Comparative efficacy of targeted structural patterns of electroencephalography neurofeedback in children with inattentive or combined attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the effects of three courses of different structural patterns of electroencephalography neurofeedback on predominantly inattentive attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD-PI) and combined ADHD (ADHD-CT). METHODS: Thirty-eight ADHD-PI and ADHD-CT children were selected and completed three courses of different structural patterns of electroencephalography neurofeedback according to their ADHD type. Before and after each course, relative power value of electroencephalography, including θ, ß, α, SMR and their ratios (θ/ß, θ/α), and eighteen integrated visual and auditory continuous performance test (IVA/CPT) quotients were obtained and compared. Data were analyzed by SPSS software, and p < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: After one course, θ, three IVA/CPT quotients in both types and two comprehensive quotients in ADHD-CT changed significantly (all p < .05). After two courses, θ/α, θ/ß and five IVA/CPT quotients in both types, θ and α in ADHD-PI, four comprehensive quotients, and four respond control quotients in ADHD-CT varied significantly compared to before treatment and after one course (all p < .05). After three courses, α, ß, θ, θ/α, θ/ß and ten IVA/CPT quotients in both types changed significantly compared to before treatment and after one course (all p < .05). In addition, six IVA/CPT quotients in both types after three courses were significantly higher than those after two courses (all p < .05). CONCLUSION: Different structural patterns of electroencephalography neurofeedback targeted for ADHD-CT and ADHD-PI were both effective and feasible. Three courses of EEG neurofeedback were most effective.

Association between Polymorphisms of the AKT1 Gene Promoter and Risk of the Alzheimer's Disease in a Chinese Han Population with Type 2 Diabetes.

AIMS: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a multifactor disease that has been reported to have a close association with type 2 diabetes (T2D) where the v-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog 1 (AKT1) plays an important role in the protein synthesis pathways and cell apoptosis processes. Evidence has been shown that AKT1 protein may be related to AD risk among patients with T2D. The aim of this study was to analyze the potential association between single nucleotide polymorphisms of AKT1 promoter and the risk of AD among patients with T2D. METHODS: The association between AKT1 polymorphisms and AD risk in patients with T2D was assessed among 574 consecutive unrelated subjects including 112 AD patients with T2D, 231 patients with AD, and 231 healthy controls in a case-control study. The cognitive function of all subjects was assessed using MMSE. Six single nucleotide polymorphisms with minor allele frequency >0.2 (rs2498786, rs74090038, rs2494750, rs2494751, rs5811155, and rs2494752) in AKT1 promoter were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and the concentration of AKT1 protein in serum was tested using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: Overall, there was statistically significant difference in AKT1 rs2498786 polymorphism. The CC frequency of AKT1 rs2498786 polymorphism in AD with T2D group and AD control group was significantly higher than that in healthy control group (PAD+T2D vs. health < 0.0001, PAD vs. health < 0.0001). However, the difference was not found between AD with T2D group and AD control group. Compared with healthy control group, the plasma levels of AKT1 protein in AD with T2D group (PAD+T2D vs. health < 0.0001) and AD control group (PAD vs. health = 0.0003) decreased significantly. Among genotypes of AKT1 rs2498786 polymorphism, the AKT1 protein level in GG genotype was significantly higher than that in GC genotype (PGG vs. GC < 0.0001) and CC genotype (PGG vs. CC < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that AKT1 rs2498786 polymorphism in insulin signaling pathway may be associated with AD risk and different genotypes may affects levels of protein expression. However, the polymorphism is not shown to be exclusive in AD patients with T2D.