bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Jepma, M.

Publications and source records attributed to Jepma, M..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Different brain systems support the aversive and appetitive sides of human pain-avoidance learning

Both unexpected pain and unexpected pain absence can drive avoidance learning, but whether they do so via shared or separate neural and neurochemical systems is largely unknown. To address this issue, we combined an instrumental pain-avoidance learning task with computational modeling, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and pharmacological manipulations of the dopaminergic (100 mg levodopa) and opioidergic (50 mg naltrexone) systems (N=83). Computational modeling provided evidence that untreated participants learned more from received than avoided pain. Our dopamine and opioid manipulations negated this learning asymmetry by selectively increasing learning rates for avoided pain. Furthermore, our fMRI analyses revealed that pain prediction errors were encoded in subcortical and limbic brain regions, whereas no-pain prediction errors were encoded in frontal and parietal cortical regions. However, we found no effects of our pharmacological manipulations on the neural encoding of prediction errors. Together, our results suggest that human pain-avoidance learning is supported by separate threat- and safety-learning systems, and that dopamine and endogenous opioids specifically regulate learning from successfully avoided pain.

neuroscience↗

Effect sizes and test-retest reliability of the fMRI-based Neurologic Pain Signature

Identifying biomarkers that predict mental states with large effect sizes and high test-retest reliability is a growing priority for fMRI research. We examined a well-established multivariate brain measure that tracks pain induced by nociceptive input, the Neurologic Pain Signature (NPS). In N = 295 participants across eight studies, NPS responses showed a very large effect size in predicting within-person single-trial pain reports (d = 1.45) and medium effect size in predicting individual differences in pain reports (d = 0.49). The NPS showed excellent shortterm (within-day) test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.84, with average 69.5 trials/person). Reliability scaled with the number of trials within-person, with [≥]60 trials required for excellent test-retest reliability. Reliability was tested in two additional studies across 5-day (N = 29, ICC = 0.74, 30 trials/person) and 1-month (N = 40, ICC = 0.46, 5 trials/person) test-retest intervals. The combination of strong within-person correlations and only modest between-person correlations between the NPS and pain reports indicate that the two measures have different sources of between-person variance. The NPS is not a surrogate for individual differences in pain reports but can serve as a reliable measure of pain-related physiology and mechanistic target for interventions. Significance statementCurrent efforts towards translating brain biomarkers require identifying brain measures that can strongly and reliably predict outcomes of interest. We systematically examined the performance of a well-established brain activity pattern, the Neurological Pain Signature (NPS), in a large and diverse sample of participants. The NPS showed excellent reliability, and the reliability scaled with the number of trials within-person. The NPS responses showed strong correlations with pain reports at the within-person level but only modest correlations at the between-person level. The findings suggest that the NPS is not a surrogate for individual differences in pain reports but can serve as a reliable measure of a pain-related physiological target. Author NoteThis project was supported by grants R01MH076136 (T.D.W.), R01DA046064, R01EB026549, and R01DA035484. Elizabeth A. Reynolds Losin was supported by a Mentored Research Scientist Development award from National Institute On Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health (K01DA045735). Lauren Y. Atlas was supported in part by funding from the Intramural Research Program of the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Yoni K. Ashar was supported by NCATS Grant # TL1-TR-002386. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Code for all analyses and figures is available at https://github.com/XiaochunHan/NPS_measurement_properties. Data for all analyses and figures is available at https://osf.io/v9px7/.

neuroscience↗

Evoked pain intensity representation is distributed across brain systems: A multistudy mega-analysis

