Can transcranial electrical stimulation motor threshold estimate individualized tDCS doses over the prefrontal cortex? Evidence from reverse-calculation electric field modeling

Exciting the social butterfly: Anodal cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation modulates neural activation during predictive social mentalizing

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a promising tool for enhancing social cognition. The posterior cerebellum, which is part of the mentalizing network, has been implicated in social processes. In our combined tDCS-fMRI study, we investigated the effects of offline anodal cerebellar tDCS on activation in the cerebellum during social action prediction. Forty-one participants were randomly assigned to receive either anodal (2 mA) or sham (0 mA) stimulation over the midline of the posterior cerebellum for 20 min. Twenty minutes post stimulation, participants underwent a functional MRI scan to complete a social action prediction task, during which they had to correctly order randomly presented sentences that described either actions of social agents (based on their personality traits) or events of objects (based on their characteristics). As hypothesized, our results revealed that participants who received anodal cerebellar tDCS exhibited increased activation in the posterior cerebellar Crus 2 and lobule IX, and in key cerebral mentalizing areas, including the medial prefrontal cortex, temporo-parietal junction, and precuneus. Contrary to our hypotheses, participants who received anodal stimulation demonstrated faster responses to non-social objects compared to social agents, while sham participants showed no significant differences. We did not find a significant relationship between electric field magnitude, neural activation and behavioral outcomes. These findings suggest that tDCS targeting the posterior cerebellum selectively enhances activation in social mentalizing areas, while only facilitating behavioral performance of non-social material, perhaps because of a ceiling effect due to familiarity with social processing.

Investigating the neural mechanisms of transcranial direct current stimulation effects on human cognition: current issues and potential solutions

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been studied extensively for its potential to enhance human cognitive functions in healthy individuals and to treat cognitive impairment in various clinical populations. However, little is known about how tDCS modulates the neural networks supporting cognition and the complex interplay with mediating factors that may explain the frequently observed variability of stimulation effects within and between studies. Moreover, research in this field has been characterized by substantial methodological variability, frequent lack of rigorous experimental control and small sample sizes, thereby limiting the generalizability of findings and translational potential of tDCS. The present manuscript aims to delineate how these important issues can be addressed within a neuroimaging context, to reveal the neural underpinnings, predictors and mediators of tDCS-induced behavioral modulation. We will focus on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), because it allows the investigation of tDCS effects with excellent spatial precision and sufficient temporal resolution across the entire brain. Moreover, high resolution structural imaging data can be acquired for precise localization of stimulation effects, verification of electrode positions on the scalp and realistic current modeling based on individual head and brain anatomy. However, the general principles outlined in this review will also be applicable to other imaging modalities. Following an introduction to the overall state-of-the-art in this field, we will discuss in more detail the underlying causes of variability in previous tDCS studies. Moreover, we will elaborate on design considerations for tDCS-fMRI studies, optimization of tDCS and imaging protocols and how to assure high-level experimental control. Two additional sections address the pressing need for more systematic investigation of tDCS effects across the healthy human lifespan and implications for tDCS studies in age-associated disease, and potential benefits of establishing large-scale, multidisciplinary consortia for more coordinated tDCS research in the future. We hope that this review will contribute to more coordinated, methodologically sound, transparent and reproducible research in this field. Ultimately, our aim is to facilitate a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms by which tDCS modulates human cognitive functions and more effective and individually tailored translational and clinical applications of this technique in the future.

Linking corticospinal tract activation and upper-limb motor control in adults with cerebral palsy

AIM

To quantify the cervicomedullary motor evoked potentials (CMEPs) at the cervical spinal level in adults with cerebral palsy (CP) and determine if altered CMEPs are linked with upper-extremity motor function in this population.

METHOD

This cross-sectional study consisted of a cohort of adults with CP (n = 15; mean age = 33 years 5 months [SD = 11 years 8 months]); Manual Ability Classification System levels I-IV) and neurotypical controls (n = 18; mean age = 30 years 10 months [SD = 10 years 4 months]), who were recruited to participate at an academic medical center. Adults with CP and typical adults (controls) were stimulated at the cervicomedullary junction to assess CMEPs at the cervical spinal cord level. Upper-extremity motor function was quantified using the Box and Blocks and Purdue Pegboard tests, self-reported upper-extremity function (UEF), and assessments of selective motor control.

