Apathy and Depression in Huntington’s Disease: Distinct Longitudinal Trajectories and Clinical Correlates
Publication: The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Abstract
Objective:
Huntington’s disease (HD) is an autosomal-dominant neurodegenerative disease resulting in motor disturbances, dementia, and psychiatric symptoms. Apathy is a common manifestation and rated as one of the most impactful by patients and caregivers. It can often be difficult to distinguish from depression because of shared features and frequent overlap. This study examined the longitudinal trajectories and clinical correlates of apathy and depression.
Methods:
Data were drawn from the Cooperative Huntington Observational Research Trial, a prospective, multicenter observational study that recruited 1,082 patients with HD. Measures of cognition, function, neuropsychiatric symptoms, motor function, and medication use were completed annually over 5 years.
Results:
Overall, 423 patients (39%) showed evidence of apathy at study baseline, and both the prevalence and overall severity of apathy increased over time. Depression, by contrast, affected a similar proportion at baseline, although levels remained relatively stable over the study. Apathy was associated with worse cognition, function, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and motor symptoms. Depression was associated with worse neuropsychiatric symptoms, suicidal ideation, and independence but not other outcomes after control for other variables.
Conclusions:
Apathy in HD increased over time and was associated with worse clinical outcomes. These associations were independent of depression and other clinical variables. The findings highlight the need to distinguish between apathy and depression given their distinct implications for prognosis and management.
Huntington’s disease (HD) is an autosomal-dominant neurodegenerative disease that is characterized by motor disturbances, dementia, and neuropsychiatric symptoms (1, 2). HD occurs in approximately one in 10,000 people (3), and there is no known prevention or cure. It is caused by an unstable expansion of the cytosine-adenine-guanine (CAG) repeat in the Huntingtin gene (4). Onset is typically in midlife, although it can occur at any age and is inversely proportional to the number of CAG repeats (5). Progression of the disease is similarly related to the number of CAG repeats (6). Motor disturbances are a defining characteristic and are required for clinical diagnosis. These disturbances can include chorea (involuntary, jerky movements), dystonia (involuntary co-contraction of muscles leading to abnormal posturing), bradykinesia, imbalance, and rigidity (2, 7, 8). Despite the prominence of motor symptoms, cognitive deficits and psychiatric symptoms may precede the diagnosis by many years (9) and often emerge over the course of the disease as the most clinically significant and disabling (10).
Apathy—defined as an absence of motivation and goal-directed behavior—is a common feature, affecting around a quarter of premanifest patients (11) and half or more of manifest HD patients (10–17). It is rated as one of most impactful symptoms of the disease by both patients and caregivers (10). It is also associated with greater impairments in cognition (17–20), function (16–22), and movement (16, 18, 19) and greater frequency of other neuropsychiatric symptoms (16, 19) in cross-sectional studies. In addition, apathy predicts the onset of HD in gene carriers and subsequent functional decline in early HD (9).
Apathy in HD has been associated with deficits in specific components of goal-directed behavior, including executive function and planning (19, 23), and insensitivity to reinforcement learning after loss (24). Neurobiological mechanisms underlying apathy remain unclear but appear largely unrelated to inheritance (25) or number of CAG repeats (16, 26). One possibility is that apathy results from the degeneration of prefrontal-subcortical circuits underlying motivation and planning (27, 28). In support of this, research has found apathy to be associated with smaller thalamic volumes (29); smaller gray matter volumes in temporal and subcortical regions (17); and lower glucose metabolism in the frontal, temporal, and parietal areas (17).
Despite its prevalence and impact, comparatively little research has examined apathy longitudinally, and most research is based on cross-sectional studies. A further challenge is the fact that apathy often co-occurs with depression, making it difficult to disentangle their relative effects (30). From the available research, apathy appears to increase in frequency and severity over time (9, 11, 31). The timeline for this, however, appears slightly unclear, with evidence that apathy may be reversible in some patients (26) and that levels may be stable over 2 years (32). Mixed findings have also been reported in terms of apathy’s relationship to clinical outcomes. One recent study, for example, found that apathy predicted cognitive decline 2 years later in premanifest HD gene carriers but not in manifest HD patients and only when controlling for depression (33). Another study found that apathy predicted functional decline over 3 years in early HD but did not control for depression (9).
Given these inconsistent findings, we attempted to characterize the longitudinal outcomes of HD patients with apathy. We drew upon data from the Cooperative Huntington Observational Research Trial (COHORT) (34), which assessed cognition, function, motor disturbances, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in a large sample of patients over a five-year period. Within these domains, we also examined occupational functioning, suicidal ideation, and psychosis separately given their potential specific relationships with apathy and depression. We likewise examined different types of motor disturbances given evidence of distinct trajectories over time (2, 7, 8, 35) and a recent report that apathy may be associated with more severe bradykinesia but less chorea (36). Based on previous research, we hypothesized that apathy would increase over time and be associated with worse clinical outcomes.
