FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2052047029> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2052047029 endingPage "472" @default.
• W2052047029 startingPage "466" @default.
• W2052047029 abstract "Back to table of contents Previous article Next article REGULARFull AccessNeuropsychological Deficits in Huntington’s Disease Gene Carriers and Correlates of Early “Conversion”Jason Brandt Ph.D.Anjeli B. Inscore Psy.D.Julianna Ward Ph.D.Barnett Shpritz O.D., M.A.Adam Rosenblatt M.D.Russell L. Margolis M.D.Christopher A. Ross M.D., Ph.D.Jason Brandt Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorAnjeli B. Inscore Psy.D.Search for more papers by this authorJulianna Ward Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorBarnett Shpritz O.D., M.A.Search for more papers by this authorAdam Rosenblatt M.D.Search for more papers by this authorRussell L. Margolis M.D.Search for more papers by this authorChristopher A. Ross M.D., Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Oct 2008https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.2008.20.4.466AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail S ince the discovery of the genetic mutation responsible for Huntington’s disease, 1 there have been many attempts to determine whether people who carry the mutation, but who are not yet clinically ill, can be distinguished from those without the mutation. Brain imaging studies have often demonstrated structural and/or functional abnormalities in the striatum in presymptomatic individuals. 2 – 7 In addition, subtle oculomotor and other movement peculiarities and neuropsychiatric changes have been reported in some mutation-positive individuals prior to the onset of clinical signs and symptoms sufficient for diagnosis. 8 – 12 However, the search for presymptomatic changes in cognition among those with the huntingtin mutation has met with mixed results. Several investigations reported no significant differences in neuropsychological functioning between those with and those without the Huntington’s disease mutation. 13 – 17 Others, however, have found such differences. 8 – 10 , 18 Deficits in reaction time, psychomotor and processing speed, 10 , 18 , 20 – 22 executive functioning, 23 – 25 spatial analysis and constructional praxis, 26 verbal fluency, 23 verbal memory, 26 – 28 and mental arithmetic 9 , 10 have all been reported among mutation carriers, albeit inconsistently. The discrepant findings among studies are due, in large part, to methodological differences. First, studies have varied in the degree of neurologic abnormality tolerated in the “asymptomatic” mutation-positive group. 29 While some researchers enrolled only persons with no, or very minimal, nonspecific neurological signs, 22 , 27 others included subjects with “major signs consistent with Huntington’s disease.” 8 , 9 , 20 , 28 In addition, some studies were of young mutation carriers who were almost certainly many years from disease onset, whereas others were of older subjects nearing the age of likely clinical onset. In those studies where proximity to clinical onset was explicitly addressed, time to disease onset (“conversion”) was most often estimated. 10 , 15 – 17 , 28 The present study is one of the very few reporting data from those who have been followed prospectively from asymptomatic status to diagnosable disease onset. 18 , 22 Other factors likely contributing to discrepant research findings include differences in the variety and sensitivity of the specific cognitive tests employed and differences in statistical power to detect group differences (due primarily to sample size). 29We sought to address the limitations of previous work by studying a relatively large group of individuals with the Huntington’s disease mutation who were neurologically healthy at first examinations, who were followed prospectively, and who received the clinical diagnosis of Huntington’s disease at least 2 years after their initial evaluations. We compared the baseline cognitive test performance of these people to that of mutation-positive individuals of equivalent age and education who remained clinically asymptomatic throughout the study period and to at-risk persons who tested negative for the Huntington’s disease mutation. We hypothesized that those who became symptomatic would exhibit greater cognitive impairment at baseline, especially on tests of motor speed, dexterity, and executive control, than those in the other two groups.METHODSResearch Participants and ProcedureAll participants in the current study underwent presymptomatic genetic testing for Huntington’s disease at the Baltimore Huntington’s Disease Research Center at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and were enrolled in prospective longitudinal studies tracking motor, psychological (cognitive, behavioral and emotional), and brain morphometric changes. The parent study from which these data were drawn was fully reviewed and approved by the Johns Hopkins Medicine Institutional Review Board. All participants gave their informed consent. At-risk asymptomatic subjects who were first evaluated between February 1986 and January 2007 were eligible for inclusion in these analyses. All were required to have definitive DNA tests for the