of 9 NC42.1 years (SDwith a mean Imedical illnesThe 2 groups deducational le
The two gP = 0.89], educ
Ethical peand the Crtewas obtained the neuropsycperformed in c
2.2. General p
Within anropsychologicand a PET mea
2.3. Neuropsy
2.3.1. Script gThe subjec
ties: (1) sewina cup of coffeewich, (7) doinggenerate the severyday activtemporal ordeticipants werescripts had to
The mean The eight scripby Bower, Blac(1987) and Gobased on a pre2000), which French languaactivities (stan
The semanon three typevant intrusionthe healthy cothis normativsubsequently trol subjects), actions (mentimet the inclusto the particulsemantic catewas therefore ticular script. C1983) have shor core of theproviding con
Difcultiesequencing erlogical sequenthe generationpoint) was alsoperseverative a script, were
2.3.2. Script soWe used th
to construct twIn the rst
zation of 2 sccontained 16 aarray of cardswas written ontask. Subjects
nished laying them on the table. The subjects were then requested to arrange allthe actions of each script in a correct sequential order.
In the second script sorting task, the subjects were also asked to arrange theactions of 2 different scripts in a correct sequential order, but this time both scriptswere given with 3 aberrant or distractor items consisting of actions belonging to
ripts. Ttainin
t distrcript the bif the actort was
. Subje layingmean
of disred fo
scann
escribigh-rejects
carritate wous in
tistica
ognitivcogniticago, ric Mare tesd and
tionshng non
age ages w
Welrieyalaira8 mm atomy, we ptient wormalative l, a coatienism. Tsholdovide
wordhan 23metat-valuave thn.
ults
ript g
Sema twoespec) = 21by HDtivel
as wts (nts e 2. T = 0.97] and IQ [t(18) = 0.31, P = 0.75].ript generation task, the patient group was compared with another. These subjects were 6 females and 3 males whose mean age was
= 7.2). Their mean number of years of schooling was 10.8 (SD = 8.1)Q of 109 (SD = 9) on the AVB test. All subjects were free of seriouss. None of them had history of neurological and psychiatric illness.id not differ signicantly with respect to age [t(15) = 0.97, P = 0.34],vel [t(15) = 0.18, P = 0.85] and IQ [t(15) = .58, P = 0.56].roups of NC were also matched with respect to age [t(19) = 0.13,ation level [t(19) = 0.14, P = 0.88] and IQ [t(19) = 0.29, P = 0.77].rmission was obtained from the French National Ethics Committeeil University Hospital Ethics Committee. Written informed consentfrom all patients. Normal control volunteers gave their consent tohological study after being extensively informed, and the study wasonformity with the declaration of Helsinki.
rocedure
interval of a few days at most, each HD patient underwent a neu-al examination including script generation and script sorting taskssurement of resting CMRGlu.
chological protocol
eneration tasksts had to describe how they would accomplish eight everyday activi-g a button again, (2) writing a letter, (3) making an omelet, (4) making
with milk and sugar, (5) making a green salad, (6) making a ham sand- the washing up and (8) polishing shoes. They were asked to verballyequence of actions (a list of 1020 actions) corresponding to eachity, which was written down by the experimenter. Respect of ther of execution of the actions in each script was also demanded. Par-
rst given an example (Doing morning routines). The order in whichbe generated was randomized.total number of actions produced in each script was rst considered.ts were then scored according to criteria that have been proposedk, and Turner (1979), Roman, Brownell, Potter, Seibold, and Gardnerdbout and Doyon (2000). The norms used to score our scripts werevious study with 274 francophone healthy control subjects (Allain,
was conducted in order to establish a corpus of script actions in thege and to quantify four main characteristics of the actions within thedardness, sequence, centrality and distinctiveness).tic aspect of the script was measured using sorting criteria based
s of actions (major, minor and trivial) and one type of error (rele-). To be included an action had to be mentioned by at least 18% ofntrols subjects of the normative study (Allain, 2000). Consistent withe study (Allain, 2000), actions that met this bottom criterion wereclassied as major (mentioned by more than 60% of the healthy con-minor (mentioned by 4059% of healthy control subjects), or trivialoned by 1839% of control subjects). By contrast, actions that did notion criteria were listed as relevant intrusions, which either belongedar script (relevant) or not (irrelevant). The number of actions in everygory, except for the relevant intrusions, was weighted; this numberdivided by the total number of actions that were generated for a par-ognitive psychologists (Bower et al., 1979; Corson, 1990; Galambos,own that a script consists of major actions that constitute the heart
semantic aspects of the script, with more minor and trivial actionstext.s in the temporal aspect of the script were evaluated in terms ofrors (Roman et al., 1987), which correspond to a displacement in thece of actions within a script. The presence of boundary errors (when
of events stops short of the stated endpoint or extends beyond this used to evaluate the temporal dimension of the script. Furthermore,errors, which consist of actions that are repeated more than once inalso measured.
rting taskse normative data proposed by Bower et al. (1979) and Corson (1990)o types of script sorting tasks.
one, the subjects were asked to re-establish the sequential organi-ripts (Going shopping and Going to a restaurant). These scriptsnd 21 actions respectively. Subjects were presented with a shufed
with an action written on each card. The title (header) of the script a separate card and was displayed in front of the subject during thewere allowed to look at and read all cards once the examiner had
other sceach conaberranfor the sask for actions othe distrthe scripthe tasknished
The numbereters sco
2.4. PET
As dwith a hThe subies wereresting sintraven
2.5. Sta
2.5.1. CThe
Inc., ChparametChi-squagenerateThe relained usi
2.5.2. ImIma
(SPM99;1996). Bspace (T8 mm brain an
Firsteach payears) nconserv
Thenthe HD pmetabolthis threthat it prIn otherhigher ti.e., hypoa lower do not hcorrectio
3. Res
3.1. Sc
3.1.1. The
with r[U (15duced respecactions8 scripelemenin Tablhe scripts used were Going to a wedding and Changing a at tire,g 12 actions. The subjects were not informed of the presence of theactors which were stamp a ticket, have a swim, place the jackGoing to a wedding and wipe oneself, install the beach umbrella,ll for the script Changing a at tire. Subjects were presented all thescript and the 3 aberrant distractors written on cards. The actions ands were mixed and displayed on a table in random order. The title of
also written on a card displayed in front of the subject throughoutcts were allowed to look and read the cards when the examiner had
them on the table and to arrange the cards in a correct sequence. number of sequencing errors (rst and second task) and the meantractor actions accepted (second task) were the performance param-r each subject.
ing procedure
ed elsewhere (Gaura et al., 2004), PET examinations were performedsolution EXACT HR+ tomograph (CTI/Siemens) using a 3D acquisition.head was xed using an individually molded headholder. All stud-ed out in a quiet, dark environment while the patients were in theith the eyes closed. Metabolic images were acquired 3050 min afterjection of 118280 MBq of [18F]uoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (18FDG).
l analysis
e data analysisive data were analyzed using the statistical package SPSS V5.1 (SPSSIL, USA). As these data were not normally distributed, the non-nnWhitney U-test was used to compare HD patients and HC groups.ts were used to compare frequencies (proportions of types of actions
proportions of subjects making errors in the script generation tasks).ip between cognitive variables obtained in the script tasks was exam--parametric Spearman rank correlations.
nalysisere analyzed using the statistical parametric mapping softwarecome Department of Cognitive Neurology, London, UK, Friston,, images were transformed into Talairachs standard stereotaxicch & Tournoux, 1988). The images were then smoothed with an8 mm Gaussian lter to compensate for intersubject variability of
(Friston, 1996).erformed a voxel-by-voxel t-test comparison of brain metabolism ofith the brain metabolism obtained in 17 age-matched (35.8 10.9
controls. The statistical threshold of each comparison was set at aevel of P < 0.0005.rrelation analysis using a multiple regression model was performed ints to investigate the relationships between cognitive scores and brainhe threshold of the correlation analysis was set at P < 0.005. Although,
is not corrected for multiple comparisons (Bonferroni), our feeling iss a good compromise considering the exploratory nature of the study.s, a Bonferroni correction would reveal only voxels with a t-value.0 which is highly conservative and might elicit false negative results,bolic regions that are truly associated with cognitive decits but withe. Accordingly, our results should be considered as exploratory ande high degree of condence that would be provided by a Bonferroni
eneration tasks
ntic aspect groups did not differ signicantly from each othert to the total number of actions generated per script.0, P = 0.14]. Mean numbers of actions per script pro-
patients and NC were 10.1 (SD = 3.8) and 10.8 (SD = 2.1)y. The mean percentages of major, minor, and trivialell as relevant intrusions that were generated for the
umber of elements to a class of action/total number of100) in the HD and normal control groups are reportedhe semantic aspects of the script were examined using
P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684 2677
Table 2Mean percentage (with standard deviations in parentheses) of major, minor, andtrivial actions, as well as relevant intrusions that were generates for each script inthe HD and NC groups.