Methods
Design
Participants were drawn from COHORT (34, 35), a prospective observational study conducted across 44 separate testing sites in Australia (N=2), Canada (N=4), and the United States (N=38). The study recruited four types of participants: individuals with a clinical diagnosis of HD; individuals at high risk of HD based on genetic testing prior to the study who did not have a clinical diagnosis of HD; first- and second-degree relatives of individuals from the first two groups (around one-third of whom underwent genetic testing for the study); and spouses or caregivers of individuals from the first two groups who had no genetic risk for HD. Genetic analyses were completed on blood collected at enrollment. Measures of clinical outcomes were administered annually for 5 years. All participants provided written informed consent. Ethics approval was obtained from ethics committees from individual testing centers (National Institutes of Health clinical trials registry number NCT00313495).
Participants
Our analyses focused on patients with a clinical diagnosis of HD at baseline or who received this diagnosis during the study. This diagnosis was based on the motor subscale of the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) (37), which requires clinicians to rate whether they believe that the subject has manifest HD with a confidence level of ≥99%. All patients were also required to have a CAG count greater than 35.
Measures and Procedure
Participants provided a medical history and a blood sample for DNA testing and Huntingtin CAG repeat genotyping at baseline. At each visit, participants completed a detailed clinical assessment and neurological examination. Function was assessed using the UHDRS measures of independence (range 0–100; higher scores indicate better function) and total functional capacity (TFC; range 0–13; higher scores indicate better function). Occupational functioning was assessed using the occupation item in the TFC measure (range 0–3; higher scores indicate better functioning). Cognition was assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; range 0–30) (38) and the UHDRS measures: Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT; range 0–110) (39); Verbal Fluency Test (number of words generated in one minute) (40); and Stroop Interference Test (number correct, range 0–100) (41); for all these cognitive measures, higher scores indicate better cognition.
Neuropsychiatric symptoms were assessed using the revised UHDRS scale for behavioral symptoms (37). This scale requires clinicians to rate 11 symptoms in terms of their frequency (range 0–4) and severity (range 0–4). These two ratings can be multiplied to provide a total score for each symptom (range 0–16). A total score of all neuropsychiatric symptoms can be calculated by adding the scores of individual symptoms. Apathy, depression, and suicidal ideation were each assessed using their individual item scores (range 0–16; higher scores indicate more severe and frequent symptoms). For the purpose of this study, a total score of neuropsychiatric symptoms was calculated excluding apathy and depression (range 0–144). Psychosis was defined dichotomously by the presence of delusions or hallucinations on the UHDRS scale; a continuous score for psychosis was also calculated by adding scores for these two items.
Motor disturbance was assessed using the UHDRS (37). This provides a total score of motor disturbance (range 0–124; higher scores indicate more severe symptoms) and subscores for chorea (range 0–28), dystonia (range 0–20), rigidity (range 0–8), balance (combining scores for gait, tandem gait, and postural stability; range 0–12), and bradykinesia (range 0–4). A list of patients’ medications was collected, including antipsychotics (typically prescribed for neuropsychiatric symptoms and chorea), tetrabenazine (typically prescribed for chorea), antidepressants, and stimulants.
Statistical Analyses
The characteristics of all patients at study baseline (including those with HD at baseline and those subsequently diagnosed) were compared according to whether they experienced apathy at baseline assessment. Data were compared using logistic regression to control for time since clinical diagnosis. The main analyses treated apathy and depression as continuous variables. For the purpose of estimating prevalence, dichotomous scores were calculated for each symptom using both their presence (score≥1) and clinically significant levels (score≥4). The latter score was based on cut-offs used in studies of neuropsychiatric symptoms in other dementias using analogous scales (42) and evidence of thalamic involvement in association with apathy at scores >2 (29).
Longitudinal data were analyzed using linear mixed models with normally distributed random intercepts and random effects for time. Time was measured from when patients received their clinical diagnosis. Analyses were restricted to the first 4 years of data due to the small number of patients returning for the five-year follow-up (Appendix 1 in the online supplement). Only patients with a current motor diagnosis of HD were included (patients diagnosed with HD during the study were included once they received their diagnosis). To assess the trajectory of apathy over time, a model examined apathy score as outcome and time since clinical diagnosis, age at baseline, sex, and number of CAG repeats as predictors. This was repeated to control for depression and antipsychotic, antidepressant, and stimulant medications. Separate analyses examined the trajectory of depression score as an outcome in a similar manner.
Other longitudinal analyses examined the clinical correlates of apathy. Outcome measures were function (independence, TFC), cognition (MMSE, SDMT, Verbal Fluency, Stroop Interference), neuropsychiatric symptoms (total behavioral score excluding apathy and depression), and motor disturbances (total score). For each outcome, separate models included the following predictors: age, sex, number of CAG repeats, apathy, and depression (both apathy and depression were treated as continuous variables). For neuropsychiatric symptoms, use of antipsychotic medications was included as a dichotomous time-varying variable. Likewise, for motor disturbances, use of antipsychotic medication and tetrabenazine were included as dichotomous time-varying variables. For all outcomes, interactions between apathy and time were included in the model to check if the effect varied over time and were retained in the model if p<0.10. Models were selected based on the Akaike information criterion. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05 for all statistical tests of main effects given the exploratory nature of the analyses.
