Co-administration of prism adaptation and methylphenidate needs striatal integrity to alleviate spatial neglect =============================================================================================================== * Maude Beaudoin-Gobert * Faustine Benistant * Maxence De Lanversin * Jules Javouhay * Sophie Jacquin-Courtois * Gilles Rode * Yves Rossetti * Jacques Luauté ## Abstract **Context** A previous study demonstrated a long-term functional improvement of spatial neglect after methylphenidate combined with prismatic adaptation in a group of patients suffering from left spatial neglect after a right stroke (RITAPRISM study). **Objective** we hypothesized that the functional improvement after MP combined with PA depends on striatal integrity in responders patients. **Methods** We conducted an MRI study in “MP+PA” program to identify lesional pattern in responders and non-responders patients in the RITAPRISM cohort. Using anatomical segmentation on morphological MRI, we compared lesional pattern in the striatum between responders and non-responders patients. **Results** The beneficial effect of MP+PA co-administration should require striatal integrity in neglect patients. More specifically, our results suggest that the short-term effect is mediated by the ventral striatum whereas the long-term effect is mediated by the posterior putamen. **Conclusion** Benefical effet of MP+PA could rely on reinforcement processes at early stage of the MP+PA program and visuospatial substrates at long-term. Keywords * prism adaptation * methylphenidate * stroke * spatial neglect * striatum ## 1 Introduction Spatial neglect is defined as a difficulty in detecting, responding or directing attention to stimuli presented or represented on the side contralateral to a brain lesion, particularly the right hemisphere. It is a factor of poor functional evolution after a stroke (for review Luaute et al. 2006). The gold standard for the medical management of these patients is prismatic adaptation (Rossetti et al. 1998). However, a double-blind trial shows that a weekly session for four weeks is insufficient to produce a sensorimotor benefit (Rode et al. 2015). It is therefore important to define how to improve the effectiveness of prismatic adaptation in rehabilitation. In particular, efforts should focus on the need to target spatial and non-spatial attention deficits to reduce the symptoms of spatial neglect. As methylphenidate (MP) improves non-spatial attention in patients with acquired brain injury (Kim et al. 2006), it appears as a relevant candidate to improve spatial neglect. A previous study demonstrated a long-term functional improvement after MP combined with PA in a group of patients suffering from left spatial neglect after a right stroke (Luauté et al. 2018). However, there was heterogeneity in the clinical improvement after prismatic adaptation in patients within the “MP+PA” group with the identification of responders and non-responders. We can wonder in what extent the lesional pattern within some keys brain structures can explain this heterogeneity and lesion location is thus probably a crucial factor influencing the efficiency of the catecholamine (Luaute et al. 2006). Among these key structures, the striatum seems particularly promising as it contains the highest density of dopaminergic transporters which MP acts on to increase the dopamine level (N. D. Volkow et al. 2002). MP blocks dopamine uptake and enhances dopamine signaling in the cortico-striatal circuit. More specifically, Positon Emission Tomography (PET) imaging in healthy subjects and ADHD patients has revealed that MP increases the synaptic concentration of dopamine mostly inside the anterior striatum (Nora D. Volkow et al. 2012; Kodama et al. 2017; Hong et al. 2015). Thus, we hypothesized that the functional improvement after MP combined with PA depends on striatal integrity in responders patients. To do so, we conducted an MRI study in “MP+PA” program to identify lesional pattern in responders and non-responders patients. ## 2 Material and methods ### 2.1 Participants This study was conducted in the RITAPRISM cohort (Luauté et al. 2018). Briefly, patients included in the RITAPRISM cohort fulfilled the following criteria: age above 18 and less than 80 years-old, right-handed, ischemic or haemorrhagic right stroke (>1 month, <18 months after the incident); as previously described in Luauté et al (2018) spatial neglect was confirmed by classical paper and pencil tests (line bisection, line cancellation, balloon-test, copy of a scene, drawing a daisy from memory). ### 2.2 RITAPRISM study design The RITAPRISM study was a multicentre, double-blind and placebo-controlled study (Luauté et al. 2018). All patients provided written informed consent. The study was approved by Lyon Ethics Committee (CPP Sud-Est IV; EudraCT Number: 2008-000325-00). After inclusion, patients were randomized into a “placebo” or a “methylphenidate” (MP) group (respectively, n=6 and n=10; Figure 1). Spatial neglect was assessed in the pre-test session (D7) and during the placebo/methylphenidate