Variables HD patients NC subjects P
Major 62.2 (11.4) 60.2 (7.3) 0.77Minor 11.0 (3.7) 24.4 (5.5) 0.01Trivial 9.6 (4.7) 11.0 (2.9) 0.81Relevant intrusions 14.2 (6.8) 3.4 (1.6) 0.005Irrelevant intrusions 3.0 (1.2) 1.0 (0.2) 0.31
Chi-square tests. Comparison of proportions of all types of actionsgenerated in both groups revealed a signicant main effect of typeof action [Chi 2 = 13.02, df = 4, P = 0.01], suggesting that the twogroups produced a different semantic organization of the script.Further post hoc analyses comparing the proportions of each type ofactions produced in each group showed that HD patients generateda smaller proportion of minor elements [Chi 2 = 5.8, df = 1, P = 0.01],and a higheP = 0.005]. Tthe proportial element[Chi 2 = 1.02
3.1.2. TempA signic
sequence otion of HD signicantlyP = 0.001]. Cnicantly mfar greater generation the HC grouof persever[U (15) = 6.0portion of Hsubjects in df = 1, P = 0.0used in the
3.2. Script s
In compacantly more(Going to a r(18) = 6.0, PChanging a
Howevebetween Hactions (Ta
Table 3Sequencing, bin parentheses
Variable
Sequencing Mean erroNumber o
Boundary erMean erroNumber o
PerseverativMean erroNumber o
Table 4Script sorting task scores (means with standard deviations in parentheses).
HD patients NC subjects P
Sequencing errorsGoing to aGoing shoGoing to aChangingTotal
Irrelevant acGoing to aChangingTotal
Changing aence emertask.
rrelaand e
lyse scrn thtion in s
gro signencycanin thho =.72, P
etabo
le 5 etabd a
Thisle co0, 1d in , 2, 4
gniti
icadataally
in Tardincingut albilat
is cntia nigra and the pons, and smaller regions in the prefrontal
(right middle and superior gyri, left middle and left precen-r proportion of relevant intrusions [Chi 2 = 7.7, df = 1,here was no signicant difference, however, betweenions of major elements [Chi 2 = 0.08, df = 1, P = 0.77], triv-s [Chi 2 = 0.05, df = 1, P = 0.81] and irrelevant intrusions, df = 1, P = 0.31].
oral aspectant difference was found between HD and NC groups in
rdering [U (15) = 0.0, P = 0.0005] (Table 3). The propor-patients manifesting sequencing errors (8/8) differed
from those (2/9) in the NC group [Chi 2 = 10.5, df = 1,ompared to the HC group, HD patients produced sig-ore boundary errors [U (15) = 16.0, P = 0.02]. In fact, aproportion of patients in the HD group (5/8) stoppedof events short of the stated end point, compared top (1/9, [Chi 2 = 4.8, df = 1, P = 0.02). The mean number
ative errors was signicantly higher in the HD group, P = 0.003]. A statistical analysis comparing the pro-D patients (7/8) making this kind of error to that of
the HC group (1/9) reached signicance [Chi 2 = 9.92,01]. There was no gender difference in any of the scriptsgeneration task.
orting tasks
rison with HC subjects, HD patients, committed signi- errors of sequential organization in all scripts (Table 4)estaurant: [U (18) = 0.0, P = 0.0002]; Going shopping: [U
= 0.001]; Going to a wedding: [U (18) = 4.5, P = 0.0008];at tire: [U (18) = 10.5, P = 0.003]).r, there was no signicant difference in performanceD patients and HC subjects in inhibiting irrelevantble 3) (Going to a wedding: [U (18) = 44.0, P = 0.75];
oundary, and perseverative errors (means with standard deviations) in the HD and NC groups.
HD patients NC subjects P
errorsr (SD) 7.9 (2.7) 0.1 (0.3) 0.0005
3.3. Coscores
Anain bothbetweegeneraduced the HDrelatedthe ua signierrors task (R(Rho =
3.4. M
Tabhypomrevealenuclei.multipareas 1area anareas 1
3.5. Co
Signnitive principshown
Regsequengyrus bgyrus erationsubstacortexf subjects 8/8 2/9 0.001
rorsr (SD) 1.0 (0.9) (0.3) 0.02f subjects 5/8 1/9 0.02
e errorsr (SD) 4.1 (2.9) 0.2 (0.7) 0.003f subjects 7/8 1/9 0.001
tral gyri), th(superior anand inferiogeneration)cortex (leftgyrus and errors is co(mainly cun restaurant 3.6 (1.2) 0.3 (0.5) 0.0002pping 2.1 (1.3) 0.2 (0.4) 0.001
wedding 1.7 (0.7) 0.2 (0.4) 0.0008 a at tire 2.6 (1.7) 0.2 (0.4) 0.003
10.1 (2.9) 1.1 (0.9) 0.0002
tions used wedding 0.2 (0.5) 0.2 (0.4) 0.75
a at tire 0.6 (0.5) 0.5 (0.5) 0.640.9 (0.3) 0.4 (0.8) 0.21
at tire: [U (18) = 42.0, P = 0.64]). No gender differ-ged in any of the scripts used in the script sorting
tions between script task scores and between taskxecutive scores
s of the relationship between script scores computedipt tasks (HD group) revealed a signicant correlatione total number of sequencing errors produced in scripttasks and the total number of sequencing errors pro-cript sorting tasks (Rho = .78, P = 0.03). In addition, inup, sequencing errors in the script sorting task cor-icantly with the total number of words produced in
task of the UHDRS (Rho = .79, P = 0.02). There was alsot correlation between the total number of sequencinge script generation task and the scores in the uency
.82, P = 0.01) and in the symbol-digit modalities test = 0.04) of the UHDRS.
lism results
and Fig. 1 show the topography and the extent of theolism in patients compared with controls. SPM analysismarked reduction of activity in caudate and putamen
signicant hypometabolism was also demonstrated inrtical areas: in the prefrontal regions in Brodmanns1, 47, 46, anterior cingulated cortices, parietal inferiorthe sensorimotor and premotor regions, in Brodmanns, 6, 44.
vemetabolic correlations
nt correlations (P < 0.005, uncorrected) between cog- and brain regions were numerous and concernedcortical regions. Data produced by the SPM analysis areable 6.g script generation, we showed correlations between
errors and metabolism of the right middle temporalso with the left precentral gyrus and the inferior frontalerally. The number of boundary errors in script gen-orrelated with the hippocampal region bilaterally, thee cingulate gyrus bilaterally, the left temporal cortexd inferior gyri) and the left parietal cortex (postcentral
r parietal gyri). Concerning perseverative errors (script, we showed correlations with the bilateral prefrontal
inferior and right superior gyri) and the right cingulatethe left postcentral gyrus. The number of sequencingrrelated to a hypometabolism of the occipital cortexeus and lingual gyrus) and the inferior frontal gyrus
2678 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
Table 5SPM analysis: local peaks in the whole brain obtained with the t-test comparison.
Anatomical region Side BA Talairach coordinates Z score Number ofvoxels
Corrected P(cluster level)
Corrected P(voxel level)
x y z
Caudate L 12 14 2 Inf 2083 0.000 0.000Caudate L 14 6 14 7.79 0.000Caudate R 16 10 10 7.76 1242 0.000 0.000Putamen L 26 4 2 7.17 0.000Putamen R 30 4 2 5.60 0.001Putamen R 26 4 0 5.32 0.005Cingulate gyrus R 24 0 38 2 4.33 174 0.031 0.231Inferior frontal gyrus R 1047 44 42 2 4.64 0.079Middle frontal gyrus R 10 32 50 8 5.56 708 0.000 0.002Middle frontal gyrus R 11 32 36 14 4.72 0.060Middle frontal gyrus L 10 28 46 10 5.19 509 0.000 0.009Middle frontal gyrus L 1046 32 38 20 4.49 0.172Middle frontal gyrus R 44 52 14 10 5.34 513 0.000 0.004Middle frontal gyrus R 6 32 8 46 4.18 0.366Middle front 4.7Superior fro 3.8Superior fro 3.8Superior fro 3.6Precentral g 4.7Precentral g 4.9Postcentral g 4.3Postcentral g 3.7Inferior pari 3.7
BA = Brodman HD pa(corrected valu
bilaterally band fusiformand superio
4. Discussi
The aimof script prmapping thlization meseveral scripatients wiuse of morhave been min HD patiesubjects sinment disordstudies of dmetabolic dthe cognitiving impairmregions: prietal and ocdiscussed inand the fram
arac
resu by pucat
patiere crent tive ecribe, theipt. T
thativelyo thoal gyrus L 11 30 38 12 ntal gyrus L 11 10 52 24 ntal gyrus R 11 16 64 20 ntal gyrus R 6 20 6 60 yrus R 6 54 4 10 yrus R 4 46 14 38 yrus R 40 56 18 14 yrus L 12 38 26 40
etal lobule R 40 40 38 46 n area; x, y, z = coordinates of peaks in Talairachs system; L = left; R = right; n = 8 fores are also in the table).
ut also small regions in right temporal cortex (middle gyri) and parietal cortex (postcentral gyrus, inferior
r gyri).
on
of the present study was to unravel the neural basesocessing impairments in brain-damaged patients bye correlations between resting-state brain glucose uti-asured by PET and measures of script knowledge acrosspt generation and script sorting tasks in a group ofth HD. As mentioned in the introduction, although thee specic cognitive tasks during a fMRI session might
ore appropriate to study fronto-striatal dysfunctions
4.1. Ch
Thecessingand edby thethey wincoheseverato desomeletper scrgestingis relapared tnts, such studies are difcult to perform with thesece attention demanded by the task increases move-ers to an unacceptable degree. Therefore, as in previousemented or HD patients, we relied on resting stateata to perform our correlations. In the present study,emetabolic correlations revealed that script process-ents were mainly related to the dysfunction of cortical
marily the lateral frontal cortex, but also temporal, pari-cipital areas, regardless of the task. These results are
the context of previous clinical and neuroimaging dataework of scripts.
and consistsmaller proevant intrurelevant intsequencingevents and point (boun
Script sesorting tasksequencingity to elimin
Fig. 1. Glassview of the t-test statistical t-map thresholded 154 0.046 0.0647 77 0.251 0.7104 39 0.590 0.7462 35 0.640 0.9251 0.0614 512 0.000 0.0249 0.1956 20 0.835 0.8210 0.879
tients; n = 17 for healthy controls. Signicant P < 0.0005, uncorrected
teristics of script impairments in HD patients
lts of the present study suggest that script event pro-atients with HD is impaired when compared with age-ion-matched controls. Although the scripts generatedents contained a sufcient amount of major actions,haracterized by a lack of detailed information and by ansequential organization, with several boundary and per-rrors. Specically, when patients with HD were asked
episodes like Sewing a button again or Making anir description consisted of about ten major sub-sectionshis is equivalent to the performance of controls, sug-
t the general organization of patients script knowledge preserved. However, their descriptions, when com-se of control subjects, were dominated by typical events
ed of relatively fewer details (HD patients produced aportion of minor elements), with relatively more rel-sions (HD patients produced a higher proportion ofrusions) and perseverative errors. In terms of response, HD patients tended to confuse the sequential order ofto stop the generation of events short of the stated enddary errors).quencing impairments were also observed in the scripts, in which HD patients committed signicantly more
errors than controls. However, in these tasks, their abil-ate aberrant actions was intact. A signicant correlation
at P < 0.0005, uncorrected.
P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684 2679
Table 6Negative correlational relationships between metabolism and scores on the script generation and script for the HD patients.
Cognitive domain Side BA Talairach coordinates Z score Number of voxels
Anatomical region x y z
Sequencing errors (script generation)Inferior frontal gyrus L 46/45 42 26 22 3.29 34Inferior frontal gyrus R 46/45 38 28 22 3.10 22Middle temporal gyrus R 21 50 2 16 3.70 154Precentral gyrus L 6 40 0 34 3.35 55Boundary errors (script generation)Middle frontal gyrus R 10 12 64 22 3.19 36Middle frontal gyrus L 10 40 50 22 3.50 22Superior frontal gyrus R 6 20 8 72 4.57 49Superior frontal gyrus R 9 24 62 26 4.00 34Superior frontal gyrus R 6 12 6 58 3.39 74Superior frontal gyrus R 6 10 4 64 3.32Superior temporal gyrus L 28/38 16 12 28 3.16 20Superior temporal gyrus L 28/38 22 8 24 2.62Inferior temporal gyrus L 20 42 18 26 3.33Precentral gyrus L 4 34 20 70 3.36 53Postcentral gyrus L 40 64 24 26 4.43 37Inferior parietal gyrus L 40 60 32 24 2.59Cingulate gyrus R 24 10 4 46 2.74Cingulate gyrus L 24 4 14 24 3.24 35Cingulate gyrus L 24 14 14 28 2.95Cingulate gyrus L 32 10 30 10 3.48 88Hippocampal gyrus R 32 12 16 4.42 73Hippocampal gyrus L 20/38 26 18 36 3.68 256Hippocampal gyrus L 35 16 8 22 3.46 111
36 18 14 3.69Substancia nigra 10 12 6 3.41Pons 10 12 16 3.11Pons 4 16 38 3.42 165Pons 2 28 34 3.36Pons 2 28 24 2.86
38 48 20 3.31 28Perseverative errors (script generation)Superior frontal gyrus R 6 10 4 78 3.44 74Superior frontal gyrus R 6 2 8 76 2.61Inferior frontal gyrus L 44/45 42 18 18 3.76 44Postcentral gyrus L 1/2 40 32 58 3.30 36Cingulate gyrus R 24 16 2 44 3.44 43Relevant intrusion (script generation)Superior frontal gyrus L 6 14 0 76 4.19 483
7 14 54 76 3.82Superior frontal gyrus L 6 4 6 76 3.75Middle frontal gyrus L 11 38 32 16 3.21 27Middle temporal gyrus R 21 72 12 12 3.2 40
74 24 12 2.97Middle temporal gyrus 21 64 48 4 2.9 20Cingulate gyrus 30/23 0 54 10 3.58Cingulate gyrus/precuneus 23/31 0 56 20 4.87 152Fusiform gyrus R 37 44 50 16 3.72 55Lingual gyrus L 17 8 88 14 4 78Precuneus L 7 6 66 62 3.75 92
8 58 58 2.719 38 84 16 3.58 79
Precuneus R 19 20 86 40 3.47 5512 86 38 3.06
Cuneus L 18 20 100 8 3.96 8524 96 2 3.33
Cuneus R 18 10 100 10 3.38 100Middle occipital gyus R 18 24 94 22 3.35
18 98 14 2.95Cerebellum R 42 60 20 2.99Sequencing errors (script sorting)Middle frontal gyrus L 46 44 26 26 3.28 39Inferior frontal gyrus R 46/45 42 30 14 3.78 83Middle temporal gyrus R 21 62 0 20 3.43 30Superior parietal lobule R 7 36 56 48 2.79Inferior parietal gyrus R 40 44 56 44 3.60 53Inferior parietal lobule R 40 52 62 38 2.88Postcentral gyrus R 2 28 34 58 3.33 24Postcentral gyrus R 2 20 38 56 2.73Cuneus R 17 4 80 6 4.35 266Cuneus L 17/18 4 88 2 3.40Cuneus R 17/18 16 96 4 2.84 23Fusiform gyrus R 37 32 50 12 3.62 25Fusiform gyrus R 19 24 76 14 3.56 72Lingual gyrus L 18 16 82 18 3.25 32Cerebellum L 24 56 16 3.14 31
The table shows regions in which there was a signicant negative correlation between metabolism and scores on the script generation and script sorting. All voxels aresignicant at a threshold of P < 0.005, uncorrected for multiple comparisons across the whole brain volume.