Separate analyses examined occupational functioning, suicidal ideation, the presence of psychosis, and different types of motor disturbances (chorea, dystonia, rigidity, balance, bradykinesia) as outcomes. These analyses included the same predictors as the main analyses. For the presence of psychosis, antipsychotic medications were controlled for. For suicidal ideation, function (independence), cognition (MMSE), motor disturbances (total score), and antidepressants were controlled for.
Three further sensitivity analyses were conducted. First, to examine apathy as a trait marker of overall disease course, apathy was defined dichotomously as a time-varying covariate such that patients were categorized as having apathy once they showed active symptoms or if they had previously shown symptoms. Second, to examine the ability of a cross-sectional assessment to predict overall disease course, the main analyses were repeated, taking apathy scores at the study baseline as the predictor of outcome measures. Finally, given previous findings suggesting that findings might be affected by controlling for depression (33), all analyses were repeated without depression as a covariate. All analyses were completed using SPSS, version 25.
Results
Sample Characteristics
Over the course of the study, 1,082 patients with HD were recruited (994 patients had HD at baseline, whereas a further 88 were diagnosed with HD during the study). Of these, 423 (39.2%) exhibited apathy at the baseline assessment and 712 (65.8%) exhibited apathy at some point over the course of their disease.
The characteristics of patients at enrollment—including both those with HD at the baseline visit and those subsequently diagnosed—are shown in Table 1. Patients with apathy at enrollment did not differ from those without apathy in terms of age, sex, education, CAG repeats, or time since diagnosis. Patients experiencing apathy, however, exhibited worse function, depression, and neuropsychiatric symptoms than patients without apathy. Patients experiencing apathy also had less chorea and more bradykinesia than patients without apathy. The sample size across the study is shown in Appendix 1 in the online supplement.
| Overall (N=1,082) | Apathyb (N=423) | No apathy (N=659) | Statistical comparisonc | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | Mean/number | SD/% | Mean/number | SD/% | Mean/number | SD/% | OR | p |
| Demographic | ||||||||
| Age | 51.64 | 11.75 | 51.16 | 11.53 | 51.94 | 11.90 | 0.99 | 0.181 |
| Sex (female) | 572 | 52.9% | 219 | 51.8% | 353 | 53.6% | 1.09 | 0.509 |
| CAG | 44.30 | 4.12 | 44.30 | 4.42 | 44.30 | 3.92 | 1.00 | 0.998 |
| Education (tertiary) | 444 | 41.1 | 169 | 40.0% | 275 | 41.9% | 0.94 | 0.621 |
| Time since diagnosis (years) | 4.13 | 4.05 | 4.38 | 4.23 | 3.98 | 3.94 | 1.02 | 0.117 |
| Function | ||||||||
| Independence scale | 79.79 | 16.34 | 77.09 | 15.85 | 81.60 | 16.34 | 0.98 | <0.001 |
| Total functional capacity | 8.23 | 3.40 | 7.67 | 3.33 | 8.61 | 3.39 | 0.92 | <0.001 |
| Occupational functioning | 0.92 | 1.10 | 0.75 | 0.98 | 1.03 | 1.15 | 0.79 | <0.001 |
| Cognition | ||||||||
| MMSE | 25.12 | 4.45 | 24.89 | 4.44 | 25.29 | 4.42 | 0.98 | 0.238 |
| SDMT | 24.20 | 11.77 | 24.89 | 11.34 | 24.30 | 12.03 | 1.00 | 0.754 |
| Verbal Fluency Test | 22.33 | 13.11 | 21.67 | 12.59 | 22.78 | 13.40 | 1.00 | 0.272 |
| Stroop Interference Test | 25.70 | 12.18 | 24.86 | 11.99 | 26.22 | 12.28 | 0.99 | 0.183 |
| Neuropsychiatric symptoms | ||||||||
| Behavioral total scored | 11.70 | 13.76 | 17.72 | 15.39 | 7.83 | 11.00 | 1.06 | <0.001 |
| Depression score | 1.71 | 2.95 | 2.90 | 3.58 | 0.93 | 2.12 | 1.31 | <0.001 |
| Suicidal ideation score | 0.14 | 0.86 | 0.30 | 1.27 | 0.04 | 0.40 | 1.59 | <0.001 |
| Psychosis present | 138 | 12.8% | 77 | 18.2% | 60 | 9.1% | 2.20 | <0.001 |
| Motor symptoms | ||||||||
| Total motor score | 38.64 | 18.76 | 38.84 | 18.49 | 38.42 | 18.86 | 1.00 | 0.725 |
| Chorea | 9.99 | 5.14 | 9.50 | 4.89 | 10.28 | 5.26 | 0.97 | 0.006 |
| Dystonia | 3.46 | 3.81 | 3.33 | 3.69 | 3.52 | 3.87 | 0.98 | 0.183 |
| Rigidity | 1.36 | 1.59 | 1.42 | 1.63 | 1.31 | 1.56 | 1.03 | 0.473 |
| Balance | 3.90 | 2.76 | 4.06 | 2.81 | 3.79 | 2.73 | 1.03 | 0.260 |
| Bradykinesia | 1.12 | 1.07 | 1.23 | 1.11 | 1.05 | 1.04 | 1.14 | 0.027 |
| Medications | ||||||||
| Antipsychotics | 376 | 34.8% | 170 | 40.2% | 204 | 31.1% | 1.48 | 0.084 |
| Tetrabenazine | 58 | 5.4% | 21 | 5.0% | 37 | 5.6% | 1.50 | 0.338 |
| Antidepressants | 674 | 62.3% | 311 | 73.5% | 361 | 54.9% | 2.17 | <0.001 |
| Stimulants | 23 | 2.1% | 12 | 2.8% | 11 | 1.7% | 1.54 | 0.308 |
a
Continuous variables are summarized as means and SDs; categorical variables are summarized as number and percentage. Function, motor, and neuropsychiatric symptoms were measured with the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). CAG, number of cytosine-adenine-guanine repeats; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; SDMT, Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Values in bold indicate p<0.05.
b
Apathy at baseline.
c
Statistical comparison between patients with apathy and patients without apathy, adjusted for time since clinical diagnosis. OR, odds ratio; p, p value.
d
Excluding apathy and depression.
Longitudinal Trajectories of Apathy and Depression
The prevalence of apathy gradually increased over the course of the study. Apathy was evident in 39.2% of patients at baseline, 39.6% at 1 year, 38.9% at 2 years, 44.0% at 3 years, and 46.0% at 4 years. Clinically significant apathy—indicated by a cut-off of 4 or more—was present in 23.8% of patients at baseline, 26.5% at 1 year, 25.7% at 2 years, 31.0% at 3 years, and 34.2% at 4 years. By contrast, the prevalence of depression appeared to be relatively constant, affecting 42.5%, 42.4%, 40.4%, 43.9%, and 39.1% at the respective visits (for clinically significant depression, 21.4%, 20.4%, 19.6%, 24.1%, and 23% were affected at the respective visits). Between 25.1% and 27.3% of patients had both symptoms across visits (between 9.8% and 12.3% had both at clinically significant levels).
Across all patients, average apathy scores increased by 0.10 points each year after diagnosis (p<0.001), with controls for age, sex, and number of CAG repeats (Appendix 2 in the online supplement). There was no relationship between apathy scores and number of CAG repeats, age, or sex. Including depression and medications in the model did not change these findings, although depression itself was associated with greater apathy—each point increase in depression score was associated with an increase of 0.42 points in apathy (p<0.001). Antidepressant (effect estimate=0.33, p<0.001) and antipsychotic medication (effect estimate=0.84, p<0.001) were also associated with greater apathy. By contrast, average depression scores appeared to decrease slightly by 0.01 points each year after diagnosis, although the statistical significance of the effect varied depending on which variables were controlled for (Appendix 2 in the online supplement). Females had greater depression than males; higher CAG count and older age were associated with lower depression. Antidepressants, but not antipsychotics, were associated with greater depression.
Unadjusted mean levels of apathy and depression are shown in Appendix 3 in the online supplement. For patients with data across subsequent annual visits, between 60.5% and 74.6% of those with apathy at the earlier visit still had apathy 1 year later. Likewise, between 59.7% and 72.2% of those with depression at the earlier visit still had depression at the later visit.
Longitudinal Correlates and Outcomes
In linear mixed model analyses, apathy as a continuous variable was associated with worse function, cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and motor symptoms. For measures of function, there were significant interactions between apathy and time (Table 2). At time of diagnosis, each point on the apathy scale was associated with scoring 0.47 points lower on the independence scale (p<0.001) and 0.11 points lower on the TFC scale (p<0.001), with analyses adjusting for depression, age, sex, and number of CAG repeats. Thereafter, each point on the apathy scale was associated with a slightly slower rate of decline on functional measures (0.02 each year on the independence scale; 0.01 each year on the TFC scale). Apathy, but not depression, was also specifically associated with reduced occupational functioning: each point on the apathy scale was associated with 0.03 reduced function (p<0.001; Appendix 4 in the online supplement). Depression was associated with slightly reduced independence, but not TFC (Table 2).
| Parameter | Estimate | 95% CI | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Independence | |||
| Interceptb | 166.70 | 151.37, 182.04 | <0.001 |
| Time effectc | −2.62 | −2.80, −2.44 | <0.001 |
| Apathy | −0.47 | −0.62, −0.31 | <0.001 |
| Apathy×time | 0.02 | 0.00, 0.04 | 0.025 |
| Depression | −0.18 | −0.31, −0.06 | 0.004 |
| CAG | −1.27 | −1.54, −1.01 | <0.001 |
| Age | −0.36 | −0.45, −0.27 | <0.001 |
| Sex (female) | −2.61 | −4.15, −1.06 | 0.001 |
| Total functional capacity | |||
| Interceptd | 26.31 | 22.98, 29.64 | <0.001 |
| Time effecte | −0.50 | −0.53, −0.46 | <0.001 |
| Apathy | −0.11 | −0.14, −0.08 | <0.001 |
| Apathy×time | 0.01 | 0.00, 0.01 | 0.002 |
| Depression | −0.01 | −0.04, 0.01 | 0.400 |
| CAG | −0.27 | −0.33, −0.21 | <0.001 |
| Age | −0.07 | −0.09, −0.05 | <0.001 |
| Sex (female) | −0.61 | −0.95, −0.28 | <0.001 |
a
Function and neuropsychiatric symptoms were measured with the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). CAG, number of cytosine-adenine-guanine repeats. Numbers in bold indicate p<0.05.