huntingtin mutation, complete neuropsychological examinations, and scores ≤10 on the Quantified Neurologic Exam 30 at baseline. The Quantified Neurologic Exam is a standardized assessment of the motor system developed specifically for Huntington’s disease, with higher scores reflecting more movement abnormalities. Scores of barely symptomatic, just-diagnosed patients are typically in the high teens to low 20s. 16 , 17 Thus, the single-digit Quantified Neurologic Exam scores of our subjects, and the fact that expert diagnosticians (including AR, RLM, CAR) rated them asymptomatic, ensure that all participants in this study were clinically healthy at entry. The above criteria were met by 237 people at risk. One hundred thirty-four subjects tested negative for the Huntington’s disease mutation (negative group), while 103 tested positive. Mutation-positive subjects were followed with (in most cases) peri-annual visits. At each visit, the Quantified Neurologic Exam was readministered, as were the battery of neuropsychological tests and several psychiatric and functional rating scales. Of the 103 mutation-positive subjects, only the 70 who were followed for at least 3 years as of June 2007 are included in the analyses reported here; this ensures that they had at least some opportunity to “convert” (i.e., develop diagnosable signs of Huntington’s disease). Of these individuals, 21 in fact converted (converter group) and 49 remained unaffected (nonconverter group) as of June 2007.Neuropsychological Tests At each visit, subjects were administered the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), 31 Vocabulary and Block Design subtests of the WAIS-Revised (WAIS-R), 32 Grooved Pegboard Test, 33 Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT, written trial), 34 Standardized Road-Map Test of Directional Sense, 35 Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, 36 Brief Test of Attention, 37 Stroop Color-Word Test, 38 and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). 39 This longitudinal study was initiated before the third edition of the WAIS (WAIS-III) and the revised version of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test were published. Statistical AnalysesBaseline demographic, neurologic, and neuropsychological test data of the converter, nonconverter, and negative groups were compared with analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by post hoc analyses of pair-wise differences using the least significant difference test. Proximity to clinical onset was determined for the converter group to be the time between baseline examination and the first follow-up visit at which a confident diagnosis was made. The converter group was then divided into “early” and “late” subgroups based on median time to onset, and the neuropsychological test performance of these groups was compared to that of the nonconverter group.RESULTS The converter, nonconverter, and negative groups were equivalent in age, education, and sex distribution ( Table 1 ). As expected, the groups differed in CAG repeat length (p<0.001), with the converter and nonconverter groups having more CAG repeats than the negative group (p<0.001). The difference in CAG repeat length between converters and nonconverters did not reach statistical significance (p=0.06). Most importantly, all the Quantified Neurologic Exam scores were in the normal range (by design), and neither the difference among the three groups nor the difference between the converters and nonconverters was significant. TABLE 1. Baseline Characteristics of Mutation-Positive Participants Who Developed Huntington’s Disease (Converted), Those Who Did Not, and Mutation-Negative Comparison SubjectsTABLE 1. Baseline Characteristics of Mutation-Positive Participants Who Developed Huntington’s Disease (Converted), Those Who Did Not, and Mutation-Negative Comparison SubjectsEnlarge table For the converter and nonconverter groups, proximity to disease onset was predicted from data available at baseline—namely, CAG repeat length and parental age of onset. 15 These two groups of mutation carriers did not differ significantly in predicted time to onset, nor did they differ in the length of time they had been followed at the time of these analyses. Subjects in the converter group had actual onset of Huntington’s disease an average of 7.94 years after their baseline visit (SD=4.89, range=1.82–18.28 years); their mean predicted time to onset was 7.12 years (SD=4.61, range=−2.57–15.06 years). These values are not statistically different from each other (p=0.44). The Pearson correlation ( r ) between actual and predicted time to onset was 0.68 (p=0.001). The mean Quantified Neurologic Exam score at the first “symptomatic” assessment for the converter subjects was 15.00 (SD=5.34). There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline performance of any of the 10 neuropsychological tests (many tests yielding multiple measures). The largest effect size (η 2partial =0.029) was on time to complete the Standardized Road-Map Test (F 2,113 =2.40, p=0.094). The converter group was divided into those who developed Huntington’s disease soon after their baseline visit (early subgroup) and those who converted later (late subgroup), using the median time to