The Impact of Compulsivity and Impulsivity in Cerebellar Ataxia: A Case Series

Consensus Paper: Cerebellum and Reward

Cerebellum is a key-structure for the modulation of motor, cognitive, social and affective functions, contributing to automatic behaviours through interactions with the cerebral cortex, basal ganglia and spinal cord. The predictive mechanisms used by the cerebellum cover not only sensorimotor functions but also reward-related tasks. Cerebellar circuits appear to encode temporal difference error and reward prediction error. From a chemical standpoint, cerebellar catecholamines modulate the rate of cerebellar-based cognitive learning, and mediate cerebellar contributions during complex behaviours. Reward processing and its associated emotions are tuned by the cerebellum which operates as a controller of adaptive homeostatic processes based on interoceptive and exteroceptive inputs. Lobules VI-VII/areas of the vermis are candidate regions for the cortico-subcortical signaling pathways associated with loss aversion and reward sensitivity, together with other nodes of the limbic circuitry. There is growing evidence that the cerebellum works as a hub of regional dysconnectivity across all mood states and that mental disorders involve the cerebellar circuitry, including mood and addiction disorders, and impaired eating behaviors where the cerebellum might be involved in longer time scales of prediction as compared to motor operations. Cerebellar patients exhibit aberrant social behaviour, showing aberrant impulsivity/compulsivity. The cerebellum is a master-piece of reward mechanisms, together with the striatum, ventral tegmental area (VTA) and prefrontal cortex (PFC). Critically, studies on reward processing reinforce our view that a fundamental role of the cerebellum is to construct internal models, perform predictions on the impact of future behaviour and compare what is predicted and what actually occurs.

The Role of the Cerebellum in Learning to Predict Reward: Evidence from Cerebellar Ataxia

Recent findings in animals have challenged the traditional view of the cerebellum solely as the site of motor control, suggesting that the cerebellum may also be important for learning to predict reward from trial-and-error feedback. Yet, evidence for the role of the cerebellum in reward learning in humans is lacking. Moreover, open questions remain about which specific aspects of reward learning the cerebellum may contribute to. Here we address this gap through an investigation of multiple forms of reward learning in individuals with cerebellum dysfunction, represented by cerebellar ataxia cases. Nineteen participants with cerebellar ataxia and 57 age- and sex-matched healthy controls completed two separate tasks that required learning about reward contingencies from trial-and-error. To probe the selectivity of reward learning processes, the tasks differed in their underlying structure: while one task measured incremental reward learning ability alone, the other allowed participants to use an alternative learning strategy based on episodic memory alongside incremental reward learning. We found that individuals with cerebellar ataxia were profoundly impaired at reward learning from trial-and-error feedback on both tasks, but retained the ability to learn to predict reward based on episodic memory. These findings provide evidence from humans for a specific and necessary role for the cerebellum in incremental learning of reward associations based on reinforcement. More broadly, the findings suggest that alongside its role in motor learning, the cerebellum likely operates in concert with the basal ganglia to support reinforcement learning from reward.

Reduced sensitivity to future consequences underlies gambling decision in cerebellar ataxia

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has identified that people with cerebellar ataxia (CA) showed impaired reward-related decision-making in the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). To investigate the mechanisms underlying this impairment, we examined CA participants' combination of performance in the IGT, which predominantly tests reward seeking, and the modified IGT (mIGT), which mainly assesses punishment avoidance.

METHODS

Fifty participants with CA and one hundred controls completed the IGT and mIGT. Task performance in each of the five twenty-trial blocks was compared between groups and the learning rates were assessed with simple linear regressions. Each participant's IGT score and mIGT score were compared.

RESULTS

CA participants performed worse than controls in both the IGT and the mIGT, especially in the last block (IGT: -0.24 ± 10.05 vs. 3.88 ± 10.31, p = 0.041; mIGT: 2.72 ± 7.62 vs. 8.65 ± 8.64, p < 0.001). In contrast to the controls, those with CA did not significantly improve their scores over time in either task. Controls performed better in the mIGT than the IGT, while CA participants' scores in the two tasks showed no significant difference. IGT and mIGT performance did not correlate with ataxia severity or depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with CA showed impaired performance in both the IGT and mIGT, which indicates disruption in both short-term reward seeking and short-term punishment avoidance. Therefore, these results suggest that reduced sensitivity to long-term consequences drives the risky decision-making in CA.

Ataxias: Hereditary, Acquired, and Reversible Etiologies

A variety of etiologies can cause cerebellar dysfunction, leading to ataxia symptoms. Therefore, the accurate diagnosis of the cause for cerebellar ataxia can be challenging. A step-wise investigation will reveal underlying causes, including nutritional, toxin, immune-mediated, genetic, and degenerative disorders. Recent advances in genetics have identified new genes for both autosomal dominant and autosomal recessive ataxias, and new therapies are on the horizon for targeting specific biological pathways. New diagnostic criteria for degenerative ataxias have been proposed, specifically for multiple system atrophy, which will have a broad impact on the future clinical research in ataxia. In this article, we aim to provide a review focus on symptoms, laboratory testing, neuroimaging, and genetic testing for the diagnosis of cerebellar ataxia causes, with a special emphasis on recent advances. Strategies for the management of cerebellar ataxia is also discussed.

Gambling associated risk-taking decision in cerebellar ataxia

INTRODUCTION

People with cerebellar ataxia (CA) can develop impulsive and compulsive behaviors that significantly affect their and their family's quality of life. To further assess the decision-making process associated with these behaviors, we used the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) to study people with CA.

METHODS

Sixty individuals with CA and thirty age-matched controls were enrolled in the study to complete the IGT. No participants had a prior or comorbid neurologic or psychiatric disorder associated with impulsivity. IGT performance in each of the five 20-trial blocks was compared between groups and the progression of participants' performance was assessed with simple linear regression models. Subgroup analyses were performed with genetic and non-genetic CA cases.

RESULTS

CA cases obtained significantly lower IGT total scores than controls (-5.30 ± 37.53 vs. 21.30 ± 37.37, p = 0.004). In addition, those with CA made riskier decisions throughout the task compared to controls. Although both CA and controls learned to make decisions with more favorable outcomes over the course of completing the IGT, CA participants never matched the controls' performance. IGT performance did not correlate with ataxia severity or depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The IGT may capture a unique behavioral symptom of CA. Future studies may help elucidate the mechanisms underlying impaired decision-making in CA and further the understanding of a broader spectrum of cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome.

Cerebellar impulsivity-compulsivity assessment scale

OBJECTIVE

The cerebellum has been identified as the key brain region that modulates reward processing in animal models. Consistently, we recently found that people with cerebellar ataxia have impulsive and compulsive behaviors (ICBs), the main symptoms related to abnormal reward processing. Due to the lack of a validated scale to quantitatively measure ICBs in cerebellar disorders, we aim to develop and validate a new scale, Cerebellar Impulsivity-Compulsivity Assessment (CIA).

METHODS

We recruited 62 cerebellar ataxia cases, categorized into those with ICBs and those without. We developed a preliminary version of CIA, containing 17 questions. We studied the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater reliability to formulate the final version of CIA, which constitutes only 10 questions. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was generated to assess the sensitivity and specificity of CIA.

RESULTS

Cerebellar ataxia cases with ICBs have threefold higher total preliminary CIA scores than those without ICBs (12.06 ± 5.96 vs. 4.68 ± 3.50, p = 0.038). Cronbach's alpha revealed good internal consistency across all items (α > 0.70). By performing the test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability on the preliminary version of CIA, we excluded seven questions (r < 0.70) and generated the final version of CIA. Based on the ROC, a score of 8.0 in CIA was chosen as the cut-off for ICBs in individuals with cerebellar ataxia with 81% sensitivity and 81% specificity.

INTERPRETATION

CIA is a novel tool to assess ICBs in cerebellar ataxia and broaden our understanding of the cerebellum-related cognitive and behavioral symptoms.

Impulsivity Trait Profiles in Patients With Cerebellar Ataxia and Parkinson Disease

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Individuals with cerebellar ataxia (CA) can develop impulsive behavioral symptoms, often resulting in negative interpersonal consequences, detrimentally affecting their quality of life. Limited evidence exists concerning impulsivity in CA and its associated behavioral changes. We assessed impulsive traits in CA using the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11) and compared them with those of Parkinson disease (PD) to investigate the differences in the impulsive trait profiles between CA and PD.

METHODS

We conducted a dual-center cross-sectional study with individuals with CA and PD enrolled through consecutive sampling from movement disorders clinics at Columbia University Medical Center and Vanderbilt University Medical Center, respectively. Age-matched controls were recruited at the respective institutions. Participants were excluded if they had prior or comorbid neurologic and psychiatric diseases known to be associated with impulsivity. All participants completed the BIS-11 questionnaire as a measure of impulsive traits. We used a general linear model and a least absolute shrinkage and selection operation regression to compare the total, subscale, and individual items of the BIS-11 scores between groups. Subgroup analyses were performed to isolate cerebellar contributions to impulsivity from potential effects of extracerebellar pathology and dopaminergic dysfunction or medications.

RESULTS

A total of 190 participants-90 age-matched controls, 50 participants with CA, and 50 with PD-completed the assessments. Persons with CA reported 9.7% higher BIS-11 scores than controls (p < 0.001), while persons with PD reported 24.9% higher scores than controls (p < 0.001). In CA, the most affected domain of impulsivity was nonplanning. In contrast, persons with PD noted greater impulsivity across the nonplanning, attentional, and motor domains.

DISCUSSION

Impulsivity in CA is uniquely driven by the nonplanning trait, unlike in PD. This suggests that the cerebellum and basal ganglia may differentially govern impulsive behaviors with the cerebellum contributing to the brain circuitry of impulsivity in a domain-specific manner.