treatment in post-tests sessions at the early (D15), intermediate (D22) and final (D45) phase. Patients performed the line bisection measure. The consequence of spatial neglect on activities of daily living was evaluated with the Bergego scale (ECB) (Bergego et al. 1995) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) (Granger et al. 1986). ![Figure 1 :](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1 :](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F1) Figure 1 : Study design. *FIM: Functional Independence Measure; MP: methylphenidate; PA: prismatic adaptation*. (Adapted from Luauté et al., 2018). ### 2.3 MRI segmentation All patients performed a 3D T1 MRI. Individual segmentations were created from the MRIs of 16 patients by manually labelling 10 brain structures (anterior caudate nucleus, anterior putamen, ventral, posterior caudate nucleus, posterior putamen) in three dimensions (Figure 2), following a precise delineation protocol (Supplementary material) using ITK-Snap (Yushkevich et al. 2006) ([http://www.itksnap.org](http://www.itksnap.org)). The lesion area was also manually segmented. All delineation were performed in native space. The volume of each ROI was extracted. The presence or absence of a lesion within a ROI was dichotomised. A ROI was considered as lesioned if the difference between right and left ROI volume was superior to three time the standard error of the mean of the left ROI volume using the following formula : Volumeleft ROI – Volumeright ROI >3*SEM Volume left ROI group. ![Figure 2 :](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F2.medium.gif) [Figure 2 :](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F2) Figure 2 : Illustration of an MRI individual segmentation. (A) Coronal, (B) transversal and (C) sagittal MRI section. (D) Anterior, (E) superior and (F) lateral view of 3-dimentional reconstruction of regions of interest. *Ant: anterior; cd: caudate nucleus; put: putamen; VS: ventral striatum*. ### 2.4 Stastistical analysis All statistical analyses were performed using R software ([https://www.r-project.org](https://www.r-project.org)). The effect of ROI lesion on i) initial severity of spatial neglect, ii) prism adaptation and iii) methylphenidate (MP) efficiency was assessed by non-parametric Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test. Clinical scores (ECB, MIF) and the line bisection measure were compared between lesioned and non-lesioned patients (for each ROI). Initial severity of spatial neglect was assessed in the whole cohort at D7 (pre-tests; Figure 1). The effect of striatal lesion on prism adaptation was assessed in the placebo group at D15, D22 and D45. The effect of striatal lesion on MP efficiency was assessed in the MP group at D15, D22 and D45. P-values of less than 0.05 were considered as significant. ## 3 Results ### 3.1 Effect of striatal lesion on initial severity of spatial neglect at baseline (D7) A significant reduction of mean bisection was observed in patients presenting a lesion in the right ventral striatum (Figure 3A; p<0.05), the right posterior caudate nucleus (Figure 3B; p<0.05) and the right posterior putamen (Figure 3C; p<0.05). There was no significant difference in ECB and FIM. ![Figure 3 :](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3 :](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F3) Figure 3 : The mean line bisection at D7 was significantly reduced in patients presenting a lesion within (A) the right ventral striatum, (B) the right posterior caudate nucleus and (C) the right posterior putamen. *p<0.05 ### 3.2 Effect of striatal lesions on prism adaptation over time Analysis was conducted in the placebo group (n=6) at D15, D22 and D45. Prism adaptation was evaluated by comparing the variation of absolute value of mean deviation depending on the presence or absence of lesions. There was no significant difference across groups whatever the absence or presence of lesions in any striatal region (i.e. anterior and posterior caudate nucleus, anterior and posterior putamen, ventral striatum) in ECB, FIM and line bisection. ### 3.3 Effect of striatal lesions on MP treatment over time Analyses were conducted in the MP group (n=10) at D15, D22 and D45. At D15, a significant reduction of the absolute value of line bisection after MP was observed in patients presenting a lesion in the right ventral striatum (Figure 4A; p<0.05). The variation of absolute value of the mean deviation on the straight-ahead pointing was 4mm in the group with ventral striatal lesion and 14mm in the group without lesion. ![Figure 4 :](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F4.medium.gif) [Figure 4 :](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/01/17/2023.01.12.23284487/F4) Figure 4 : The absolute value of line bisection was significantly reduced in the MP group patients (A) at D15 in patients presenting a lesion within the right ventral striatum and (B) at D45 in patients presenting a lesion within the right posterior putamen. *p<0.05 At D45, a significant reduction of the absolute value of line