b
Random effect with mean 166.70 and SD=10.46.
c
Random effect with mean –2.62 and SD=1.28.
d
Random effect with mean 26.31 and SD=2.40.
e
Random effect with mean –0.50 and SD=0.22.
For cognition, each point on the apathy scale was associated with scoring 0.09 points lower on the MMSE (p<0.001), 0.13 points lower on the SDMT (p=0.001), and 0.18 lower in verbal fluency (p<0.001), with adjustment for other variables (Table 3; Appendix 2 in the online supplement). There were no interactions with time, indicating these associations were stable over time. For the Stroop Interference Test, there was a significant interaction: at time of diagnosis, each point on the apathy scale was associated with scoring 0.39 points lower on the Stroop Interference Test (p<0.001); thereafter, each point on the apathy scale was associated with a slightly slower rate of decline (0.03 points; p=0.003; Appendix 2 in the online supplement). Depression was unrelated to MMSE, SDMT, and Stroop Interference Tests, but was related to slightly better verbal fluency, after analyses controlled for apathy and other clinical variables.
| Parameter | Estimate | 95% CI | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognition (MMSE) | |||
| Interceptb | 45.58 | 41.06, 50.09 | <0.001 |
| Time effectc | −0.43 | −0.49, −0.38 | <0.001 |
| Apathy | −0.09 | −0.12, −0.06 | <0.001 |
| Depression | 0.00 | −0.04, 0.04 | 0.905 |
| CAG | −0.32 | −0.40, −0.24 | <0.001 |
| Age | −0.08 | −0.11, −0.06 | <0.001 |
| Sex (female) | −0.41 | −0.85, 0.04 | 0.076 |
| Neuropsychiatric symptoms | |||
| Interceptd | 3.41 | −6.77, 13.60 | 0.511 |
| Time effecte | 0.03 | −0.10, 0.15 | 0.688 |
| Apathy | 0.89 | 0.72, 1.07 | <0.001 |
| Apathy×time | −0.04 | −0.06, −0.02 | 0.001 |
| Depression | 1.68 | 1.55, 1.82 | <0.001 |
| CAG | 0.08 | −0.09, 0.26 | 0.352 |
| Age | −0.03 | −0.10, 0.03 | 0.285 |
| Sex (female) | −0.17 | −1.16, 0.83 | 0.740 |
| Antipsychotic | 1.61 | 0.69, 2.54 | 0.001 |
a
Neuropsychiatric symptoms were measured with the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale. Cognition was measured with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). CAG, number of cytosine-adenine-guanine repeats. Numbers in bold indicate p<0.05.
b
Random effect with mean 45.58 and SD=2.77.
c
Random effect with mean –0.43 and SD=0.45.
d
Random effect with mean 3.41 and SD=6.48.
e
Random effect with mean 0.03 and SD=0.00.
For neuropsychiatric symptoms, there was an interaction with time such that each point on the apathy scale at the time of diagnosis was associated with 0.89 points greater overall neuropsychiatric symptoms, but thereafter was associated with a slightly slower rate of increase over time (0.04 points each year; Table 3). Depression was similarly associated with greater neuropsychiatric symptoms. Both apathy and depression were associated with psychotic symptoms (Appendix 4 in the online supplement). By contrast, depression, but not apathy, was associated with suicidal ideation.
For movement disturbances, each point on the apathy scale was associated with scoring 0.16 points greater on the UHDRS motor disturbance scale (p=0.005), with adjustment for other variables (Table 4). There was no interaction with time, indicating the association was stable over time. Separate analyses for different types of movement disturbances indicated that apathy was associated with greater rigidity, imbalance, and bradykinesia, although not chorea or dystonia (Appendix 4 in the online supplement). Depression was unrelated to movement disturbances.
| Parameter | Estimate | 95% CI | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interceptb | −91.51 | −109.31, −73.72 | <0.001 |
| Time effectc | 2.45 | 2.24, 2.66 | <0.001 |
| Apathy | 0.16 | 0.05, 0.27 | 0.005 |
| Depression | 0.10 | −0.04, 0.24 | 0.175 |
| CAG | 2.02 | 1.72, 2.33 | <0.001 |
| Age | 0.56 | 0.45, 0.67 | <0.001 |
| Sex (female) | 1.80 | 0.01, 3.59 | 0.049 |
| Antipsychotic | 2.71 | 1.49, 3.92 | <0.001 |
| Tetrabenazine | 1.52 | −0.42, 3.45 | 0.125 |
a
Function and neuropsychiatric symptoms were measured with the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale. CAG, number of cytosine-adenine-guanine repeats. Numbers in bold indicate p<0.05.
b
Random effect with mean –91.51 and SD=12.32.
c
Random effect with mean 2.45 and SD=1.41.
A sensitivity analysis treating apathy as a dichotomous trait (comparing patients who had experienced apathy to those who had not, rather than as a continuous measure) similarly found that patients with apathy had worse function (0.98 points on the TFC scale at time of diagnosis; 4.03 points on the independence scale, p<0.001); worse cognition (declining more quickly at a rate of 0.44 points on the MMSE each year compared with 0.38 points in patients without apathy, p<0.001); greater neuropsychiatric symptoms (5.21 points on the UHDRS scale, p<0.001); and greater motor symptoms overall (1.44 points on the UHDRS scale, p=0.010), after controlling for other variables (Appendix 5 in the online supplement). A further sensitivity analysis focusing on baseline apathy score as a continuous measure likewise found that it predicted worse function and cognition and greater neuropsychiatric symptoms, but not overall movement disturbances, over the course of the disease (Appendix 6 in the online supplement). The direction, relative magnitude, and statistical significance of effects for apathy were unchanged in all analyses when removing depression as a predictor.
DISCUSSION
Apathy affected a large proportion of HD patients. Approximately 40% showed some evidence of apathy and both the prevalence and severity of apathy increased over time. Apathy was also associated with worse clinical outcomes. Patients with apathy had greater functional and cognitive impairments, neuropsychiatric disturbances, and movement symptoms compared with patients without apathy, after we controlled for depression and other clinical variables. These differences in outcomes were apparent prospectively, with apathy at baseline predicting worse cognition, function, and neuropsychiatric disturbances (although not movement symptoms) over the course of the disease.
The proportion of patients experiencing apathy was comparable with previous studies of manifest HD, which have reported apathy in around 50% of patients (10–13, 15–17). The relationship between apathy and clinical outcomes is likewise consistent with previous cross-sectional research, which has found that apathy is associated with worse cognition (18, 19), function (16, 18, 19, 21, 22), neuropsychiatric disturbances (16, 19), and motor symptoms (16, 18, 19). The current study extends this previous research by confirming that apathy gradually increases from time of diagnosis (albeit with some fluctuation in whether individual patients exhibit the symptom on consecutive visits) and is associated with globally worse outcomes over time. The current study also highlights the impact of medication; both antidepressants and antipsychotics were associated with greater apathy. Given these medications’ established side-effect profiles, it is plausible that antipsychotics may directly increase apathy, whereas antidepressants may be started due to apathy’s phenotypic similarity to depression and the limited availability of alternatives.
In the case of function, cognition, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, there was evidence of a floor effect whereby patients with apathy reach more severe levels of impairment earlier in the disease and thereafter progress more slowly. Such an effect could reflect limitations in the scales used or neurobiology, such that patients with apathy experience more pronounced deterioration of brain regions underpinning cognition and function before progression to other areas. Previous longitudinal research found that apathy predicted cognitive decline over 2 years in premanifest HD, but not manifest HD, and only with control for depression (33). Another study found apathy predicted functional decline over 3 years but did not control for depression (9). The current study demonstrates that these longitudinal associations are present in manifest HD across cognitive, functional, neuropsychiatric, and motor domains; are apparent over a longer time period; and are independent of depression and other clinical variables.
The current study found evidence of a relationship between apathy and depression, which has been reported previously (16). This is not surprising given some overlap in features (30), including anhedonia and loss of interest in activities. Importantly, however, the current study demonstrated differences in trajectory between the two symptoms: whereas apathy appeared to increase progressively from time of diagnosis, depression remained relatively constant or decreased slightly. In addition, the current study confirmed that apathy, but not depression, predicts clinical outcomes, including function, cognition, motor disturbances, and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (15, 18). Apathy, but not depression, was also specifically associated with reduced occupational functioning.
Finally, apathy and depression were associated with different neuropsychiatric symptoms: whereas both were associated with greater risk of psychosis, depression was associated with greater suicidal ideation. Altogether, the findings are consistent with the notion that the symptoms involve distinct mechanisms. Apathy may reflect neurodegeneration, hence its association with poorer clinical outcomes overall. By contrast, depression, which involves aspects of attribution and mood, may also depend on cognition, appraisals, and social factors, hence its weaker association with disease course and more specific association with increased suicidal ideation (42–44). The distinct correlates of apathy and depression highlight the need to carefully screen for associated features if one or both are present.
The study did not replicate a recent report that apathy may be associated with less chorea (36). Although a difference in chorea was apparent in baseline comparisons, the effect disappeared in the longitudinal analyses and after control for other variables. Instead, the study found apathy was related to greater movement disturbances overall, particularly rigidity, balance, and bradykinesia. The current study likewise found no relationship between apathy and age or sex. Other studies reported higher levels of apathy in older patients (15) and in males (16, 19), although without control for time since diagnosis. Females, however, showed higher levels of depression, consistent with previous research (20).