2680 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
indicated than sequencing difculties in script generations taskswere consistent with sequencing problems in script sorting tasksin HD patients.
The present results suggest that the performance of HD patientsin script geto a deterioity to accescan be arguview that iduce a greasemantic kna two-compcesses frommodel in wthe way in This claim i
In this thto heavily insition, we exibility (digit modaresembles the same twith Shallicpreestablishtheir script-whole tempduring the stion back athe generalsentations. current stucommitted ing abstractshifting abi
This patParkinson dfunctioningeral studiesindividual eimpairmenpoor procestasks, and or script geauthors, alsdeprived oferrors and i
It is inteteristic of bosome discrefrom the tw1998). Firstirrelevant aet al., 2004)patients in patients inctheir scriptdifculties ment of a sinformationparison of ein the actuathat our HDtheir set shtasks, Godbmore irrele
posed that this type of error was specic to a striatal dysfunctionand consistent with Shallices (1982) theory, in which damage tothe basal ganglia should impair the ability to maintain script actionsactive in memory and to inhibit irrelevant ones. Our HD patients
t prontainctionis prt soen toifferelitiesedgeript gla etsingions ludintract
taskscripion sto enlogice ordpresesubstt abo
patummnt wbasat al.,cingt rsole iith Ssal g
of srelevcriptcons
eural
t, it grouh PEtamtiplensored iet al992;
foun witcingientseriorntals thces. in st
scrip009hinkneration and script sorting tasks are most likely dueration of the script organization rather than an inabil-s an intact semantic representation. In other words, ited that the decits described are consistent with then HD patients fronto-striatal lesions selectively pro-ter impairment in the organizational aspects than in theowledge of a script. This nding is more consistent withonent model that dissociates script organizational pro-
semantic script knowledge than with a one-componenthich all aspects of a script including script content andwhich this content is organized are closely related.s more consistent with Shallices (1982) model.eoretical model, script sequencing tasks are expectedvolve executive functions. Consistent with this propo-have found that sequencing errors correlated withuency task) and working memory measures (symbol-
lities test) of the UHDRS. This pattern of correlationsthe one we have observed in elderly subjects usingasks (Allain et al., 2007). In this study, and in linees (1982) model, we have suggested that ordering aed sequence of actions requires the subjects to retrievememory representations and to simulate mentally theoral structure of the actions in working memory. Then,equencing stage, subjects must continually shift atten-nd forth from the individual elements of the scripts to
display dictated by the internal abstract script repre-We think that these suggestions could be applied to thedy. Hence, we can speculate that the sequence errorsby HD patients might reect a difculty in maintain-
representations in working memory and a diminishedlity.tern of cognitive decits resembles the one seen afterisease (PD), another clinical condition that disrupts
of the frontostriatal system. As mentioned before, sev- have shown than PD patients have preserved access tovent knowledge required for planning, but signicantts in well-dened aspects of script knowledge retrieval:sing of distractors (Zalla et al., 1998) in script sortingpoor sequencing in script sorting (Zalla et al., 1998)neration tasks (Godbout & Doyon, 2000). The lattero showed that the scripts generated by PD patients were
contextual elements, and contained more perseverativerrelevant intrusions (Godbout & Doyon, 2000).resting to note that while sequencing errors are charac-th types of patients with basal ganglia lesions, there arepancies between the present HD group and PD patientso previous studies (Godbout & Doyon, 2000; Zalla et al.,, in our script sorting tasks, HD patients discarded all thections. This result ts with our previous ndings (Allain
in HD patients, but differs from the performance of PDthe study by Zalla et al. (1998). In this last study, the PDluded one or more semantically related distractors in
arrangements. Zalla et al. (1998) suggested that theseof PD patients with distractors were due to an impair-witching mechanism that is necessary for processing
in parallel, more precisely to a difculty in on-line com-vent sequences from memory with those to be executedl task. When interpreted in the light of this idea, the fact
patients discarded most irrelevant actions suggests thatifting ability is intact. Second, in their script generationout and Doyon (2000) found that PD patients producedvant intrusions than normal control subject. They pro-
did noto maivant awith thin scrip
Takhave ding abiknowland scthe Zalcompoconditers incand dissortingand 2 evocatasked chronoreversof the These broughand HD
In scohereof the Zalla esequenThus, ahas a rtent wthe baactionsmost irright sis less
4.2. N
Firsin our ies witand puin mulrior, sedescribGaura et al., 1
WerelatedSequenHD patthe infdle) froconrmsequenfound tion inet al., 2by Kucduce irrelevant intrusions, suggesting that their ability script actions active in memory and to inhibit irrele-s are better preserved than in PD patients. Consistentoposition, our HD patients discarded irrelevant actionsrting protocols.gether, these discrepancies suggest that HD and PDnt consequences on script generation and script sort-. To substantiate this idea, it is useful to compare script
in PD and HD patients using the same script sortingeneration tasks. This has not been the case to date. In
al. (2000) study, for example, approximately 20 events 4 independent scripts were presented under different(script events with headers, script events with head-g distractor events and script events without headersors) in the script-event reconstitution task. In our scripts, 2 scripts containing each 12 actions with 3 distractorsts containing 16 or 21 actions were used. In the scripttudy by Godbout and Doyon (2000), PD patients wereumerate the actions of 6 familiar scripts in the correctal order and the actions of 6 other familiar scripts in theer. As mentioned in the materials and methods sectionnt paper, we used 8 scripts in the script evocation task.antial differences in experimental protocols may haveut the variation of performance proles observed in PDients.ary, the behavioral results of the present study are
ith the data of previous studies in patients with lesionsl ganglia (Allain et al., 2004; Godbout & Doyon, 2000;
1998), reecting a predominant impairment of script rather than a problem of access to script knowledge.t view, our ndings support the claim that the striatumn script information sequencing. This claim is consis-hallices (1982) model, which implies that damage toanglia impairs the ability to sequentially organize thecripts. However, the fact that our HD patients discardedant action suggests that their ability in maintaining the
and inhibiting irrelevant ones is preserved. This ndingistent with Shallices ideas.
bases of script decits in HD patients
should be noted that the pattern of hypometabolismp of HD patients is in accordance with previous stud-T in HD. The marked reduction of activity in caudateen nuclei, together with a signicant hypometabolism
areas of prefrontal, anterior cingulated, parietal infe-imotor and premotor corticles have repeatedly beenn these patients (see for example, Furtado et al., 2005;., 2004; Kuhl et al., 1982; Kuwert et al., 1990; Martin
Mazziotta et al., 1987).d that script generation and script sorting decits cor-h hypometabolism in some of these cortical regions.
impairments, the most severe decit in our cohort of in both tasks, were associated with hypometabolism in
frontal gyrus (bilaterally) and the left precentral (mid- gyrus. This nding supports our initial hypothesis ande role of the frontal cortex in the processing of scriptIn fact implications of frontal areas are consistentlyudies investigating the processing of order informa-ts (Crozier et al., 1999; Knutson et al., 2004; Kuchinke; Partiot et al., 1996; Wood et al., 2005). As suggestede et al. (2009), middle frontal gyrus functioning might
P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684 2681
be associated with mental representations of scenes in script basedtasks when participants mentally imagine themselves performingthe proposed actions (Crozier et al., 1999; Knutson et al., 2004).Crozier et al. (1999) and Knutson et al. (2004) had already sug-gested thatof higher leor the sequresults showwith errorsevents.
