Dataset Information

White Matter Microstructure in the Young Adult Brain Varies with Neighborhood Disadvantage in Adolescence.

ABSTRACT: Neighborhood disadvantage and community violence are common in poor, urban communities and are risk factors for emotional dysfunction. Emotional processes are supported by neural circuitry that includes the prefrontal cortex (PFC), hippocampus, amygdala, and hypothalamus. These brain regions are connected by white matter pathways that include the cingulum bundle, uncinate fasciculus, stria terminalis, and fornix. Emotional function varies with the microstructure of these white matter pathways. However, it is not clear whether the microstructure of these pathways varies with risk factors for emotional dysfunction (e.g., neighborhood disadvantage and violence exposure). Therefore, determining the relationships between neighborhood disadvantage, violence exposure, and white matter microstructure may offer insight into the neural mechanisms by which adverse life experiences alter developing neural systems. The current study investigated the association that exposure to neighborhood disadvantage and violence have with the quantitative anisotropy (QA), a measure of the amount of directional water diffusion, of the cingulum bundle, uncinate fasciculus, stria terminalis, and fornix. Neighborhood disadvantage (M_age = 11.20) and violence exposure (M_W1age = 11.20; M_W2age = 13.05; M_W3age = 16.20; M_W4age = 19.25) were assessed during adolescence and participants returned for magnetic resonance imaging as young adults (N = 303; M_age = 20.25, SD = 1.55), during which diffusion weighted brain images were collected. The QA of the cingulum bundle, uncinate fasciculus, and stria terminalis/fornix varied negatively with neighborhood disadvantage such that the QA of these white matter tracts decreased as neighborhood disadvantage increased. Violence exposure was not related to QA in any tract (i.e., cingulum bundle, uncinate fasciculus, and stria terminalis/fornix) after correction for multiple comparisons. These results suggest that an adolescent's neighborhood may play an important role in the microstructure (i.e., QA) of white matter pathways that connect brain regions that support emotional function.

SUBMITTER: Bell KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8217337 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeighborhood- or area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with neural alterations across the life span. However, few studies have examined the effects of neighborhood disadvantage on white matter microstructure during adolescence, an important period of development that coincides with increased risk for psychopathology.MethodsIn 200 adolescents (ages 13-20 years; 54.5% female, 4% nonbinary) recruited from 2 studies enriched for early adversity and depression, we examined whether neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage derived from census tract data was related to white matter microstructure in several major white matter tracts. We also examined whether depressive symptoms and sex moderated these associations.ResultsGreater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with lower fractional anisotropy (FA) in the left arcuate fasciculus (β = -0.24, false discovery rate [FDR]-corrected p = .035) and right uncinate fasciculus (β = -0.32, FDR-corrected p = .002) above and beyond the effects of family-level socioeconomic status. Depressive symptoms significantly moderated the association between left arcuate fasciculus FA and both neighborhood (β = 0.17, FDR-corrected p = .026) and unemployment (β = 0.22, FDR-corrected p = .004) disadvantage such that these associations were only significant in adolescents who reported less severe depression. Sex did not moderate the association between socioeconomic disadvantage and FA in these tracts.ConclusionsGreater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage, particularly poverty and educational attainment levels, was associated with lower FA in the arcuate fasciculus and uncinate fasciculus above and beyond the effects of family-level measures of socioeconomic status. These patterns were only observed in adolescents with low levels of depression, suggesting that we must be cautious about generalizing these findings to youths who struggle with mental health difficulties.

Project description:ImportanceThe negative effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on lifelong functioning are pronounced, with some evidence suggesting that these effects are mediated by changes in brain development. To our knowledge, no research has investigated whether parenting might buffer these negative effects.ObjectiveTo establish whether positive parenting behaviors moderate the effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on brain development and adaptive functioning in adolescents.Design, setting, and participantsIn this longitudinal study of adolescents from schools in Melbourne, Australia, data were collected at 3 assessments between 2004 and 2012. Data were analyzed between August 2016 and April 2017.ExposuresBoth family (parental income-to-needs, occupation, and education level) and neighborhood measures of socioeconomic disadvantage were assessed. Positive maternal parenting behaviors were observed during interactions in early adolescence.Main outcomes and measuresStructural magnetic resonance imaging scans at 3 times (early, middle, and late adolescence) from ages 11 to 20 years. Global and academic functioning was assessed during late adolescence. We used linear mixed models to examine the effect of family and neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage as well as the moderating effect of positive parenting on adolescent brain development. We used mediation models to examine whether brain developmental trajectories predicted functional outcomes during late adolescence.ResultsOf the included 166 adolescents, 86 (51.8%) were male. We found that neighborhood, but not family, socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with altered brain development from early (mean [SD] age, 12.79 [0.425] years) to late (mean [SD] age, 19.08 [0.460] years) adolescence, predominantly in the temporal lobes (temporal cortex: random field theory corrected; left amygdala: B, -0.237; P?<?.001; right amygdala: B, -0.209; P?=?.008). Additionally, positive parenting moderated the effects of neighborhood disadvantage on the development of dorsal frontal and lateral orbitofrontal cortices as well as the effects of family disadvantage on the development of the amygdala (occupation: B, 0.382; P?=?.004; income-to-needs: B, 27.741; P?=?.004), with some male-specific findings. The pattern of dorsal frontal cortical development in males from disadvantaged neighborhoods exposed to low maternal positivity predicted increased rates of school noncompletion (indirect effect, -0.018; SE, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.053 to -0.001).Conclusions and relevanceOur findings highlight the importance of neighborhood disadvantage in influencing brain developmental trajectories. Further, to our knowledge, we present the first evidence that positive maternal parenting might ameliorate the negative effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on frontal lobe development (with implications for functioning) during adolescence. Results have relevance for designing interventions for children from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.

Dataset Information

White Matter Microstructure in the Young Adult Brain Varies with Neighborhood Disadvantage in Adolescence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets