Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults

Stephanie London; Kathy Yates; Antonio Convit

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

| Peer-Reviewed

Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults

Stephanie London, Kathy Yates, Antonio Convit

Published in American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience (Volume 6, Issue 4)

Received: 13 November 2018 Accepted: 28 November 2018 Published: 21 December 2018

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether effects of insulin resistance (IR) on frontal lobe mediated abilities differ between adolescents and middle-aged adults. These analyses included 118 adolescents aged 16-21 and 118 adults aged 45-60. IR was defined as having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) > 3.99. These analyses focused on higher-order frontal lobe-mediated function and assessed the differential effects of IR by age group on eight targeted cognitive/functional measures. There were significant differences between adolescents who were insulin sensitive (IS) and those with IR on the Stroop interference score (Cohen’s d = 0.61) and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) executive dysfunction (Cohen’s d = -1.00). Adults with and without IR did not differ on any of the selected measures. There were significant interactions between age group and IR status for the Stroop interference score (partial eta² = 0.029) and FrSBe executive dysfunction scale (partial eta² = 0.045). Compared to their IS peers, adolescents with IR performed significantly worse on 2/8 indices of frontal lobe function, while no frontal lobe related cognitive differences existed in the adult population. As anticipated, there was a significant age group by IR status interaction for these higher-order frontal abilities. Poor performance in these measures indicates difficulties in planning, organization and self-regulation, skills that are crucial for life-long learning and achievement of future goals. These data suggest that the still-developing brains of adolescents may render them more vulnerable to the negative effects of metabolic dysregulation than do equivalent metabolic abnormalities in adults.

Published in	American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience (Volume 6, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
Page(s)	108-115
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Insulin Resistance, Metabolic Syndrome, Diabetes, Executive Function, Adolescents