The scriwas associa(right middadditional hscript sortintribute to sthat the prodomain is asition, Godbordering imhave also fotasks in pata matter of sive tissue dareas (Braaan fMRI stuprocessing parietal and
The factcorrelated wwith past esequence le(1995), Graand Ivry (19time of seqof the stimcued). Thus& Seidler, 2resentationgoals of theabstract repScript generfore, we cain script shypometab
Consequmarily assoet al., 1999of other bret al., 2008and intrusiowith hypomalso consist
We founcorrelated ter brain re(Henson, CPassinghamwork (Magthat script episodic meation betwemetabolismwork is nee
Inconsistions betwe
hypometabolism in the caudate and putamen nuclei. This suggeststhat within the fronto-striatal system, the cortical frontal regionsare more crucial in script processing than the basal ganglia. Sucha nding is consistent with Shallices (1982) theoretical model, in
the frulatins nhis mifcnes ed i
lly, r & Solvemtion(199erial
can deman
lesioationquenwhicangltientral, ps maddit
s in Hrefro
severeserportaeque
The tientorre999ere a
werropohe faselecnt seate irmen
dorsompation
theed byisean im
of Loefronecisiefronn abal loein, 1dorsoan th
loops et the middle frontal gyrus might support the processingvel mental representations responsible for the timingencing of actions. In line with these propositions, our
that hypometabolism in these regions is correlated in the processing of sequential relations between script
pt sequencing decit in our cohort of HD patientsted with additional hypometabolism of temporal areasle temporal gyrus) in the script generation task and withypometabolism of parietal and occipital regions in theg task. This suggests that other brain regions may con-
equencing abilities, thus casting a doubt upon the ideacess of analyzing sequential links in the script action
specically frontal function. In line with this propo-out et al. (2004) have recently found script temporalpairments in patients with parietal lobe lesions. Weund numerous sequencing errors in script sequencingients with Alzheimers disease (Allain et al., 2008). It iscommon knowledge that these patients have progres-egeneration predominantly affecting temporoparietal
k & Braak, 1991; Gomez-Isla et al., 1996). Moreover, indy conducted by Crozier et al. (1999), action sequencewas also associated with activation of regions in the
temporal cortices. that in our script sorting task sequencing errors wereith hypometabolism in the parietal lobe is consistent
xperiments, showing that this region was engaged forarning. More precisely, Grafton, Hazeltine, and Ivryfton, Hazeltine, and Ivry (1998) or Hazeltine, Grafton,97) have shown that parietal cortex was engaged at theuence encoding and sequence retrieval, independentlyulus cueing characteristics (spatially or symbolically, according to these authors (see also Bo, Peltier, Noll,011), this region is crucial for forming sequence rep-, but at an abstract level that best corresponds to the
action rather than to specic movements. Scripts areresentations of goal-directed actions of everyday life.ation or sorting tasks require sequence retrieval. There-n speculate that parietal lobe would also be engagedequence processing and that patients with parietalolism would be impaired in script sequencing tasks.ently, while script sequencing tasks have been pri-ciated with frontal lobe functioning until now (Allain; Grafman, 1989; Sirigu et al., 1995), the contributionsain regions should also be considered (see also Allain). The fact that boundary errors, perseverative errorsn errors in our script generation task were correlatedetabolism in frontal and non-frontal brain regions is
ent with this proposition.d that boundary errors (script generation) were alsowith hippocampal gyrus hypometabolism. This lat-gion has been generally related to memory retrievalansino, Herron, Robb, & Rugg, 2003; Sakai, Rowe, &, 2002), as part of a common memory retrieval net-uire & Mummery, 1999). Therefore, we can speculategeneration might be associated with the activation ofmory representations. On the other hand, the associ-en impaired script generation and hippocampal gyrus
was relatively weak in the present study and furtherded to conrm this idea.tent with our initial hypotheses, we did not nd correla-en script generation and script sorting impairments and
which manipfunctioever, tcause devant odiscardtask.
Fina(Coopecal invcorrelamans managscriptscan beand sefrontalinformrect sescript, basal gHD patemporegion
In adecitwith ppaper,have pthe impoor s1995).HD pamost cet al., 1lobe wlesionsvant pdata, tited a cohereeliminimpairin theall-encdissociused inobtainof the dbetweeTowereral pron a ddial pris knowneuron& Folstof the lier thcortexWatkinontal lobes have an important role in script informationon conditions making extensive demands on executiveeeded in script generation and script sorting tasks. How-odels prediction that basal ganglia damage should
ulties in maintaining the right script and inhibiting irrel-is inconsistent with our results. In fact, our HD patientsrrelevant actions, including those of our script sorting
while the revised model proposed by Shallice (2002)hallice, 2000) implicates a degree of prefrontal corti-ent in routine action processing, cognitivo-metabolic
s in the current study are more in keeping with Graf-9) (Grafman, Sirigu, Spector, & Hendler, 1993) model of
knowledge units (MKUs). Grafman (1999) argues thatbe considered as closely related concepts to MKUs, whoned as single units of memory representing syntactictic aspects of event series. Grafman (1999) claims thatns damage the functional network that assembles MKU
into a correct syntax (that is into a sequentially cor-ce), but not the basic semantic representation of theh is stored in posterior cortical areas, but not in theia. However, the fact that script sequencing decits ins were associated with additional hypometabolism ofarietal and occipital areas suggests that other corticaly contribute to sequencing abilities.ion, our impression is that the pattern of cognitiveD patients is bears similar to the one seen in patientsntal lesions. As mentioned in the introduction of thisral studies have shown that patients with frontal lesionsved access to script knowledge, but poor evaluation ofnce of events (Allain et al., 1999; Sirigu et al., 1995) andncing abilities (Godbout & Doyon, 1995; Sirigu et al.,only difference between frontally lesioned patients ands is that the last group discarded irrelevant actionsctly. The lesion analyses of our past studies (Allain, 2001) revealed that dorsolateral lesions of the frontalssociated with script sequencing decits, while orbitale associated with impairments in eliminating irrele-sitions (Allain et al., 1999, 2001). With regard to thesect that in our script sorting task HD patients exhib-tive impairment in their ability to produce temporallyquences of actions without a decit in their ability torelevant propositions, suggests that script processingts in HD could be better interpreted in terms of changesolateral striato-thalamo-cortical loop rather than inassing striato-thalamo-cortical loop deterioration. The
of performance observed in the script sorting tasks present study ts well with neuropsychological data
Watkins et al. (2000) in HD patients early in the coursese. In these patients, these authors found a dissociationpaired performance on a planning test (the one-touchndon), that was strongly associated with the dorsolat-tal cortex in functional imaging, and intact performanceon making task, which was associated to ventrome-tal lesion. Our interpretation is consistent with whatout the neuropathological progression of HD, in whichss progresses in a dorsal-to-ventral direction (Hedreen995). Thereby, the dorsomedial striatum (a componentlateral prefrontal cortex loop circuitry) is affected ear-e ventral striatum (a component of the orbitofrontal
circuitry). Following Hedreen and Folstein (1995) andal. (2000), it would be very informative to study the per-
2682 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
formance on a script sorting tasks with distractors in later stagesof HD. It could be predicted that decits in inhibiting irrelevantactions would emerge as the disease spreads through the caudatenucleus.
As a limisize and theresting-statresult, our tion, we didused scriptsof executioSewing a bcuted less oMoll, Zahn,quency modthe human regions of tin processinthe corresprior medialfor low freqhigh frequethat sub-reengaged inhow often Therefore, ent patterninto accounHowever, insequencingfrontal area(Changingwashing upgesting thatno incidencin the scripscripts thatof frequencthis problem
5. Conclus
In concllarger impasemantic knscript orderthe decitsdistributedOur ndingbrain imagibecome maFrom a clinmining the progressionmight also life difcult
Acknowled
The MIGand AOM 0de Paris) ater involveP. Remy, MP. Maison.
Dolbeau. The Sites PI are: A.C. Bachoud-Lvi, S. Pal (Crteil), P.Krystkowiak, S. Blond (Lille), J.F. Dmonet, J.C. Sol (Toulouse), C.Verny, P. Menei (Angers), P. Damier, Y. Lajat (Nantes); F. Supiot, M.Levivier (Bruxelles).
nces
Fujii, insonptive er, G. ally seroscien. (200t et pde Be., Berre funcing anal Scie., Le Gan of kts. Jou., Le Gt repr., Le Gence ring inropsyc., Vernt de 440., E. H0). Ratingtoard, Aons ScA. L., ciateserg, M. (200itive ltier, or seq. H., B
hology., & Br. Acta t, D., Dal evoctionR. J., Cg cererters231F., Az
severety, 7, ard, M0). An496Y. (199hologiR. P., &ities. S., Sir9). Discriptges, Bneuraeimere, F., Pie couesia in., Godits in g. CorK. J. (1ing d
3633, S., Sotron e. Annatation of our study we have to mention the small sample modest statistical power of our correlations betweene brain glucose utilization and script task scores. As andings should be considered as exploratory. In addi-
not control for the frequency and/or familiarity of the. Although we selected daily life scripts, their frequencyn may widely vary. For example, an activity such asutton again includes a sequence of actions that are exe-ften than Going Shopping. In a recent study, Krueger,
Heinecke, and Grafman (1997) showed that event fre-ulates the sequence processing of daily life activities in
medial prefrontal cortex. The authors revealed that sub-he medial prefrontal cortex were differentially engagedg event sequence knowledge, depending on how oftenonding daily life activities are performed. The ante-
prefrontal area (BA 10) was differentially activateduency and the posterior medial prefrontal area 10 forncy daily life activities. Krueger et al. (1997) concludedgions of the medial prefrontal cortex are differentially
processing event sequence knowledge depending onthe activity was reportedly performed in daily life.we can assume that we would have observed differ-s of cognitivo-metabolic correlations if we had takent the variations of frequency/familiarity in our scripts.
the present work, no correlations emerged between errors and hypometabolism in the anterior medial pre-. In addition, while we used stereotypical male scripts
a at tire) and stereotypical female scripts (Doing the) in our script task, no gender differences emerged, sug-
the degree of variation in the execution of an action hase on the likelihood of the subject sequencing it correctlyt. This conclusion is only an hypothesis. A study using
are based upon tasks that are better controlled in termsy/familiarity would be required in order to disentangle.
ion
usion, our ndings provide evidence for a selectivelyirment for the organizational aspects compared toowledge of script in HD patients. Script generation anding are affected early in the course of the disease, and
observed are correlated with reduced metabolism in a functional network mainly including cortical regions.s should motivate further work, including longitudinalng, in order to clarify when script manipulation decitsnifest and how their brain substrate evolves over time.ical point of view, script tasks may be useful in deter-onset of cognitive involvement and in tracking disease
in HD. A better understanding of the pattern of decitshave some implications for anticipating the everydayies encountered by HD patients.
gements
-HD trial is granted through two PHRC AOM001394021 from the DRCD (Assistance Publique-Hpitauxnd the support of the AFM. The management cen-s: A.C. Bachoud-Lvi (Principal investigator), S. Pal,. Peschanski, P. Hantraye, J.P. Lefaucheur, D. Challine,CROs were: A. Rialland, D. Schmitz. Data manager: G.
Refere
Abe, N., Parkdece
AlexandtionNeu
Allain, PScripClau
Allain, PutivsortSoci
Allain, Ptatioscrip
Allain, PScrip
Allain, PInuordeNeu
Allain, Pmen434
Aylward(200Hun
BeauregEditi
Benton, Asso
Blinkenbet alcogn
Bo, J., Pemot
Bower, GPsyc
Braak, Hmus
Cardebalexica fun
Caselli, latinconv65, 1
Cazalis, afterSoci
Chevign(20036, 6
Corson, Psyc
Cooper, activ
Crozier, (199and
DesgranThe Alzh
EustachIn thamn
Fortin, Sdeclivin
Friston, imag(pp.
FurtadoPosieaseT., Hirayama, K., Takeda, A., Hosokai, Y., Ishioka, T., et al. (2009). Doian patients have trouble telling lies? The neurobiological basis ofbehaviour. Brain, 132, 13861395.E., Delong, M. R., & Strick, P. L. (1986). Parallel organization of func-gregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex. Annual Review ofces, 9, 357381.0). Pathologie frontale et utilisation des schmas routiniers daction:athologie frontale. Thse de Doctorat de Neuropsychologie. Universitrnard: Lyon I.ut, G., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., Barr, J., Dubas, F., & Le Gall, D. (2007). Exec-tions in normal aging: An examination of script sequencing, scriptd script monitoring. Journal of Gerontology, Psychological Sciences andnces, 62, 187190.ll, D., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., Aubin, G., & Emile, J. (1999). Mental represen-nowledge following frontal-lobe lesion: Dissociations on tasks usingrnal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21(5), 643665.all, D., Foucher, C., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., Barr, J., Dubas, F., et al. (2008).esentation in patients with Alzheimers disease. Cortex, 44, 294304.all, D., Etcharry-Bouyx, F., Forgeau, M., Mercier, P., & Emile, J. (2001).of the centrality and distinctiveness of actions on script sorting and
patients with frontal lobe lesions. Journal of Clinical and Experimentalhology, 23(4), 465483.y, C., Aubin, G., Bonneau, D., Dubas, F., & Le Gall, D. (2004). Arrange-scripts dans la maladie de Huntington. Revue Neurologique, 160,
., Codori, A. M., Rosenblatt, A., Sherr, M., Brandt, J., Stine, O. C., et al.te of caudate atrophy in presymptomatic and symptomatic stages ofns disease. Movement Disorders, 15, 552560.. (1971). Les Tests des Automatismes Verbaux. In Issy les Moulineaux:ientiques et Psychotechniques.& Hamsher, K. (1989). Multilingual aphasia examination. Iowa: AJA.., Rune, K., Jensen, C. V., Ravnborg, M., Kyllingsbaek, S., Holm, S.,
0). Cortical cerebral metabolism correlates with MRI lesion load anddysfunction in MS. Neurology, 54, 558564.S. J., Noll, D. C., & Seidler, R. D. (2011). Symbolic representations inuence learning. Neuroimage, 54, 417426.lack, J. B., & Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for texts. Cognitive, 11, 177220.aak, E. (1991). Alzheimers disease affects limbic nuclei of the thala-Neuropathologica, 81, 261268.oyon, B., Puel, M., Goulet, P., & Joanette, Y. (1990). Formal and semanticcation in normal subjects. Performance and dynamics of production as
of sex, age and educational level. Acta Neurologica Belgica, 90, 207217.hen, K., Lee, W., Alexander, G. E., & Reiman, E. M. (2008). Corre-
ebral hypometabolism with future memory decline in subsequent to amnestic pre-mild cognitive impairment. Archives of Neurology,
1236.ouvi, P., Sirigu, A., Agar, N., & Burnod, Y. (2001). Script knowledgee traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International Neuropsychological795804.., Pillon, B., Pradat-Diehl, P., Taillefer, C., Rousseau, S., Le Bras, C., et al.
ecological approach to planning dysfunction: Script execution. Cortex,69.0). The structure of scripts and their constituent elements. Cahiers de
e Cognitive, 2, 157183. Shallice, T. (2000). Contention scheduling and the control of routineCognitive Neuropsychology, 17, 297338.igu, A., Lehericy, S., Van De Moortele, P. F., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., et al.stinct prefrontal activations in processing sequence at the sentence
level: An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 37, 14691476.., Baron, J. C., Giffard, B., Chtelat, G., Laleve, C., Viader, F., et al. (2002).l basis of intrusions in free recall and cued recall: A PET study ins disease. Neuroimage, 17, 16581664.olino, P., Giffard, B., Viader, F., de la Sayette, V., Baron, J. C., et al. (2004).rse of time: A PET study of the cerebral substrates of autobiographical
Alzheimers disease. Brain, 127, 15491560.bout, L., & Braun, C. M. J. (2003). Cognitive structure of executivefrontally lesioned head trauma patients performing activities of dailytex, 39, 273291.996). Statistical parametric mapping and other analysis of functionalata. In A. W. Toga, & J. C. Mazziotta (Eds.), Brain mapping. The methods86). San Diego: Academic Press.
ssi, V., Hauser, R. A., Samii, A., Schulzer, M., Murphy, C. B., et al. (2005).mission tomography after fetal transplantation in Huntingtons dis-ls of Neurology, 58, 331337.