onset of 8.62 years. The early, late, and nonconverter groups did not differ in mean age or education ( Table 2 ). There was a small difference among the groups in mean baseline Quantified Neurologic Exam score, but difference between the early subgroup and late subgroup converters did not reach significance (p=0.07). Examination of the baseline neuropsychological performance of these three groups of participants, all of whom have the Huntington’s disease genetic mutation, revealed significant differences (p<0.01) only on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test ( Figure 1 ). The early converters differed from both the late converters and the nonconverter groups (who did not differ from each other) in number of sorts achieved (F 2,65 =9.17, η 2partial =0.220, p<0.001) and in efficiency score (cards used divided by sorts achieved) (F 2,65 =6.53, η 2partial =0.167, p<0.001). They also differed in the number of both perseverative errors (F 2,65 =6.50, η 2partial =0.167, p=0.003) and nonperseverative errors (F 2,65 =4.96, η 2partial =0.132, p=0.01). TABLE 2. Baseline Characteristics of Mutation-Positive Subjects Who Converted Early, Those Who Converted Late, and Those Who Remained AsymptomaticTABLE 2. Baseline Characteristics of Mutation-Positive Subjects Who Converted Early, Those Who Converted Late, and Those Who Remained AsymptomaticEnlarge tableFIGURE 1. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test Results for Huntington’s Disease Early Converters, Late Converters, and NonconvertersLeft: Inefficiency scores for patients who developed symptoms within 8.62 years (early), after 8.62 years (late), and those who remained asymptomatic. For subjects who achieved no sorts, the denominator is set at 0.5 to allow computation of this summary score. Higher scores indicate worse performance. Means+SE. Right: Number of perseverative and nonperseverative errors.DISCUSSION Most previous studies that have reported cognitive impairment in presymptomatic Huntington’s disease have found it in mutation-positive persons who were judged to be close to onset. 17 While informative, studies using estimated years to onset provide less definitive evidence of preclinical cognitive changes than investigations of persons who actually convert to Huntington’s disease within a given period. To our knowledge, only two previous studies have followed asymptomatic mutation carriers prospectively until they have become clinically ill. Paulsen et al. 22 analyzed data from the 36-center Huntington’s Study Group and reported that 70 of 260 mutation-positive subjects converted to Huntington’s disease within 2 years of baseline evaluation. These participants performed more poorly on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test and all three trials of the Stroop Color-Word Test (but not on a verbal fluency test) than those who did not convert within 2 years. Notable limitations of this study are the very minimal neurocognitive data available (i.e., three timed tests) and the brief follow-up period. In particular, the fact that all participants converted within 2 years raises the possibility that some persons who were minimally symptomatic were inadvertently enrolled. Snowden et al. 18 compared 51 mutation-positive and 85 mutation-negative subjects on 10 tests, most with multiple outcome measures. Differences emerged only on simple tracing time on the Standardized Road-Map Test (i.e., not making left-right decisions), the color naming trial of the Stroop test, and an alternating hand movement test. These tasks are all described as psychomotor performance tasks that make minimal demands on higher-level cognition, thereby making them particularly sensitive to striatal dysfunction. Twenty-four of the 51 mutation-positives had follow-up assessments, and 15 of them converted to symptomatic at least 5 years after baseline. There were statistical trends for these 15 subjects to differ from the nine who remained unaffected on two variables from the Road-Map Test, time to complete the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (Nelson modification), and time to complete a picture sequencing task. No mention is made of whether these close-to-onset and far-from-onset groups had equivalent Quantified Neurologic Exam scores at baseline and whether they were followed for the same length of time. Our study extends the work of Paulsen and Snowden by studying demographically similar samples of asymptomatic mutation-positive and mutation-negative subjects, matched for Quantified Neurologic Exam score, and by comparing presymptomatic mutation-carriers who developed Huntington’s disease at least 2 years later (mean=7.9 years) to well-matched mutation carriers followed the same length of time but who remained unaffected. Under these conditions, we found no evidence of cognitive impairment associated with having the mutation or with converting during the study period. Although we administered many of the same tests as Snowden et al., 18 we relied on standardized administration. We did not employ the speed modifications Snowden and colleagues made to many tasks, which may have made them more sensitive. On the other hand, Snowden’s mutation-positive and mutation-negative groups differed significantly in baseline Quantified Neurologic Exam score, which may have contributed to the observed group differences in psychomotor performance. When our converters were stratified into those who developed clinical signs within 8.62 years (the early group, with an average time to conversion of 3.72 years) and those who developed the illness after 8.62 years (the late group, with an average time to conversion of 11.78 years), significant differences were seen on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. The early converters achieved fewer sorts, were less efficient (i.e., they required more cards to achieve the sorts they completed), and made more perseverative and nonperseverative errors. Previous studies from our research group have demonstrated no significant cognitive impairments associated with the huntingtin mutation when subjects are more than 8 years from predicted disease onset. 15 , 16 While no overall group differences were identified between the mutation-positive and mutation-negative groups we described in 2002, 17 a median split of the mutation-positive group on estimated time to onset (8.1 years) yielded significant group differences. Mutation-carriers who were closer to predicted illness onset (mean=4.0 years) performed significantly worse than those further from onset (mean=13.1 years) on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test, WAIS-R Block Design subtest, and all trials of the Stroop test, as well as the Standardized Road-Map Test of Directional Sense and nondominant hand performance on the Grooved Pegboard Test. In the present study, the converter group was tested an average of 7.94 years before conversion, and the nonconverter group had a predicted time to onset of 9.25 years. Thus, both groups were relatively far from onset at baseline testing. The early converters were tested a mean of 3.72 years before disease onset, and only they displayed selective cognitive deficits on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Other research groups have identified executive dysfunction in preclinical Huntington’s disease. Lawrence and colleagues 23 reported findings similar to those described here in their study of persons with manifest Huntington’s disease, asymptomatic gene carriers, and mutation-negative comparison subjects. On a modified Tower of London task assessing planning and problem-solving, the gene carriers in this study achieved fewer perfect solutions and required a greater number of attempts to reach solutions than the mutation-negative comparison subjects. In another study, Lawrence et al. 24 reported more errors in attentional set-shifting (an aspect of executive functioning also measured by the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test) in asymptomatic gene carriers compared to mutation-negative subjects. Finally, difficulties with response inhibition have also been documented in preclinical huntingtin mutation carriers. 25 As we see them, the strengths of this study include objectively, operationally defined asymptomatic status of all participants; reliance on actual rather than estimated time to disease onset; extensive follow-up (e.g., some participants followed prospectively for more than 15 years); and relatively comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. Several limitations of the study are acknowledged. First, the number of converters (n=21) remains relatively small. Continued follow-up of our mutation-positive sample should yield additional cases over time. Second, the diagnosis of Huntington’s disease, and the determination of “conversion,” remains a clinical judgment and is subject to error. This is a limitation shared by all studies of the clinical emergence of Huntington’s disease. Finally, we relied heavily on standardized neuropsychological tests. The results of Snowden et al. 18 suggest that research paradigms that stress low-level, automatic, cognitive and motor routines may be more sensitive than clinical tests on the earliest brain changes in Huntington’s disease. Our finding of a highly selective presymptomatic cognitive change among those “incubating” Huntington’s disease parallels recent reports of changes in brain morphology and functioning prior to clinical disease onset. Research from our group has revealed progressive decreases in the volume of the caudate nucleus on structural MRI starting 9–11 years prior to clinical onset. 2 Other structural changes have been reported in cerebral white matter 40 – 41 and selected cortical regions. 3 Studies using PET imaging have revealed decreased activation at rest in the frontal and temporal cortex 40 as well as decreased D 2 receptor binding in the striatum. 