References

[1]	Jolliffe, D., Extent of overweight among US children and adolescents from 1971 to 2000. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord, 2004. 28(1): p. 4-9.
[2]	Skinner, A. C., et al., Prevalence of Obesity and Severe Obesity in US Children, 1999-2016. Pediatrics, 2018.
[3]	Gold, S. M., et al., Hippocampal damage and memory impairments as possible early brain complications of type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia, 2007. 50(4): p. 711-9.
[4]	Stewart, R. and D. Liolitsa, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, cognitive impairment and dementia. Diabet Med, 1999. 16(2): p. 93-112.
[5]	Cervos-Navarro, J. and N. H. Diemer, Selective vulnerability in brain hypoxia. Crit Rev Neurobiol, 1991. 6(3): p. 149-82.
[6]	Chalmers, J., et al., Severe amnesia after hypoglycemia. Clinical, psychometric, and magnetic resonance imaging correlations. Diabetes Care, 1991. 14(10): p. 922-5.
[7]	Vanhanen, M., et al., Risk for non-insulin-dependent diabetes in the normoglycaemic elderly is associated with impaired cognitive function. Neuroreport, 1997. 8(6): p. 1527-30.
[8]	Bruehl, H., et al., Cognitive impairment in nondiabetic middle-aged and older adults is associated with insulin resistance. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol, 2010. 32(5): p. 487-93.
[9]	Willette, A. A., et al., Insulin resistance, brain atrophy, and cognitive performance in late middle-aged adults. Diabetes Care, 2013. 36(2): p. 443-9.
[10]	Muniyappa, R., M. Iantorno, and M. J. Quon, An integrated view of insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am, 2008. 37(3): p. 685-711, ix-x.
[11]	Willette, A. A., et al., Association of Insulin Resistance With Cerebral Glucose Uptake in Late Middle-Aged Adults at Risk for Alzheimer Disease. JAMA Neurol, 2015. 72(9): p. 1013-20.
[12]	Sweat, V., et al., Obese Adolescents Show Reduced Cognitive Processing Speed Compared with Healthy Weight Peers. Child Obes, 2017. 13(3): p. 190-196.
[13]	Yau, P. L., et al., Preliminary evidence of cognitive and brain abnormalities in uncomplicated adolescent obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring), 2014. 22(8): p. 1865-71.
[14]	Li, Y., et al., Overweight is associated with decreased cognitive functioning among school-age children and adolescents. Obesity (Silver Spring), 2008. 16(8): p. 1809-15.
[15]	Roberts, C. K., B. Freed, and W. J. McCarthy, Low aerobic fitness and obesity are associated with lower standardized test scores in children. J Pediatr, 2010. 156(5): p. 711-8, 718.e1.
[16]	Mangone, A., et al., Cognitive functions among predominantly minority urban adolescents with metabolic syndrome. Appl Neuropsychol Child, 2018. 7(2): p. 157-163.
[17]	Andersen, S. L., Trajectories of brain development: point of vulnerability or window of opportunity? Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2003. 27(1-2): p. 3-18.
[18]	Lupien, S. J., et al., Effects of stress throughout the lifespan on the brain, behaviour and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2009. 10: p. 434.
[19]	McCrimmon, R. J., C. M. Ryan, and B. M. Frier, Diabetes and cognitive dysfunction. Lancet, 2012. 379(9833): p. 2291-9.
[20]	Romine, C. B. and C. R. Reynolds, A model of the development of frontal lobe functioning: findings from a meta-analysis. Appl Neuropsychol, 2005. 12(4): p. 190-201.
[21]	Yau, P. L., et al., Preliminary evidence for brain complications in obese adolescents with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia, 2010. 53(11): p. 2298-306.
[22]	Yau, P. L., et al., Obesity and metabolic syndrome and functional and structural brain impairments in adolescence. Pediatrics, 2012. 130(4): p. e856-64.
[23]	Anderson, P., Assessment and development of executive function (EF) during childhood. Child Neuropsychol, 2002. 8(2): p. 71-82.
[24]	Henry, J. D. and J. R. Crawford, A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency performance following focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychology, 2004. 18(2): p. 284-95.
[25]	Tang, Q., et al., Optimal cut-off values for the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and pre-diabetes screening: Developments in research and prospects for the future. Drug Discov Ther, 2015. 9(6): p. 380-5.
[26]	Rosenbaum, M., et al., Racial/ethnic differences in clinical and biochemical type 2 diabetes mellitus risk factors in children. Obesity (Silver Spring), 2013. 21(10): p. 2081-90.
[27]	Flynn, J. T., et al., Clinical Practice Guideline for Screening and Management of High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents. Pediatrics, 2017. 140(3).
[28]	Fink, R. I., et al., The role of the glucose transport system in the postreceptor defect in insulin action associated with human aging. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 1984. 58(4): p. 721-5.
[29]	Falkner, B., Hypertension in children and adolescents: epidemiology and natural history. Pediatr Nephrol, 2010. 25(7): p. 1219-24.
[30]	McNiece, K. L., et al., Prevalence of hypertension and pre-hypertension among adolescents. J Pediatr, 2007. 150(6): p. 640-4, 644.e1.
[31]	Carroll, M. D., C. D. Fryar, and B. K. Kit, Total and High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol in Adults: United States, 2011-2014. NCHS Data Brief, 2015(226): p. 1-8.
[32]	Nguyen, D., B. Kit, and M. Carroll, Abnormal Cholesterol Among Children and Adolescents in the United States, 2011-2014. NCHS Data Brief, 2015(228): p. 1-8.
[33]	Dabelea, D., et al., Prevalence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes among children and adolescents from 2001 to 2009. Jama, 2014. 311(17): p. 1778-86.
[34]	Novak, V. and I. Hajjar, The relationship between blood pressure and cognitive function. Nat Rev Cardiol, 2010. 7(12): p. 686-98.
[35]	Wolf, P. A., et al., Relation of obesity to cognitive function: importance of central obesity and synergistic influence of concomitant hypertension. The Framingham Heart Study. Curr Alzheimer Res, 2007. 4(2): p. 111-6.
[36]	Alvarez, J. A. and E. Emory, Executive function and the frontal lobes: a meta-analytic review. Neuropsychol Rev, 2006. 16(1): p. 17-42.
[37]	Perret, E., The left frontal lobe of man and the suppression of habitual responses in verbal categorical behaviour. Neuropsychologia, 1974. 12(3): p. 323-30.
