Premium
Evaluation of sensory gating efficiency in adults with Down syndrome
Author(s) -
Le April
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1002/alz.055730
Subject(s) - sensory gating , gating , neuroscience , n100 , psychology , sensory system , stimulus (psychology) , cognition , audiology , medicine , event related potential , cognitive psychology
Background In Down syndrome (DS), the amyloid precursor protein (APP) gene‐dosing effect drives a lifelong over‐production of amyloid‐beta (Aβ). The accumulation of Aβ begins to manifest as amyloid plaques as early as the teens and virtually in all by 40 years. The progression of Alzheimer’s Disease(AD)‐related neuropathology may underlie inhibitory disruption leading to over‐ or under‐sensitivity to auditory processing and cognitive deficits in DS. In positron electromagnetic tomography (PET) studies in DS, amyloid deposition has a defined temporal‐spatial profile that begins in the striatum and predictably progresses to the dorsolateral pre‐frontal cortex (DLPFC) and ventral pre‐frontal cortex (VPFC). Typically developing (TD) individuals with AD exhibit deficits of sensory gating, which can lead to sensory overload and disruption of higher cognitive processes. The auditory paired‐click paradigm has been used to evaluate sensory gating deficits in AD. We extend this inquiry to a cohort with DS to assess sensory gating in adults with DS by measuring the P50 and the N100 event‐related potential (ERP) components. The P50 component is elicited 50 ms post‐stimulus, involves the DLPFC and is sensitive to striatum‐dependent sensory gating. The N100 is elicited 100 ms post‐stimulus by auditory stimuli in absence of task demands. Method In this cross‐sectional study, data were collected using high‐density QEEG in 39 DS adults and 39 age‐matched TD controls. In this paradigm, two identical auditory stimuli (S1 and S2) were presented. For each stimuli, the response latency and amplitudes of the P50, and more salient N100 component were measured at the Cz and Fz electrode sites. General linear models examined the modulation of the ERP responses to S1 and S2 between the two groups. Result With P50 and N100 response amplitudes, an effect of stimulus was found. In the DS group, longer response latencies for the P50 and N100 corresponding to both S1 and S2 were observed. Conclusion In DS, the ability to gate‐out irrelevant sensory information is intact when compared to TD; however, there is an overall slower processing of auditory stimuli, which may be attributed to amyloidopathy. The EEG‐based paired‐click paradigm offers functional insight into potential biomarkers for pre‐clinical AD in DS.