bisection after MP+PA was observed in patients presenting a lesion in the right posterior putamen (Figure 4B; p<0.05). The variation of absolute value of the mean deviation on the straight-ahead pointing was 1mm in the group with posterior putamen lesion and 20mm in the group without lesion. ## 4 Discussion This study proposes that the beneficial effect of MP+PA co-administration should require striatal integrity in neglect patients. More specifically, our results suggest that the short-term effect is mediated by the ventral striatum whereas the long-term effect is mediated by the posterior putamen. Patients with severe neglect showed the most benefit from prism adaptation treatment (Gillen et al. 2022), and among then, patients with spared ventral striatal and posterior putamen are most likely to benefit MP+PA co-administration. ### The ventral striatum and the posterior putamen are the substrates for MP+PA action It is well described now that dopaminergic medication improves motor component of spatial neglect (Geminiani, Bottini, et Sterzi 1998). In addition, PA preferentially improves motor intentional bias than perceptual bias in both healthy and neglect patients (Fortis et al. 2011). Thus, the involvement of the ventral part of the striatum – i.e. an associativo-limbic territory (Alexander, DeLong, et Strick 1986) – during a MP+PA co-administration was surprising. An *in vivo* PET and pharmacological study in non-human primates has suggested that the beneficial effect of MP could be mediated by the anterior ventral striatum. Indeed, Martinez and colleagues have shown that a systemic administration of MP decreases the fixation of 11C-PE2I radiotracer (targeting dopaminergic transporters) within the ventral striatum (Martinez et al. 2020), which is known to be involved in reward processing and reinforcement learning (Tremblay et al. 2015). Altogether, the involvement of the ventral striatum suggests that reinforcement processes could be involved in MP+PA mechanisms. In fact, placing a high reward on certain targets can override intrinsic spatial attention bias (Della Libera et Chelazzi 2006; Kristjánsson et al. 2010; J. Lee et Shomstein 2013; Jeongmi Lee et Shomstein 2014). Reinforcement learning could influence the bottom-up influences of stimulus features on attentional allocation during spatial decision making (Neppi-Mòdona et al. 2020). Our results also highlighted the role of the posterior putamen in MP+PA beneficial effects, as patients with intact posterior putamen demonstrate a long-term improvement. Interestingly, the MP+PA alleviation seems to concern only the classical tests of spatial neglect (i.e. line bisection) – which are specifically design to detect visuospatial alteration – compared to the different clinical scales – which evaluate the global effect of spatial neglect in daily life). The role of posterior parietal cortex in visuospatial attention has been widely described in the literature (for review Silver, Ress, et Heeger 2005). Interestingly, the posterior putamen receives overlapping projections from parietal areas associated with somatosensory function, resulting in a sensory-motor area (Haber 2003). Thus, the posterior putamen appears to be a key region in the beneficial effect of M+PA in improving visuospatial attention. ### The long-term antero-posterior shift in the striatum during MP+PA co-administration Our study suggests that the beneficial effect of MP+PA takes place in two stages with the involvement of short-term mechanisms in the ventral striatum (assessed at D15) and long-term mechanisms in the posterior putamen (assessed at D45). Thus, reinforcement processes could be involved at early stage of the MP+PA program and replaced by visuospatial substrates. This diffuse overlap of corticostriatal projections has been proposed as an explicit substrate for reinforcement learning that directly integrates reward and executive control signals from the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) (for review Haber et Knutson 2010). There are bilateral convergence zones i) in the ventral striatum receiving projections from OFC and dlPCF, ii) in the putamen receiving projections from dlPCF and parietal cortex (Verstynen 2014; Jarbo et Verstynen 2015). During a new learning, the dlPFC and the striatum (i.e. ventral striatum) are activated. When subjects had to select movements (i.e at the beginning of the MP+PA training until D15), the premotor cortex and mid-putamen are activated. With automatic (overlearned) movements (i.e; at the end of the program at D45), the sensorimoteur and posterior putamen are activated (Jueptner et Weiller 1998). In other words, there is a shift of activation in the anterior-posterior direction within the striatum. This antero-posterior shift within the striatum would explain why an intact ventral striatum could be needed at D15 while an intact posterior putamen seems to be mandatory at D45 for a long-term benefit. Further studies are need to decipher the role of dlPFC in MP+PA beneficial effet in spatial neglect. ## Supporting information Supplementary : Delineation protocol [[supplements/284487_file02.pdf]](pending:yes) ## Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors ## 5 Conflict of Interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. ## 6 Funding This work was supported by institutional grant from the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (PHRC 2007). This work also benefited from institutional supports from Inserm, CNRS, UCBL, HCL, the Labex/Idex ANR-11-LABX-0042 and IHU CeSaMe ANR-10-IBHU-0003 and the James McDonnell Foundation. MBG salary was supported by ANR-18-CE17-0012. * Received January 12, 2023. * Revision received January 12, 2023. * Accepted January 17, 2023. * © 2023, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission. ## 7 References 1. Alexander, G E, M R DeLong, et P L Strick. 1986. « Parallel organization of functionally segregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex ». Annual Review of Neuroscience 9: 357–81. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.09.030186.002041](https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.09.030186.002041). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1146/annurev.ne.09.030186.002041&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3085570&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1986A575000014&link_type=ISI) 2. Bergego, C, P Azouvi, C Samuel, F Marchal, A Louis-Dreyfus, C Jokic, L Morin, C Renard, P Pradat-Diehl, et G Deloche. 1995. « Validation d’une échelle d’évaluation fonctionnelle de l’héminégligence dans la vie quotidienne: l’échelle CB ». Annales de Réadaptation et de Médecine Physique 38 (4): 183–89. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-6054(96)89317-2](https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-6054(96)89317-2). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0168-6054(96)89317-2&link_type=DOI) 3. Della Libera Chiara, et Leonardo Chelazzi. 2006. « Visual Selective Attention and the Effects of Monetary Rewards ». Psychological Science 17 (3): 222–27. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01689.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01689.x). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01689.x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16507062&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) 4. Fortis, Paola, Peii Chen, Kelly M. Goedert, et Anna M. Barrett. 2011. « Effects of Prism Adaptation on Motor-Intentional Spatial Bias in Neglect ». NeuroReport 22 (14): 700–705. [https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0b013e32834a3e20](https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0b013e32834a3e20). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/WNR.0b013e32834a3e20&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21817924&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000294450400007&link_type=ISI) 5. Geminiani, G., G. Bottini, et R. Sterzi. 1998. « Dopaminergic Stimulation in Unilateral Neglect ». Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 65 (3): 344–47. [https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.65.3.344](https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.65.3.344). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiam5ucCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI2NS8zLzM0NCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIzLzAxLzE3LzIwMjMuMDEuMTIuMjMyODQ0ODcuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 6. Gillen, Robert W., Erin Y. Harmon, Brittany Weil, Benjamin Fusco-Gessick, Paul P. Novak, et A. M. Barrett. 2022. « Prism Adaptation Treatment of Spatial Neglect: Feasibility During Inpatient Rehabilitation and Identification of Patients Most Likely to Benefit ». Frontiers in Neurology 13: 803312. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.803312](https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.803312). 7. Granger, C.V, B.B Hamilton, R.A. Keith, M Zielezny, et F.S. Sherwin. 1986. « Advances in functional assesment for medica rehabilitation ». Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation 1 (3): 59–74. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00013614-198604000-00007&link_type=DOI) 8. Haber, Suzanne N. 2003. « The primate basal ganglia: parallel and integrative networks ». Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy 26 (4): 317–30. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jchemneu.2003.10.003&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14729134&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000188784900010&link_type=ISI) 9. Haber, Suzanne N, et Brian Knutson. 2010. « The reward circuit: linking primate anatomy and human imaging ». Neuropsychopharmacology: Official Publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology 35 (1): 4–26. [https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2009.129](https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2009.129). 10. Hong, Soon-Beom, Ben J. Harrison, Alex Fornito, Chul-Ho Sohn, In-Chan Song, et Jae-Won Kim. 2015. « Functional Dysconnectivity of Corticostriatal Circuitry and Differential Response to Methylphenidate in Youth with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder ». Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience: JPN 40 (1): 46–57. [https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.130290](https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.130290). 11. Jarbo, Kevin, et Timothy D. Verstynen. 2015. « Converging Structural and Functional Connectivity of Orbitofrontal, Dorsolateral Prefrontal, and Posterior Parietal Cortex in the Human Striatum ». The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience 35 (9): 3865–78. [https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2636-14.2015](https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2636-14.2015). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Njoiam5ldXJvIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjM1LzkvMzg2NSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIzLzAxLzE3LzIwMjMuMDEuMTIuMjMyODQ0ODcuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 12. Jueptner, M., et C. Weiller. 1998. « A Review of Differences between Basal Ganglia and Cerebellar Control of Movements as Revealed by Functional Imaging Studies ». Brain: A Journal of Neurology 121 (Pt 8) (août): 1437–49. [https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/121.8.1437](https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/121.8.1437). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/brain/121.8.1437&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9712006&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000075417500005&link_type=ISI) 13. Kim, Yun-Hee, Myoung-Hwan Ko, Seung-Yong Na, Se-Hun Park, et Kee-Won Kim. 2006. « Effects of Single-Dose Methylphenidate on Cognitive Performance in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study ». Clinical Rehabilitation 20 (1): 24–30. [https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215506cr927oa](https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215506cr927oa). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1191/0269215506cr927oa&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16502746&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000235530700004&link_type=ISI) 14. Kodama, Tohru, Takashi Kojima, Yoshiko Honda, Takayuki Hosokawa, Ken-Ichiro Tsutsui, et Masataka Watanabe. 2017. « Oral Administration of Methylphenidate (Ritalin) Affects Dopamine Release Differentially Between the Prefrontal Cortex and Striatum: A Microdialysis Study in the Monkey ». The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience 37 (9): 2387–94. [https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2155-16.2017](https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2155-16.2017). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Njoiam5ldXJvIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjM3LzkvMjM4NyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIzLzAxLzE3LzIwMjMuMDEuMTIuMjMyODQ0ODcuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 15. Kristjánsson, Arni, Katrín Ósk Eyjólfsdóttir, Anna Jónsdóttir, et Guðmundur Arnkelsson. 2010. « Temporal Consistency Is Currency in Shifts of Transient Visual Attention ». PloS One 5 (10): e13660. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013660](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013660). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0013660&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21060888&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) 16. Lee, J., et S. Shomstein. 2013. « The Differential Effects of Reward on Space- and Object-Based Attentional Allocation ». Journal of Neuroscience 33 (26): 10625–33. [https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5575-12.2013](https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5575-12.2013). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Njoiam5ldXJvIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjExOiIzMy8yNi8xMDYyNSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIzLzAxLzE3LzIwMjMuMDEuMTIuMjMyODQ0ODcuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 17. Lee, Jeongmi, et Sarah Shomstein. 2014. « Reward-Based Transfer From Bottom-Up to Top-Down Search Tasks ». Psychological Science 25 (2): 466–75. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613509284](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613509284). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/0956797613509284&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24335604&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) 18. Luaute, J, P Halligan, G Rode, Y Rossetti, et D Boisson. 2006. « Visuo-Spatial Neglect: A Systematic Review of Current Interventions and Their Effectiveness ». Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 30 (7): 961–82. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.03.001](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.03.001). 19. Luauté, Jacques, Laurent Villeneuve, Adeline Roux, Stuart Nash, Jean-Yves Bar, Eric Chabanat, François Cotton, et al. 2018. « Adding Methylphenidate to Prism-Adaptation Improves Outcome in Neglect Patients. A Randomized Clinical Trial ». Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior 106 (septembre): 288–98. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.03.028](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.03.028). 20. Martinez, Eva, Benjamin Pasquereau, Guillaume Drui, Yosuke Saga, Élise Météreau, et Léon Tremblay. 2020. « Ventral Striatum Supports Methylphenidate Therapeutic Effects on Impulsive Choices Expressed in Temporal Discounting Task ». Scientific Reports 10 (1): 716. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57595-6](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57595-6). 21. Neppi-Mòdona, Marco, Roberta Sirovich, Alessandro Cicerale, Nathalie Richard, Pascale Pradat-Diehl, Angela Sirigu, et Jean-René Duhamel. 2020. « Following the Gold Trail: Reward Influences on Spatial Exploration in Neglect ». Cortex 129 (août): 329–40. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.04.027](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.04.027). 22. Rode, G., S. Lacour, S. Jacquin-Courtois, L. Pisella, C. Michel, P. Revol, N. Alahyane, et al. 2015. « Long-Term Sensorimotor and Therapeutical Effects of a Mild Regime of Prism Adaptation in Spatial Neglect. A Double-Blind RCT Essay ». Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 58 (2): 40–53. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2014.10.004](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2014.10.004). 23. Rossetti, Yves, Gilles Rode, Laure Pisella, Alessandro Farné, Ling Li, Dominique Boisson, et Marie-Thérèse Perenin. 1998. « Prism adaptation to a rightward optical deviation rehabilitates left hemispatial neglect ». Nature 395 (6698): 166–69. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/25988&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9744273&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000075829900040&link_type=ISI) 24. Silver, Michael A., David Ress, et David J. Heeger. 2005. « Topographic Maps of Visual Spatial Attention in Human Parietal Cortex ». Journal of Neurophysiology 94 (2): 1358–71. [https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01316.2004](https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01316.2004). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1152/jn.01316.2004&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15817643&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000230882300044&link_type=ISI) 25. Tremblay, Léon, Yulia Worbe, Stéphane Thobois, Véronique Sgambato-Faure, et Jean Féger. 2015. « Selective dysfunction of basal ganglia sub-territories: from movement to behavioural disorders ». Movement Disorders. 26. Verstynen, Timothy D. 2014. « The Organization and Dynamics of Corticostriatal Pathways Link the Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex to Future Behavioral Responses ». Journal of Neurophysiology 112 (10): 2457–69. [https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00221.2014](https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00221.2014). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1152/jn.00221.2014&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25143543&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000345251800010&link_type=ISI) 27. Volkow, N. D., J. S. Fowler, G. Wang, Y. Ding, et S. J. Gatley. 2002. « Mechanism of Action of Methylphenidate: Insights from PET Imaging Studies ». Journal of Attention Disorders 6 Suppl 1: S31–43. [https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370200601s05](https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370200601s05). [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12685517&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) 28. Volkow, Nora D., Gene-Jack Wang, Dardo Tomasi, Scott H. Kollins, Tim L. Wigal, Jeffrey H. Newcorn, Frank W. Telang, et al. 2012. « Methylphenidate-Elicited Dopamine Increases in Ventral Striatum Are Associated with Long-Term Symptom Improvement in Adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ». The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience 32 (3): 841–49. [https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4461-11.2012](https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4461-11.2012). [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Njoiam5ldXJvIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjMyLzMvODQxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMDEvMTcvMjAyMy4wMS4xMi4yMzI4NDQ4Ny5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 29. Yushkevich, Paul A., Joseph Piven, Heather Cody Hazlett, Rachel Gimpel Smith, Sean Ho, James C. Gee, et Guido Gerig. 2006. « User-Guided 3D Active Contour Segmentation of Anatomical Structures: Significantly Improved Efficiency and Reliability ». NeuroImage 31 (3): 1116–28. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015). [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16545965&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F01%2F17%2F2023.01.12.23284487.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000238358500015&link_type=ISI)