42 Functional imaging studies with cognitive activation have found reduced activation in subcortical regions (caudate and thalamus), 4 as well as increased activation in medial prefrontal cortex 4 or decreased activation in the anterior cingulate cortex, 5 probably depending on the task. Such changes in the structure and function of fronto-striatal circuitry are consistent with the executive dysfunction demonstrated in our asymptomatic gene carriers. In conclusion, this long-term prospective study of neurologically healthy persons with the Huntington’s disease mutation found that those who develop symptoms an average of 7.9 years after baseline assessment displayed no cognitive impairments. However, those who converted soon after baseline (within 8.6 years), as a group, performed more poorly on a problem-solving test requiring mental flexibility and concept formation than those who developed the disease later. This impairment is by no means sufficiently robust to be used in counseling individual cases, but it does support prior observations that the huntingtin mutation has phenotypic expression prior to frank disease onset. Received September 26, 2007; revised January 15, 2008; accepted January 31, 2008. The authors are affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore; Drs. Brandt, Margolis, and Ross are also affiliated with the Department of Neurology and Dr. Ross is affiliated with the Department of Neurosciences at The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Address correspondence to Jason Brandt, Ph.D., The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe St., Meyer 218, Baltimore, MD 21287-7218; [email protected] (e-mail).Copyright © 2008 American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.References1 . The Huntington’s Disease Collaborative Research Group: A novel gene containing a trinucleotide repeat that is expanded and unstable on Huntington’s disease chromosomes. Cell 1993; 72:971–983Google Scholar2 . Aylward EH, Sparks BF, Field KM, et al: Onset and rate of striatal atrophy in preclinical Huntington disease. Neurology 2004; 63:66–72Google Scholar3 . Rosas HD, Hevelone ND, Zaleta AK, et al: Regional cortical thinning in preclinical Huntington disease and its relationship to cognition. Neurology 2005; 65:745–747Google Scholar4 . Paulsen JS, Zimbelman JL, Hinton SC, et al: fMRI biomarker of early neuronal dysfunction in presymptomatic Huntington’s disease. Am J Neuroradiol 2004; 25:1715–1721Google Scholar5 . Reading S, Dziorny AC, Peroutka LA, et al: Functional brain changes in presymptomatic Huntington’s disease. Ann Neurol 2004; 55:879–883Google Scholar6 . Reynolds NC Jr, Hellman RS, Tikofsky RS, et al: Single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) in detecting neurodegeneration in Huntington’s disease. Nucl Med Commun 2002; 23:13–18Google Scholar7 . Feigin A, Leenders KL, Moeller JR, et al: Metabolic network abnormalities in early Huntington’s disease: an 18 F fluorodeoxyglucose PET study. J Nucl Med 2001; 42:1591–1595 Google Scholar8 . Foroud T, Siemers E, Kleindorfer BS, et al: Cognitive scores in carriers of Huntington’s disease gene compared to noncarriers. Ann Neurol 1995; 37:657–664Google Scholar9 . Kirkwood SC, Siemers E, Hodes ME, et al: Subtle changes among presymptomatic carriers of the Huntington’s disease gene. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000; 69:773–779Google Scholar10 . Kirkwood SC, Siemers E, Stout JC, et al: Longitudinal cognitive and motor changes among presymptomatic Huntington disease gene carriers. Arch Neurol 1999; 56:563–568Google Scholar11 . Blekher T, Johnson SA, Marshall J, et al: Saccades in presymptomatic and early stages of Huntington disease. Neurology 2006; 67:394–399Google Scholar12 . Golding CV, Danchaivijitr C, Hodgson TL, et al: Identification of an oculomotor biomarker of preclinical Huntington disease. Neurology 2006; 67:485–487Google Scholar13 . de Boo GM, Tibben A, Lanser JB, et al: Early cognitive and motor symptoms in identified carriers of the gene for Huntington’s disease. Arch Neurol 1997; 54:1353–1357Google Scholar14 . de Boo GM, Tibben A, Hermans J, et al: Memory and learning are not impaired in presymptomatic individuals with an increased risk for Huntington’s disease. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 1999; 21:831–836Google Scholar15 . Campodonico JR, Codori AM, Brandt J: Neuropsychological stability over two years in asymptomatic carriers of the Huntington’s disease mutation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 61:621–624Google Scholar16 . Campodonico JR, Aylward E, Codori AM, et al: When does Huntington’s disease begin? J Int Neuropsychol Soc 1998; 4:467–473Google Scholar17 . Brandt J, Shpritz B, Codori AM, et al: Neuropsychological manifestations of the genetic mutation for Huntington’s disease in presymptomatic individuals. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2002; 8:918–924Google Scholar18 . Snowden JS, Craufurd D, Thompson J, et al: Psychomotor, executive, and memory function in preclinical Huntington’s disease. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2002; 24:133–145Google Scholar19 . Lemiere J, Decruyenaere M, Evers-Kiebooms G, et al: Cognitive changes in patients with Huntington’s disease (HD) and asymptomatic carriers of the HD mutation: a longitudinal follow-up study. J Neurol 2004; 251:935–942Google Scholar20 . Witjes-Ané MN, Vegter-van der Vlis M, van Vugt JP, et al: Cognitive and motor functioning in gene carriers for Huntington’s disease: a baseline study. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2003; 15:7–16Google Scholar21 . Lemiere J, Decruyenaere M, Evers-Kiebooms G, et al: Longitudinal study evaluating neuropsychological changes in so-called asymptomatic carriers of the Huntington’s disease mutation after 1 year. Acta Neurol Scand 2002; 106:131–141Google Scholar22 . Paulsen JS, Zhao H, Stout JC, et al: Clinical markers of early disease in persons near onset of Huntington’s disease. Neurology 2001; 57:658–662Google Scholar23 . Lawrence AD, Weeks RA, Brooks DJ, et al: The relationship between striatal dopamine receptor binding and cognitive performance in Huntington’s disease. Brain 1998; 121:1343–1355Google Scholar24 . Lawrence AD, Hodges JR, Rosser AE, et al: Evidence for specific cognitive deficits in preclinical Huntington’s disease. Brain 1998; 121:1329–1341Google Scholar25 . Farrow M, Churchyard A, Chua P, et al: Attention, inhibition, and proximity to clinical onset in preclinical mutation carriers for Huntington’s disease. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2007; 29:235–246Google Scholar26 . Rosenberg NK, Sorensen SA, Christensen AL: Neuropsychological characteristics of Huntington’s disease carriers: a double blind study. J Med Genet 1995; 32:600–604Google Scholar27 . Hahn-Barma V, Deweer B, Durr A, et al: Are cognitive changes the first symptoms of Huntington’s disease? A study of gene carriers. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 64:172–177Google Scholar28 . Solomon AC, Stout JC, Johnson SA, et al: Verbal episodic memory declines prior to diagnosis in Huntington’s disease. Neuropsychologia 2007; 45:1767–1776Google Scholar29 . Georgiou-Karistianis N, Smith E, Bradshaw JL, et al: Future directions in research with presymptomatic individuals carrying the gene for Huntington’s disease. Brain Res Bull 2003; 59:331–338Google Scholar30 . Folstein SE, Jensen B, Leigh RJ, et al: The measurement of abnormal movement: methods developed for Huntington’s disease. Neurobehav Toxicol Teratol 1983; 5:605–609Google Scholar31 . Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: “Mini-Mental State.” A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12:189–198Google Scholar32 . Wechsler D: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. New York, Psychological Corporation, 1981Google Scholar33 . Matthews C, Kløve H: Instruction Manual for the Adult Neuropsychology Test Battery. Madison, Wis, University of Wisconsin Medical School, 1964Google Scholar34 . Smith A: Symbol Digit Modalities Test Manual. Los Angeles, Western Psychological Services, 1973Google Scholar35 . Money J: Standardized Road-Map Test of Directional Sense Manual. San Rafael, Calif, Academic Therapy Publications, 1976Google Scholar36 . Brandt J, Benedict RHB: The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised Professional Manual. Odessa, Fla, Psychological Assessment Resources, 2001Google Scholar37 . Schretlen D: Brief Test of Attention Professional Manual. Odessa, Fla, Psychological Assessment Resources, 1997Google Scholar38 . Golden C: Stroop Color and Word Test Manual. Chicago, Stoelting, 1978Google Scholar39 . Heaton RK: Wisconsin Card Sorting Test Manual. Odessa, Fla, Psychological Assessment Resources, 1981Google Scholar40 . Ciarmiello A, Cannella M, Lastoria S, et al: Brain white-matter volume loss and glucose hypometabolism precede the clinical symptoms of Huntington’s disease. J Nucl Med 2006; 47:215–222Google Scholar41 . Reading SAJ, Yassa MA, Bakker A, et al: Regional white matter change in pre-symptomatic Huntington’s disease: a diffusion tensor imaging study. Psychiatr Res Neuroimaging 2005; 140:55–62Google Scholar42 . van Oostrom JCH, Maguire RP, Verschuuren-Bemelmans CC, et al: Striatal dopamine D2 receptors, metabolism, and volume in preclinical Huntington disease. Neurology 2005; 65:941–943Google Scholar FiguresReferencesCited byDetailsCited byIdentification of Subtle Verbal Memory Deficits in Premanifest Huntington Disease Using the California Verbal Learning TestCognitive and Behavioral Neurology, Vol. 33, No. 1OUP accepted manuscript1 January 2020 | BrainParkinsonism & Related Disorders, Vol. 60Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques, Vol. 45, No. 2NeuroImage: Clinical, Vol. 15Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, Vol. 22, No. 4Journal of Huntington's Disease, Vol. 5, No. 4Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, Vol. 21, No. 3The Neuropsychological Evaluation14 October 2014Cortex, Vol. 49, No. 10Brain metabolite alterations and cognitive dysfunction in early Huntington's disease30 May 2012 | Movement Disorders, Vol. 27, No. 7Human Brain Mapping, Vol. 33, No. 9Longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging of cognition in preclinical Huntington's diseaseExperimental Neurology, Vol. 231, No. 2Magnetic resonance perfusion imaging of resting-state cerebral blood flow in preclinical Huntington's disease11 May 2011 | Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism, Vol. 31, No. 9Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, Vol. 33, No. 8 Volume 20Issue 4 Fall, 2008Pages 466-472 Metrics PDF download History Published online 1 October 2008 Published in print 1 October 2008" @default.
• W2052047029 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5002674552 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5040600751 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5040712119 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5055360931 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5072055814 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5072399797 @default.