[38]	Blair, C. and R. P. Razza, Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Dev, 2007. 78(2): p. 647-63.
[39]	Best, J. R., P. H. Miller, and J. A. Naglieri, Relations between Executive Function and Academic Achievement from Ages 5 to 17 in a Large, Representative National Sample. Learn Individ Differ, 2011. 21(4): p. 327-336.
[40]	Maayan, L., et al., Disinhibited eating in obese adolescents is associated with orbitofrontal volume reductions and executive dysfunction. Obesity (Silver Spring), 2011. 19(7): p. 1382-7.
[41]	Pathan, A. R., et al., Rosiglitazone attenuates the cognitive deficits induced by high fat diet feeding in rats. Eur J Pharmacol, 2008. 589(1-3): p. 176-9.
[42]	Alosco, M. L., et al., Cognitive function after bariatric surgery: evidence for improvement 3 years after surgery. Am J Surg, 2014. 207(6): p. 870-6.
[43]	Gunstad, J., et al., Improved memory function 12 weeks after bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis, 2011. 7(4): p. 465-72.
[44]	Mingrone, G., et al., Bariatric surgery versus conventional medical therapy for type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2012. 366(17): p. 1577-85.
[45]	Sultan, S., et al., Five-year outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes who underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Surg Obes Relat Dis, 2010. 6(4): p. 373-6.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Stephanie London, Kathy Yates, Antonio Convit. (2018). Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 6(4), 108-115. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Stephanie London; Kathy Yates; Antonio Convit. Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. Am. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 2018, 6(4), 108-115. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Stephanie London, Kathy Yates, Antonio Convit. Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. Am J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2018;6(4):108-115. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14,
  author = {Stephanie London and Kathy Yates and Antonio Convit},
  title = {Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults},
  journal = {American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {108-115},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  abstract = {The aim of this study was to determine whether effects of insulin resistance (IR) on frontal lobe mediated abilities differ between adolescents and middle-aged adults. These analyses included 118 adolescents aged 16-21 and 118 adults aged 45-60. IR was defined as having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) > 3.99. These analyses focused on higher-order frontal lobe-mediated function and assessed the differential effects of IR by age group on eight targeted cognitive/functional measures. There were significant differences between adolescents who were insulin sensitive (IS) and those with IR on the Stroop interference score (Cohen’s d = 0.61) and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) executive dysfunction (Cohen’s d = -1.00). Adults with and without IR did not differ on any of the selected measures. There were significant interactions between age group and IR status for the Stroop interference score (partial eta2 = 0.029) and FrSBe executive dysfunction scale (partial eta2 = 0.045). Compared to their IS peers, adolescents with IR performed significantly worse on 2/8 indices of frontal lobe function, while no frontal lobe related cognitive differences existed in the adult population. As anticipated, there was a significant age group by IR status interaction for these higher-order frontal abilities. Poor performance in these measures indicates difficulties in planning, organization and self-regulation, skills that are crucial for life-long learning and achievement of future goals. These data suggest that the still-developing brains of adolescents may render them more vulnerable to the negative effects of metabolic dysregulation than do equivalent metabolic abnormalities in adults.},
 year = {2018}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults
AU  - Stephanie London
AU  - Kathy Yates
AU  - Antonio Convit
Y1  - 2018/12/21
PY  - 2018
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
T2  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
JF  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
JO  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
SP  - 108
EP  - 115
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-426X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
AB  - The aim of this study was to determine whether effects of insulin resistance (IR) on frontal lobe mediated abilities differ between adolescents and middle-aged adults. These analyses included 118 adolescents aged 16-21 and 118 adults aged 45-60. IR was defined as having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) > 3.99. These analyses focused on higher-order frontal lobe-mediated function and assessed the differential effects of IR by age group on eight targeted cognitive/functional measures. There were significant differences between adolescents who were insulin sensitive (IS) and those with IR on the Stroop interference score (Cohen’s d = 0.61) and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) executive dysfunction (Cohen’s d = -1.00). Adults with and without IR did not differ on any of the selected measures. There were significant interactions between age group and IR status for the Stroop interference score (partial eta2 = 0.029) and FrSBe executive dysfunction scale (partial eta2 = 0.045). Compared to their IS peers, adolescents with IR performed significantly worse on 2/8 indices of frontal lobe function, while no frontal lobe related cognitive differences existed in the adult population. As anticipated, there was a significant age group by IR status interaction for these higher-order frontal abilities. Poor performance in these measures indicates difficulties in planning, organization and self-regulation, skills that are crucial for life-long learning and achievement of future goals. These data suggest that the still-developing brains of adolescents may render them more vulnerable to the negative effects of metabolic dysregulation than do equivalent metabolic abnormalities in adults.
VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Stephanie London

Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA
Kathy Yates

Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA
Antonio Convit

Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Stephanie London, Kathy Yates, Antonio Convit. (2018). Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 6(4), 108-115. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Stephanie London; Kathy Yates; Antonio Convit. Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. Am. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 2018, 6(4), 108-115. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Stephanie London, Kathy Yates, Antonio Convit. Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults. Am J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2018;6(4):108-115. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14,
  author = {Stephanie London and Kathy Yates and Antonio Convit},
  title = {Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults},
  journal = {American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {108-115},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajpn.20180604.14},
  abstract = {The aim of this study was to determine whether effects of insulin resistance (IR) on frontal lobe mediated abilities differ between adolescents and middle-aged adults. These analyses included 118 adolescents aged 16-21 and 118 adults aged 45-60. IR was defined as having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) > 3.99. These analyses focused on higher-order frontal lobe-mediated function and assessed the differential effects of IR by age group on eight targeted cognitive/functional measures. There were significant differences between adolescents who were insulin sensitive (IS) and those with IR on the Stroop interference score (Cohen’s d = 0.61) and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) executive dysfunction (Cohen’s d = -1.00). Adults with and without IR did not differ on any of the selected measures. There were significant interactions between age group and IR status for the Stroop interference score (partial eta2 = 0.029) and FrSBe executive dysfunction scale (partial eta2 = 0.045). Compared to their IS peers, adolescents with IR performed significantly worse on 2/8 indices of frontal lobe function, while no frontal lobe related cognitive differences existed in the adult population. As anticipated, there was a significant age group by IR status interaction for these higher-order frontal abilities. Poor performance in these measures indicates difficulties in planning, organization and self-regulation, skills that are crucial for life-long learning and achievement of future goals. These data suggest that the still-developing brains of adolescents may render them more vulnerable to the negative effects of metabolic dysregulation than do equivalent metabolic abnormalities in adults.},
 year = {2018}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Differential Effects of Insulin Resistance on Frontal Lobe Related Cognitive Function in Adolescents and Adults
AU  - Stephanie London
AU  - Kathy Yates
AU  - Antonio Convit
Y1  - 2018/12/21
PY  - 2018
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
T2  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
JF  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
JO  - American Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
SP  - 108
EP  - 115
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-426X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpn.20180604.14
AB  - The aim of this study was to determine whether effects of insulin resistance (IR) on frontal lobe mediated abilities differ between adolescents and middle-aged adults. These analyses included 118 adolescents aged 16-21 and 118 adults aged 45-60. IR was defined as having a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) > 3.99. These analyses focused on higher-order frontal lobe-mediated function and assessed the differential effects of IR by age group on eight targeted cognitive/functional measures. There were significant differences between adolescents who were insulin sensitive (IS) and those with IR on the Stroop interference score (Cohen’s d = 0.61) and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe) executive dysfunction (Cohen’s d = -1.00). Adults with and without IR did not differ on any of the selected measures. There were significant interactions between age group and IR status for the Stroop interference score (partial eta2 = 0.029) and FrSBe executive dysfunction scale (partial eta2 = 0.045). Compared to their IS peers, adolescents with IR performed significantly worse on 2/8 indices of frontal lobe function, while no frontal lobe related cognitive differences existed in the adult population. As anticipated, there was a significant age group by IR status interaction for these higher-order frontal abilities. Poor performance in these measures indicates difficulties in planning, organization and self-regulation, skills that are crucial for life-long learning and achievement of future goals. These data suggest that the still-developing brains of adolescents may render them more vulnerable to the negative effects of metabolic dysregulation than do equivalent metabolic abnormalities in adults.
VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download