The current study had several limitations. First, the study was limited by its convenience sampling of patients and the fact that patients were volunteers recruited from HD specialists. As a result, patients may have come from higher socioeconomic backgrounds and different disease severity and apathy levels than patients recruited from other clinical settings. Second, data were available for 4 years, which is only a small proportion of disease course. Third, assessment of apathy and other neuropsychiatric symptoms was limited by reliance on the UHDRS scale, rather than Problem Behavior Assessments, which provide for a broader assessment of symptoms (13), or symptom-specific scales of apathy and depression, which allow for more detailed examination of subcomponents. Fourth, assessment of cognition was limited by reliance on the MMSE and UHDRS, rather than a more formal neuropsychological battery, and did not evaluate cognitive subdomains. Fifth, data about specific sites and number of raters were not available due to confidentiality requirements, so it was not possible to control for these variables in the analyses. Finally, analysis of medications was limited and did not include dosage or duration due to the practical and conceptual difficulties in standardizing these variables across different medications.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite these limitations, the study confirms that apathy increases over time and is associated with worse clinical outcomes in HD. The study also suggests that apathy has a different longitudinal trajectory and different clinical correlates to depression. These findings highlight the need to distinguish between these two symptoms given their distinct implications for prognosis and management. Apathy’s close relationship to disease progression and antipsychotic medication, for example, may encourage more immediate planning for further deterioration while considering behavioral support strategies and rationalization of antipsychotics. Depression, which appears less closely tied to disease course and medication, could be more amenable to treatment and may prompt consideration of the broader range of factors that underpin it. The frequent overlap of symptoms, however, suggests the need to consider the presence of the other as a differential diagnosis or comorbid condition (30). For both symptoms, clarifying causal mechanisms and identifying effective clinical interventions remain important goals to address the significant impairment they cause.
Acknowledgments
We thank the Huntington Study Group COHORT investigators and coordinators, who collected data and/or samples for this study, as well as all participants and their families, who made this work possible.
Supplementary Material
File (appi.neuropsych.21070191.ds001.pdf)
- View/Download
- 262.00 KB
References
1.
Ross CA, Aylward EH, Wild EJ, et al: Huntington disease: natural history, biomarkers and prospects for therapeutics. Nat Rev Neurol 2014; 10:204–216
2.
Ross CA, Tabrizi SJ: Huntington’s disease: from molecular pathogenesis to clinical treatment. Lancet Neurol 2011; 10:83–98
3.
Pringsheim T, Wiltshire K, Day L, et al: The incidence and prevalence of Huntington’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mov Disord 2012; 27:1083–1091
4.
The Huntington’s Disease Collaborative Research Group: A novel gene containing a trinucleotide repeat that is expanded and unstable on Huntington’s disease chromosomes. Cell 1993; 72:971–983
5.
Duyao M, Ambrose C, Myers R, et al: Trinucleotide repeat length instability and age of onset in Huntington’s disease. Nat Genet 1993; 4:387–392
6.
Rosenblatt A, Kumar BV, Mo A, et al: Age, CAG repeat length, and clinical progression in Huntington’s disease. Mov Disord 2012; 27:272–276
7.
Rosenblatt A, Liang KY, Zhou H, et al: The association of CAG repeat length with clinical progression in Huntington disease. Neurology 2006; 66:1016–1020
8.
Dorsey ER, Beck CA, Darwin K, et al: Natural history of Huntington disease. JAMA Neurol 2013; 70:1520–1530
9.
Tabrizi SJ, Scahill RI, Owen G, et al: Predictors of phenotypic progression and disease onset in premanifest and early-stage Huntington’s disease in the TRACK-HD study: analysis of 36-month observational data. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12:637–649
10.
Simpson JA, Lovecky D, Kogan JN, et al: Survey of the Huntington’s disease patient and caregiver community reveals most impactful symptoms and treatment needs. J Huntingtons Dis 2016; 5:395–403
11.
Martinez-Horta S, Perez-Perez J, van Duijn E, et al: Neuropsychiatric symptoms are very common in premanifest and early stage Huntington’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2016; 25:58–64
12.
Camacho M, Barker RA, Mason SL: Apathy in Huntington’s disease: a review of the current conceptualization. J Alzheimer’s Dis Park 2018; 8:1000431
13.
Craufurd D, Thompson JC, Snowden JS: Behavioral changes in Huntington disease. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 2001; 14:219–226
14.
Matmati J, Verny C, Allain P: Apathy and Huntington’s disease: a literature review based on PRISMA. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2021;34:100–112
15.
Naarding P, Janzing JGE, Eling P, et al: Apathy is not depression in Huntington’s disease. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2009; 21:266–270
16.
van Duijn E, Craufurd D, Hubers AAM, et al: Neuropsychiatric symptoms in a European Huntington’s disease cohort (REGISTRY). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014; 85:1411–1418
17.
Martínez-Horta S, Perez-Perez J, Sampedro F, et al: Structural and metabolic brain correlates of apathy in Huntington’s disease. Mov Disord 2018; 33:1151–1159
18.
