» Articles » PMID: 38746624

A Comparative Evaluation of Error Processing Performance and Its Relationship with Cognitive Function in Patients with Alzheimer's Disease, Individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Normal Controls Using the Event-Related Potentials

Overview
Publisher IOS Press
Date 2024 May 15
PMID 38746624
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Some pathological changes occur in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) prior to the onset of clinical symptoms.

Objective: In the present study, we aimed to investigate the potential of event-related potential (ERP) components in error processing performance as a neuromarker of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and transition to AD and their relation with cognitive functions.

Methods: We conducted an evaluation of 16 patients diagnosed with AD, 16 patients with MCI, and 15 normal controls using three subtests from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Testing Automated Battery (CANTAB). The ERP components of error processing were extracted and compared among the three groups using a modified version of the Eriksen flanker task. Additionally, we assessed the correlation between the cognitive results and the ERP components.

Results: Significant differences were observed among the three groups in terms of providing correct responses following errors and the amplitude of error-related negativity (ERN). These differences were also significant between all paired groups. Regarding other ERP components of error processing and the peak latency of ERN, no significant differences were observed among the three groups. The findings revealed that the spatial working memory and new learning were correlated with the amplitude of ERN.

Conclusions: In the context of error processing performance, both the accuracy of responses following an error and the amplitude of ERN can be considered as indicators of MCI and its progression to AD. The present findings do not support the use of other error processing components as differential markers in the three groups.

References
1.
Suchan B, Jokisch D, Skotara N, Daum I . Evaluation-related frontocentral negativity evoked by correct responses and errors. Behav Brain Res. 2007; 183(2):206-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2007.06.013. View

2.
Horvath A, Szucs A, Csukly G, Sakovics A, Stefanics G, Kamondi A . EEG and ERP biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease: a critical review. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2017; 23(2):183-220. DOI: 10.2741/4587. View

3.
Dhikav V, Anand K . Potential predictors of hippocampal atrophy in Alzheimer's disease. Drugs Aging. 2010; 28(1):1-11. DOI: 10.2165/11586390-000000000-00000. View

4.
Egerhazi A, Berecz R, Bartok E, Degrell I . Automated Neuropsychological Test Battery (CANTAB) in mild cognitive impairment and in Alzheimer's disease. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2007; 31(3):746-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2007.01.011. View

5.
Thurm F, Antonenko D, Schlee W, Kolassa S, Elbert T, Kolassa I . Effects of aging and mild cognitive impairment on electrophysiological correlates of performance monitoring. J Alzheimers Dis. 2013; 35(3):575-87. DOI: 10.3233/JAD-121348. View