Information is coded in the brain at different scales for different phenomena: locally, distributed across regions and networks, and globally. For pain, the scale of representation is controversial. Although generally believed to be an integrated cognitive and sensory phenomenon implicating diverse brain systems, quantitative characterizations of which regions and networks are sufficient to represent pain are lacking. In this meta-analysis (or mega-analysis) using data from 289 participants across 10 studies, we use model comparison combined with multivariate predictive models to investigate the spatial scale and location of acute pain representation. We compare models based on (a) a single most pain-predictive module, either previously identified elementary regions or a single best large-scale cortical resting-state network module; (b) selected cortical-subcortical systems related to evoked pain in prior literature ( multi-system models); and (c) a model spanning the full brain. We estimate the accuracy of pain intensity predictions using cross validation (7 studies) and subsequently validate in three independent holdout studies. All spatial scales convey information about pain intensity, but distributed, multi-system models better characterize pain representations than any individual region or network (e.g. multisystem models explain >20% more of individual subject pain ratings than the best elementary region). Full brain models showed no predictive advantage over multi-system models. These findings quantify the extent that representation of evoked pain experience is distributed across multiple cortical and subcortical systems, show that pain representation is not circumscribed by any elementary region or conical network, and provide a blueprint for identifying the spatial scale of information in other domains. Significance StatementWe define modular, multisystem and global views of brain function, use multivariate fMRI decoding to characterize pain representations at each level, and provide evidence for a multisystem representation of evoked pain. We further show that local views necessarily exclude important components of pain representation, while a global full brain representation is superfluous, even though both are viable frameworks for representing pain. These findings quantitatively juxtapose and reconcile divergent conclusions from evoked pain studies within a generalized neuroscientific framework, and provide a blueprint for investigating representational architecture for diverse brain processes.

neuroscience↗

Uncertainty-driven regulation of learning and exploration in adolescents: A computational account

Healthy adults flexibly adapt their learning strategies to ongoing changes in uncertainty, a key feature of adaptive behaviour. However, the developmental trajectory of this ability is yet unknown, as developmental studies have not incorporated trial-to-trial variation in uncertainty in their analyses or models. To address this issue, we compared adolescents and adults trial-to-trial dynamics of uncertainty, learning rate, and exploration in two tasks that assess learning in noisy but otherwise stable environments. In an estimation task--which provides direct indices of trial-specific learning rate--both age groups reduced their learning rate over time, as self-reported uncertainty decreased. Accordingly, the estimation data in both groups was better explained by a Bayesian model with dynamic learning rate (Kalman filter) than by conventional reinforcement-learning models. Furthermore, adolescents learning rates asymptoted at a higher level, reflecting an over-weighting of the most recent outcome, and the estimated Kalman-filter parameters suggested that this was due to an overestimation of environmental volatility. In a choice task, both age groups became more likely to choose the higher-valued option over time, but this increase in choice accuracy was smaller in the adolescents. In contrast to the estimation task, we found no evidence for a Bayesian expectation-updating process in the choice task, suggesting that estimation and choice tasks engage different learning processes. However, our modeling results of the choice task suggested that both age groups reduced their degree of exploration over time, and that the adolescents explored overall more than the adults. Finally, age-related differences in exploration parameters from fits to the choice data were mediated by participants volatility parameter from fits to the estimation data. Together, these results suggest that adolescents overestimate the rate of environmental change, resulting in elevated learning rates and increased exploration, which may help understand developmental changes in learning and decision-making. Author SummaryTo successfully learn the value of stimuli and actions, people should take into account their current (un)certainty about these values: Learning rates and exploration should be high when ones value estimates are highly uncertain (in the beginning of learning), and decrease over time as evidence accumulates and uncertainty decreases. Recent studies have shown that healthy adults flexibly adapt their learning strategies based on ongoing changes in uncertainty, consistent with normative learning. However, the development of this ability prior to adulthood is yet unknown, as developmental learning studies have not considered trial-to-trial changes in uncertainty. Here, we show that adolescents, as compared to adults, showed a smaller decrease in both learning rate and exploration over time. Computational modeling revealed that both of these effects were due to adolescents overestimating the amount of environmental volatility, which made them more sensitive to recent relative to older evidence. The overestimation of volatility during adolescence may represent the rapidly changing environmental demands during this developmental period, and can help understand the surge in real-life risk taking and exploratory behaviours characteristic of adolescents.

neuroscience↗