P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684 2683
Galambos, J. A. (1983). Normative studies of six characteristics of our knowledgeof common activities. Behavioral Research, Methods and Instrumentation, 15,327340.
Gaura, V., Bachoud-Levi, A. C., Ribeiro, M. J., Nguyen, J. P., Frouin, V., Baudic, S., et al.(2004). Striatal neural grafting improves cortical metabolism in Huntingtonsdisease pa
Godbout, L., & tic memor40, 13613
Godbout, L., Cleration folNeuropsyc
Godbout, L., Donormal agiBrain and C
Godbout, L., &frontal-lob
Godbout, L., & Ddisease: E510.
Golden, C. J. (1Gomez-Isla, T.
T. (1996). PAlzheimer
Grafman, J. (19the frontaneuropsych
Grafman, J. (19Miller, & J.(pp. 3213
Grafman, J., Sicortex leaTrauma Re
Grafton, S. T., learning in
Grafton, S. T., Hsentations9420942
Hazeltine, E., tics determ123140.
Hedreen, J. C., Huntingto105120.
Henley, S. M.,(2008). Deanatomica
Helmes, E., Buperforman213.
Henson, R. N. A familiar13(2), 301
Huang, C., Matbrain netwroimage, 3
Huntington Stability an136142.
Humphreys, Gdisorganis
Kassubek, J., Gacerebral pogy, 62, 52
Knutson, K. Mtemporal s
Krueger, F., Moulates the Cerebral Co
Kuchinke, L., vtaxonomicBrain and C
Kuhl, D. E., PheCerebral mand compu
Kuwert, T., LaE. (1990). patients w
Lawrence, A. DT. W. (199Brain, 199,
Lozza, C., BaroExecutive Human Bra
Magistretti, P.demand. S
Maguire, E. A., & Mummery, C. J. (1999). Differential modulation of a common mem-ory retrieval network revealed by positron emission tomography. Hippocampus,9, 5461.
Martin, W. R. W., Clark, C., Ammann, W., Stoessl, A. J., Shtybel, W., & Hayden, M.R. (1992). Cortical glucose metabolism in Huntingtons disease. Neurology, 42,
229.ta, J. C. (198isk for362.
M. J., Mtionshospatihiatryi, L., Putionaal ag
., Sawaelatioitive iSaito,itive-studie, D. A.,haviorintedciousn
YorkA., Grng scro, M. J5). A eimern, 118P., Ct al. he fro274
M., Brledg
uage, . D., Lonal aology, R. I., Z
selec642., Rowt retr632R. C., &rlbauz, M. F., & Maopsyc
T. (19l Socie
T. (19ersity
T. (2ciples s.
T., & Bl orgatal cor., Coh8). Di. Corte., Zallats in m316.., Zallquen310.. (197al Ser. R. (19tal Ps. A., Pmemoex, 34,h, J., &tgard:d, D. itive atients. Brain, 127, 6572.Bouchard, C. (1999). Processing time and space components of seman-y: A study of frontal-lobe related impairments. Brain and Cognition,9.outier, P., Bouchard, C., Braun, C. M. J., & Gagnon, S. (2004). Script gen-lowing frontal and parietal lesions. Journal of Clinical and Experimentalhology, 26, 857873.ucet, C., & Fiola, M. J. (2000). The scripting of activities of daily living inng: Anticipation and shifting decits with preservation of sequencing.ognition, 43, 220224.
Doyon, J. (1995). Mental representation of knowledge followinge or postrolandic lesions. Neuropsychologia, 33, 16711696.oyon, J. (2000). Defective representation of knowledge in Parkinsons
vidence from a script-production task. Brain and Cognition, 44, 490
978). Stroop color and word test. Chicago: Stoelting., Price, J. L., McKeel, D. W. J., Morris, J. C., Growdon, J. H., & Hyman, B.rofound loss of layer II entorhinal cortex neurons occurs in very milds disease. Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 44914500.89). Plans, actions and mental sets: Managerial knowledge units in
l lobes. In E. Perecman (Ed.), Integrating theory and practice in clinicalology (pp. 93138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.99). Experimental assessment of adult frontal lobe function. In B. L.
L. Cummings (Eds.), The human frontal lobes: Functions and disorders44). New York: Guilford.rigu, A., Spector, L., & Hendler, J. (1993). Damage to the prefrontalds to decomposition of structured event complexes. Journal of Headhabilitation, 8, 7387.Hazeltine, E., & Ivry, R. B. (1995). Functional mapping of sequence
normal humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 497510.azeltine, E., & Ivry, R. B. (1998). Abstract and effector-specic repre-
of motor sequences identied with PET. Journal of Neuroscience, 18,8.Grafton, S. T., & Ivry, R. (1997). Attention and stimulus characteris-ine the locus of motor-sequence encoding: A PET study. Brain, 120,
& Folstein, S. E. (1995). Early loss of neostriatal striosome neurons inns disease. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology, 54,
Wild, E. J., Hobbs, N. Z., Warren, J. D., Frost, C., Scahill, R. I., et al.fective emotion recognition in early HD is neuropsychologically andlly generic. Neuropsychologia, 46, 21522160.sh, J. D., Pike, D. L., & Drake, D. G. (2006). Gender differences ince of script analysis by older adults. Brain and Cognition, 62, 206
A., Cansino, S., Herron, J. E., Robb, W. G. K., & Rugg, M. D. (2003).ity signal in human anterior medial temporal cortex? Hippocampus,304.tis, P., Tang, C., Perrine, K., Carbon, M., & Eidelberg, D. (2007). Metabolicorks associated with cognitive function in Parkinsons disease. Neu-
4, 714723.udy Group. (1996). Unied Huntingtons Disease Rating Scale: Reli-d consistency, Huntington Study Group. Movement Disorders, 11,
. W., & Forde, E. M. E. (1998). Disordered action schema and actionation syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 15, 771811.us, W., & Landwehrmeyer, G. B. (2004). Evidence for more widespread
athology in early HD: An MRI-based morphometric analysis. Neurol-3524.., Wood, J. N., & Grafman, J. (2004). Brain activation in processingequence: An fMRI study. Neuroimage, 23, 12991307.ll, J., Zahn, R., Heinecke, A., & Grafman, J. (1997). Event frequency mod-processing of daily life activities in human medial prefrontal cortex.rtex, 17, 23462353.an der Meer, E., & Krueger, F. (2009). Differences in processing of
and sequential relations in semantic memory: An fMRI investigation.ognition, 69, 245261.lps, M. E., Markham, C. H., Metter, E. J., Riege, W. H., & Winter, J. (1982).etabolism and atrophy in Huntingtons disease determined by 18FDGted tomographic scan. Annals of Neurology, 12, 425434.
nge, H. W., Langen, K. J., Herzog, H., Albrecht, A., & Feinendegen, L.Cortical and subcortical glucose consumption measured by PET inith Huntingtons disease. Brain, 113, 14051423.., Sahakian, B. J., Hodges, J. R., Rosser, A. E., Lange, K. W., & Robbins,6). Executive and mnemonic functions in early Huntingtons disease.
16331645.n, J. C., Eidelberg, D., Mentis, M. J., Carbon, M., & Marie, R. M. (2004).processes in Parkinsons disease: FDG-PET and network analysis.in Mapping, 22, 236245.
J., Pellerin, L., Rothman, D. L., & Shulman, R. G. (1999). Energy oncience, 283, 496497.
223Mazziot
et alat r357
Mentis, RelavisuPsyc
MosconFuncnorm392.
Nishi, HCorrcogn
Nagano-CognPET
Normanof be(RepConsNew
Partiot, duri
Penniell(199AlzhBrai
Piolino, F., ein t2730
Roman, knowLang
Rosas, HRegiNeur
Rumiatias a617
Sakai, K.nal a6315
Schank, NJ: E
SchwartH. BNeur
Shallice,Roya
Shallice,Univ
Shallice,PrinPres
Shallice,porafron
Sirigu, A(199mar
Sirigu, Amen301
Sirigu, Aof se297
Smith, Alogic
Stroop, Jimen
Swain, Sand Cort
TalairacStut
Tisserancogn., Phelps, M. E., Pahll, J. J., Huang, S. C., Baxter, L. R., Riege, W. H.,7). Reduced cerebral glucose metabolism in asymptomatic subjects
Huntingtons disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 316,
cIntosh, A. R., Perrine, K., Dhawan, V., Berlin, B., Feigin, A., et al. (2002).ips among the metabolic patterns that correlate with mnemonic,al, and mood symptoms in Parkinsons disease. American Journal of, 159, 746754.pi, A., De Cristafaro, M. T., Fayyaz, M., Sorbi, S., & Herholtz, K. (2004).
l interactions of the entorhinal cortex: An 18F-FDG PET study oning and Alzheimers disease. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 45, 382
moto, N., Namiki, C., Yoshida, H., Dinh, H. D., Ishizu, K., et al. (2010).n between cognitive decits and glucose hypometabolism in mildmpairment. Journal of Neuroimaging, 20, 2936.
A., Kato, T., Arahata, Y., Washimi, Y., Nakamura, A., Abe, Y., et al. (2004). and motor-related regions in Parkinsons disease: FDOPA and FDGs. Neuroimage, 22, 553561.
& Shallice, T. (1980). Attention to action: Willed and automatic controlur. Center for human information processing (Technical report n(99)
in revised form. In: R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz & D. Shapiro (Eds.),ess and self-regulation. Advances in research and theory (1986), vol. 4.
: Plenum Press, pp. 118.afman, J., Sadato, N., Flitman, S., & Wild, K. (1996). Brain activationipt event processing. Neuroreport, 7, 761766.., Lambert, J., Eustache, F., Petit-Tabou, M. C., Barr, L., Viader, F., et al.PET study of the functional neuroanatomy of writing impairment ins disease. The role of the left supramarginal and left angular gyri., 697706.hetelat, G., Matuszewski, V., Landeau, B., Mezenge, F., Viader,(2007). In search of autobiographical memories: A PET studyntal variant of frontotemporal dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45,
3.ownell, H. H., Potter, H. H., Seibold, M. S., & Gardner, H. (1987). Scripte in right hemisphere damage and in normal elderly adults. Brain and31, 151170.iu, A. K., Hersch, S., Glessner, M., Ferrante, R. J., & Salat, D. H. (2002).nd progressive thinning of the cortical ribbon in Huntingtons disease., 58, 695701.anini, S., Vorano, L., & Shallice, T. (2001). A form of ideational apraxia
tive decit of contention scheduling. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 18,
e, J. B., & Passingham, R. E. (2002). Parahippocampal reactivation sig-ieval after interruption of rehearsal. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(15),0.
Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale,m.., Montgomery, M. W., Fitzpatrick-Desalme, E. J., Ochipa, C., Coslett,yer, N. H. (1995). Analysis of a disorder of everyday action. Cognitivehology, 12, 863892.82). Specic impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of thety of London B, 298, 199209.88). From neuropsychology to mental structures. Cambridge: Cambridge
Press.002). Fractionation of the supervisory system. In D. T. Stuss (Ed.),of frontal lobe function (pp. 261277). New York: Oxford University
urgess, P. W. (1998). Domain of supervisory processes and the tem-nization. In A. C. Roberts, T. W. Robbins, & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Thetex (pp. 2235). Oxford: Oxford University Press.en, L., Zalla, T., Pradat-Diehl, P., Van Eeckhout, P., Grafman, J., et al.stinct frontal regions for processing sentence syntax and story gram-x, 34, 771778., T., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., Agid, Y., & Dubois, B. (1995). Selective impair-anagerial knowledge following pre-frontal cortex damage. Cortex, 31,
a, T., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., Agid, Y., & Dubois, B. (1996). Encodingce and boundaries of scripts following prefrontal lesions. Cortex, 32,
3). Symbol digit modalities test manual. Los Angeles: Western Psycho-vices.35). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Exper-
ychology, 18, 643662.olkey, C. E., Bullock, P., & Morris, R. G. (1998). Recognition memoryry for order in script-based stories following frontal lobe excisions.
2545. Tournoux, P. (1988). Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain.
Thieme.J., & Jolles, J. (2003). On the involvement of prefrontal networks inging. Cortex, 39, 11071128.
2684 P. Allain et al. / Neuropsychologia 49 (2011) 2673 2684
Teichmann, M., Gaura, V., Dmonet, J. F., Supiot, F., Delliaux, M., Verny, C., et al.(2008). Language processing within the striatum: Evidence from a PET correla-tion study in Huntingtons disease. Brain, 131, 10461056.
Wood, J. N., Knutson, K. M., & Grafman, J. (2005). Psychological structure and neuralcorrelates of event knowledge. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 11551161.
Watkins, L. H. A., Rogers, R. D., Lawrence, A. D., Sahakian, B. J., Rosser, A. E., & Robbins,T. W. (2000). Impaired planning but intact decision making in early Huntingtonsdisease: Implication for specic fronto-striatal pathology. Neuropsychologia, 38,11121125.
Wechsler, D. (1981). Wechsler adult intelligence scale-revised manual. New York:Psychological Corporation.
Woo, B. K., Harwood, D. G., Melrose, R. J., Mandelkern, M. A., Campa, O. M.,Walston, A., et al. (2010). Executive decits and regional brain metabolism
in Alzheimers disease. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25, 11501158.
Zalla, T., Sirigu, A., Pillon, B., Dubois, B., Grafman, J., & Agid, Y. (1998). Decits in eval-uating pre-determinated sequences of script events in patients with Parkinsonsdisease. Cortex, 34, 621628.
Zalla, T., Sirigu, A., Pillon, B., Dubois, B., Agid, Y., & Grafman, J. (2000). How patientswith Parkinsons disease retrieve and manage cognitive event knowledge. Cor-tex, 36, 163179.
Zanini, S. (2008). Generalized script sequencing decits following frontal lobelesions. Cortex, 44, 140149.
Zanini, S., Rumiati, R. I., & Shallice, T. (2002). Action-sequencing decit followingfrontal lobe lesion. Neurocase, 8, 8899.
The neural substrates of script knowledge deficits as revealed by a PET study in Huntington's disease1 Introduction2 Materials and methods2.1 Subjects2.1.1 Patient group2.1.2 Control subjects
2.2 General procedure2.3 Neuropsychological protocol2.3.1 Script generation tasks2.3.2 Script sorting tasks
2.4 PET scanning procedure2.5 Statistical analysis2.5.1 Cognitive data analysis2.5.2 Image analysis
3 Results3.1 Script generation tasks3.1.1 Semantic aspect3.1.2 Temporal aspect
3.2 Script sorting tasks3.3 Correlations between script task scores and between task scores and executive scores3.4 Metabolism results3.5 Cognitivemetabolic correlations
4 Discussion4.1 Characteristics of script impairments in HD patients4.2 Neural bases of script deficits in HD patients
5 ConclusionAcknowledgementsReferences