• W2052047029 creator A5090855061 @default.
• W2052047029 date "2008-10-01" @default.
• W2052047029 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2052047029 title "Neuropsychological Deficits in Huntington’s Disease Gene Carriers and Correlates of Early “Conversion”" @default.
• W2052047029 cites W1972507128 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W1980546862 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W1982284131 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2003719759 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2015789019 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2026801435 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2027816913 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2041171891 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2066664059 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2069297150 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2071762160 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2082675615 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2084425054 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2084907056 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2087028922 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2106598883 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2107946133 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2111423651 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2112168582 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2114554944 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2121642311 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2125705043 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2125789404 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2127888257 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2163142452 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2167708565 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2167878040 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2253569290 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2332106893 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W2407234902 @default.
• W2052047029 cites W39805860 @default.
• W2052047029 doi "https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.2008.20.4.466" @default.
• W2052047029 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/2966303" @default.
• W2052047029 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19196932" @default.
• W2052047029 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2052047029 type Work @default.
• W2052047029 sameAs 2052047029 @default.
• W2052047029 citedByCount "26" @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292012 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292013 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292014 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292015 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292016 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292017 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292018 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292019 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292020 @default.
• W2052047029 countsByYear W20520470292021 @default.
• W2052047029 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5002674552 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5040600751 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5040712119 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5055360931 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5072055814 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5072399797 @default.
• W2052047029 hasAuthorship W2052047029A5090855061 @default.
• W2052047029 hasBestOaLocation W20520470292 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C14216870 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C169900460 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C2780647506 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C118552586 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C126322002 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C14216870 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C15744967 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C169900460 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C2779134260 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C2780647506 @default.
• W2052047029 hasConceptScore W2052047029C71924100 @default.
• W2052047029 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2052047029 hasLocation W20520470291 @default.
• W2052047029 hasLocation W20520470292 @default.
• W2052047029 hasLocation W20520470293 @default.
• W2052047029 hasOpenAccess W2052047029 @default.
• W2052047029 hasPrimaryLocation W20520470291 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W1566646394 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W1999519889 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W2030725658 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W2153163442 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W2318244633 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2052047029 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.

• next