Thompson JC, Snowden JS, Craufurd D, et al: Behavior in Huntington’s disease: dissociating cognition-based and mood-based changes. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2002; 14:37–43
19.
van Duijn E, Reedeker N, Giltay EJ, et al: Correlates of apathy in Huntington’s disease. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2010; 22:287–294
20.
McAllister B, Gusella JF, Landwehrmeyer GB, et al: Timing and impact of psychiatric, cognitive, and motor abnormalities in Huntington disease. Neurology 2021; 96.e2395
21.
Jacobs M, Hart EP, Roos RAC: Cognitive performance and apathy predict unemployment in Huntington’s disease mutation carriers. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2018; 30:188–193
22.
Banaszkiewicz K, Sitek EJ, Rudzińska M, et al: Huntington’s disease from the patient, caregiver and physician’s perspectives: three sides of the same coin? J Neural Transm 2012; 119:1361–1365
23.
Baudic S, Maison P, Dolbeau G, et al: Cognitive impairment related to apathy in early Huntington’s disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2006; 21:316–321
24.
McLauchlan DJ, Lancaster T, Craufurd D, et al: Insensitivity to loss predicts apathy in Huntington’s disease. Mov Disord 2019; 34:1381–1391
25.
De Souza J, Gordon-Smith K, Jones L, et al: The familiality of psychiatric symptoms in Huntington’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014; 85:A54
26.
Reedeker N, Bouwens JA, van Duijn E, et al: Incidence, course, and predictors of apathy in Huntington’s disease: a two-year prospective study. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2011; 23:434–441
27.
Levy R, Dubois B: Apathy and the functional anatomy of the prefrontal cortex–basal ganglia circuits. Cereb Cortex 2005; 16:916–928
28.
Le Heron C, Holroyd CB, Salamone J, et al: Brain mechanisms underlying apathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2019; 90:302–312
29.
Baake V, Coppen EM, van Duijn E, et al: Apathy and atrophy of subcortical brain structures in Huntington’s disease: a two-year follow-up study. NeuroImage Clin 2018; 19:66–70
30.
Brodaty H, Connors MH: Pseudodementia, pseudo-pseudodementia, and pseudodepression. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2020; 12:e12027
31.
Thompson JC, Harris J, Sollom AC, et al: Longitudinal evaluation of neuropsychiatric symptoms in Huntington’s disease. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2012; 24:53–60
32.
van Duijn E, Reedeker N, Giltay EJ, et al: Course of irritability, depression and apathy in Huntington’s disease in relation to motor symptoms during a two-year follow-up period. Neurodegener Dis 2014; 13:9–16
33.
Andrews SC, Langbehn DR, Craufurd D, et al: Apathy predicts rate of cognitive decline over 24 months in premanifest Huntington’s disease. Psychol Med 2020; 51:1338–1344
34.
The Huntington Study Group COHORT Investigators: Characterization of a large group of individuals with Huntington disease and their relatives enrolled in the COHORT study. PLoS One 2012; 7.e29522
35.
Connors MH, Teixeira-Pinto A, Loy CT: Psychosis and longitudinal outcomes in Huntington disease: the COHORT study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2020; 91:15
36.
Nair A, Aziz NA, Rutledge R, et al: Relationship between distinct motor symptoms and apathy in Huntington’s disease: clues to mechanism. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018; 89:A56
37.
The Unified Huntington’s Disease Rating Scale ‘99 (Clarified Version 2005). Rochester, NY, Huntington Study Group, 2005
38.
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatry Res 1975; 12:189–198
39.
Smith A: Symbol Digit Modalities Test: Manual. Los Angeles, CA, Western Psychological Services, 1973
40.
Benton AL, Hamsher K: Multilingual Aphasia Examination Manual. Iowa City, IA, University of Iowa, 1978
41.
Stroop JR: Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol 1935; 18:643–662
42.
Brodaty H, Connors MH, Xu J, et al: The course of neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia: a 3-year longitudinal study. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2015; 16:380–387
43.
Cummings JL: The Neuropsychiatry of Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias. London, UK, Martin Dunitz, 2003
44.
Connors MH, Teixeira-Pinto A, Ames D, et al: Distinguishing apathy and depression in dementia: a longitudinal study. Aust N Z J Psychiatry, in press
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: 31 July 2021
Revision received: 2 December 2021
Revision received: 20 January 2022
Accepted: 21 January 2022
Published online: 21 September 2022
Published in print: Winter 2023
Keywords
Authors
Competing Interests
The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.
Funding Information
Partially supported by National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Dementia Research Development Fellowship APP1107657 (Dr. Loy). Additional support was received by an NHMRC program grant 633003 to the Screening & Test Evaluation Program (Dr. Teixeira-Pinto). The CHDI Foundation, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to finding treatments for people with Huntington’s disease, funded the COHORT study.The CHDI Foundation had no role in the analyses, data interpretation, or writing of the paper.
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
View Options
View options
PDF/EPUB
View PDF/EPUBLogin options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).