RESULTS

At higher stimulation levels, the contralateral CMEP responses of adults with CP were different from typical adults (p = 0.032). Reduced CMEP was correlated with reduced upper-limb function, including worse performance on the Box and Blocks (rho = 0.625, p = 0.025) and Purdue Pegboard tests (rho = 0.701, p = 0.010), lower self-reported UEF (rho = 0.761, p = 0.009), and overall selective motor control (rho = 0.731, p = 0.007).

INTERPRETATION

Changes in the activation of spinal motoneurons through corticospinal pathways may have an important role in the altered upper-extremity motor function of individuals with CP.

Lack of effects of eight-week left dorsolateral prefrontal theta burst stimulation on white matter macro/microstructure and connection in autism

Whether brain stimulation could modulate brain structure in autism remains unknown. This study explored the impact of continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on white matter macro/microstructure in intellectually able children and emerging adults with autism. Sixty autistic participants were randomized (30 active) and received active or sham cTBS for eight weeks twice per week, 16 total sessions using a double-blind (participant-, rater-, analyst-blinded) design. All participants received high-angular resolution diffusion MR imaging at baseline and week 8. Twenty-eight participants in the active group and twenty-seven in the sham group with good imaging quality entered the final analysis. With longitudinal fixel-based analysis and network-based statistics, we found no significant difference between the active and sham groups in changes of white matter macro/microstructure and connections following cTBS. In addition, we found no association between baseline white matter macro/microstructure and autistic symptom changes from baseline to week 8 in the active group. In conclusion, we did not find a significant impact of left DLPFC cTBS on white matter macro/microstructure and connections in children and emerging adults with autism. These findings need to be interpreted in the context that the current intellectually able cohort in a single university hospital site limits the generalizability. Future studies are required to investigate if higher stimulation intensities and/or doses, other personal factors, or rTMS parameters might confer significant brain structural changes visible on MRI in ASD.

Outcome measures for electric field modeling in tES and TMS: A systematic review and large-scale modeling study

BACKGROUND

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a potent tool to estimate the amount of transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation (TMS and tES, respectively) that reaches the cortex and to address the variable behavioral effects observed in the field. However, outcome measures used to quantify E-fields vary considerably and a thorough comparison is missing.

OBJECTIVES

This two-part study aimed to examine the different outcome measures used to report on tES and TMS induced E-fields, including volume- and surface-level gray matter, region of interest (ROI), whole brain, geometrical, structural, and percentile-based approaches. The study aimed to guide future research in informed selection of appropriate outcome measures.

METHODS

Three electronic databases were searched for tES and/or TMS studies quantifying E-fields. The identified outcome measures were compared across volume- and surface-level E-field data in ten tES and TMS modalities targeting two common targets in 100 healthy individuals.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, we extracted 308 outcome measures from 202 studies that adopted either a gray matter volume-level (n = 197) or surface-level (n = 111) approach. Volume-level results focused on E-field magnitude, while surface-level data encompassed E-field magnitude (n = 64) and normal/tangential E-field components (n = 47). E-fields were extracted in ROIs, such as brain structures and shapes (spheres, hexahedra and cylinders), or the whole brain. Percentiles or mean values were mostly used to quantify E-fields. Our modeling study, which involved 1,000 E-field models and > 1,000,000 extracted E-field values, revealed that different outcome measures yielded distinct E-field values, analyzed different brain regions, and did not always exhibit strong correlations in the same within-subject E-field model.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcome measure selection significantly impacts the locations and intensities of extracted E-field data in both tES and TMS E-field models. The suitability of different outcome measures depends on the target region, TMS/tES modality, individual anatomy, the analyzed E-field component and the research question. To enhance the quality, rigor, and reproducibility in the E-field modeling domain, we suggest standard reporting practices across studies and provide four recommendations.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Chronic Stroke: Is Neuroimaging the Answer to the Next Leap Forward?

During rehabilitation, a large proportion of stroke patients either plateau or begin to lose motor skills. By priming the motor system, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising clinical adjunct that could augment the gains acquired during therapy sessions. However, the extent to which patients show improvements following tDCS is highly variable. This variability may be due to heterogeneity in regions of cortical infarct, descending motor tract injury, and/or connectivity changes, all factors that require neuroimaging for precise quantification and that affect the actual amount and location of current delivery. If the relationship between these factors and tDCS efficacy were clarified, recovery from stroke using tDCS might be become more predictable. This review provides a comprehensive summary and timeline of the development of tDCS for stroke from the viewpoint of neuroimaging. Both animal and human studies that have explored detailed aspects of anatomy, connectivity, and brain activation dynamics relevant to tDCS are discussed. Selected computational works are also included to demonstrate how sophisticated strategies for reducing variable effects of tDCS, including electric field modeling, are moving the field ever closer towards the goal of personalizing tDCS for each individual. Finally, larger and more comprehensive randomized controlled trials involving tDCS for chronic stroke recovery are underway that likely will shed light on how specific tDCS parameters, such as dose, affect stroke outcomes. The success of these collective efforts will determine whether tDCS for chronic stroke gains regulatory approval and becomes clinical practice in the future.

A Systematic Review and Large-Scale tES and TMS Electric Field Modeling Study Reveals How Outcome Measure Selection Alters Results in a Person- and Montage-Specific Manner

Background

Electric field (E-field) modeling is a potent tool to examine the cortical effects of transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation (TMS and tES, respectively) and to address the high variability in efficacy observed in the literature. However, outcome measures used to report E-field magnitude vary considerably and have not yet been compared in detail.

Objectives

The goal of this two-part study, encompassing a systematic review and modeling experiment, was to provide an overview of the different outcome measures used to report the magnitude of tES and TMS E-fields, and to conduct a direct comparison of these measures across different stimulation montages.

Methods

Three electronic databases were searched for tES and/or TMS studies reporting E-field magnitude. We extracted and discussed outcome measures in studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Additionally, outcome measures were compared via models of four common tES and two TMS modalities in 100 healthy younger adults.

Results

In the systematic review, we included 118 studies using 151 outcome measures related to E-field magnitude. Structural and spherical regions of interest (ROI) analyses and percentile-based whole-brain analyses were used most often. In the modeling analyses, we found that there was an average of only 6% overlap between ROI and percentile-based whole-brain analyses in the investigated volumes within the same person. The overlap between ROI and whole-brain percentiles was montage- and person-specific, with more focal montages such as 4Ã-1 and APPS-tES, and figure-of-eight TMS showing up to 73%, 60%, and 52% overlap between ROI and percentile approaches respectively. However, even in these cases, 27% or more of the analyzed volume still differed between outcome measures in every analyses.

Conclusions

The choice of outcome measures meaningfully alters the interpretation of tES and TMS E-field models. Well-considered outcome measure selection is imperative for accurate interpretation of results, valid between-study comparisons, and depends on stimulation focality and study goals. We formulated four recommendations to increase the quality and rigor of E-field modeling outcome measures. With these data and recommendations, we hope to guide future studies towards informed outcome measure selection, and improve the comparability of studies.

Optimized APPS-tDCS electrode position, size, and distance doubles the on-target stimulation magnitude in 3000 electric field models

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a widely used noninvasive brain stimulation technique with mixed results to date. A potential solution is to apply more efficient stimulation to ensure that each participant receives sufficient cortical activation. In this four-part study, we used electric field (E-field) modeling to systematically investigate the cortical effects of conventional and novel tDCS electrode montages, with the goal of creating a new easily adoptable form of tDCS that induces higher and more focal E-fields. We computed 3000 anatomically accurate, MRI-based E-field models using 2 mA tDCS to target the left primary motor cortex in 200 Human Connectome Project (HCP) participants and tested the effects of: 1. Novel Electrode Position, 2. Electrode Size, and 3. Inter-Electrode Distance on E-field magnitude and focality. In particular, we examined the effects of placing electrodes surrounding the corticomotor target in the anterior and posterior direction (anterior posterior pad surround tDCS; APPS-tDCS). We found that electrode position, electrode size, and inter-electrode distance all significantly impact the cortical E-field magnitude and focality of stimulation (all p < 0.0001). At the same 2 mA scalp stimulation intensity, APPS-tDCS with smaller than conventional 1 × 1 cm electrodes surrounding the neural target deliver more than double the on-target cortical E-field (APPS-tDCS: average of 0.55 V/m from 2 mA; M1-SO and bilateral M1: both 0.27 V/m from 2 mA) while stimulating only a fraction of the off-target brain regions; 2 mA optimized APPS-tDCS produces 4.08 mA-like cortical E-fields. In sum, this new optimized APPS-tDCS method produces much stronger cortical stimulation intensities at the same 2 mA scalp intensity. APPS-tDCS also more focally stimulates the cortex at the intended target, using simple EEG coordinate locations and without MRI scans. This APPS-tDCS method is adoptable to any existing, commercially available tDCS device and can be used to ensure sufficient cortical activation in each person. Future directions include testing whether APPS-tDCS produces larger and more consistent therapeutic tDCS effects.

Addressing transcranial electrical stimulation variability through prospective individualized dosing of electric field strength in 300 participants across two samples: the 2-SPED approach

Objective. Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is a promising method for modulating brain activity and excitability with variable results to date. To minimize electric (E-)field strength variability, we introduce the 2-sample prospective E-field dosing (2-SPED) approach, which uses E-field strengths induced by tES in a first population to individualize stimulation intensity in a second population.Approach. We performed E-field modeling of three common tES montages in 300 healthy younger adults. First, permutation analyses identified the sample size required to obtain a stable group average E-field in the primary motor cortex (M1), with stability being defined as the number of participants where all group-average E-field strengths ± standard deviation did not leave the population's 5-95 percentile range. Second, this stable group average was used to individualize tES intensity in a second independent population (n = 100). The impact of individualized versus fixed intensity tES on E-field strength variability was analyzed.Main results. In the first population, stable group average E-field strengths (V/m) in M1 were achieved at 74-85 participants, depending on the tES montage. Individualizing the stimulation intensity (mA) in the second population resulted in uniform M1 E-field strength (all p < 0.001) and significantly diminished peak cortical E-field strength variability (all p < 0.01), across all montages.Significance. 2-SPED is a feasible way to prospectively induce more uniform E-field strengths in a region of interest. Future studies might apply 2-SPED to investigate whether decreased E-field strength variability also results in decreased physiological and behavioral variability in response to tES.

Variation of cerebrospinal fluid in specific regions regulates focality in transcranial direct current stimulation

Background

Conventionally, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) aims to focalize the current reaching the target region-of-interest (ROI). The focality can be quantified by the dose-target-determination-index (DTDI). Despite having a uniform tDCS setup, some individuals receive focal stimulation (high DTDI) while others show reduced focality (“non-focal”). The volume of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), gray matter (GM), and white matter (WM) underlying each ROI govern the tDCS current distribution inside the brain, thereby regulating focality.

Aim

To determine the regional volume parameters that differentiate the focal and non-focal groups.

Methods

T1-weighted images of the brain from 300 age-sex matched adults were divided into three equal groups- (a) Young (20 ≤ × &lt; 40 years), (b) Middle (40 ≤ × &lt; 60 years), and (c) Older (60 ≤ × &lt; 80 years). For each group, inter and intra-hemispheric montages with electrodes at (1) F3 and right supraorbital region (F3-RSO), and (2) CP5 and Cz (CP5-Cz) were simulated, targeting the left- Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC) and -Inferior Parietal Lobule (IPL), respectively. Both montages were simulated for two current doses (1 and 2 mA). For each individual head simulated for a tDCS configuration (montage and dose), the current density at each region-of-interest (ROI) and their DTDI were calculated. The individuals were categorized into two groups- (1) Focal (DTDI ≥ 0.75), and (2) Non-focal (DTDI &lt; 0.75). The regional volume of CSF, GM, and WM of all the ROIs was determined. For each tDCS configuration and ROI, three 3-way analysis of variance was performed considering- (i) GM, (ii) WM, and (iii) CSF as the dependent variable (DV). The age group, sex, and focality group were the between-subject factors. For a given ROI, if any of the 3 DV’s showed a significant main effect or interaction involving the focality group, then that ROI was classified as a “focal ROI.”

Results

Regional CSF was the principal determinant of focality. For interhemispheric F3-RSO montage, interaction effect (p &lt; 0.05) of age and focality was observed at Left Caudate Nucleus, with the focal group exhibiting higher CSF volume. The CSF volume of focal ROI correlated positively (r ∼ 0.16, p &lt; 0.05) with the current density at the target ROI (DLPFC). For intrahemispheric CP5-Cz montage, a significant (p &lt; 0.05) main effect was observed at the left pre- and post-central gyrus, with the focal group showing lower CSF volume. The CSF volume correlated negatively (r ∼ –0.16, p &lt; 0.05) with current density at left IPL. The results were consistent for both current doses.

Conclusion

The CSF channels the flow of tDCS current between electrodes with focal ROIs acting like reservoirs of current. The position of focal ROI in the channel determines the stimulation intensity at the target ROI. For focal stimulation in interhemispheric F3-RSO, the proximity of focal ROI reserves the current density at the target ROI (DLPFC). In contrast, for intrahemispheric montage (CP5-Cz), the far-end location of focal ROI reduces the current density at the target (IPL).

Electric Field Strength From Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Determines Degree of Working Memory Response: A Potential Application of Reverse-Calculation Modeling?

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for working memory is an enticing treatment, but there is mixed evidence to date.

OBJECTIVES

We tested the effects of electric field strength from uniform 2 mA dosing on working memory change from prestimulation to poststimulation. Second, we statistically evaluated a reverse-calculation method of individualizing tDCS dose and its effect on normalizing electric field at the cortex.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed electric field modeling on a data set of 28 healthy older adults (15 women, mean age = 73.7, SD = 7.3) who received ten sessions of active 2 mA tDCS (N = 14) or sham tDCS (N = 14) applied over bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortices (DLPFC) in a triple-blind design. We evaluated the relationship between electric field strength and working memory change on an N-back task in conditions of above-median, high electric field from active 2 mA (N = 7), below-median, low electric field from active 2 mA (N = 7), and sham (N = 14) at regions of interest (ROI) at the left and right DLPFC. We then determined the individualized reverse-calculation dose to produce the group average electric field and measured the electric field variance between uniform 2 mA doses vs individualized reverse-calculation doses at the same ROIs.

RESULTS

Working memory improvements from pre- to post-tDCS were significant for the above-median electric field from active 2 mA condition at the left DLPFC (mixed ANOVA, p = 0.013). Furthermore, reverse-calculation modeling significantly reduced electric field variance at both ROIs (Levene's test; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher electric fields at the left DLPFC from uniform 2 mA doses appear to drive working memory improvements from tDCS. Individualized doses from reverse-calculation modeling significantly reduce electric field variance at the cortex. Taken together, using reverse-calculation modeling to produce the same, high electric fields at the cortex across participants may produce more effective future tDCS treatments for working memory.

Is there a neuroscience-based, mechanistic rationale for transcranial direct current stimulation as an adjunct treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder?

It is well-known that there is considerable variation in the effectiveness of evidence-based treatments for psychiatric disorders, and a continued need to improve the real-world effectiveness of these treatments. In the last 20+ years the examination of noninvasive brain stimulation techniques for psychiatric treatment has increased dramatically. However, in order to test these techniques for effective therapeutic use, it is critical to understand (a) (what are) the key neural circuits to engage for specific disorders or clusters of symptoms, and (b) (how) can these circuits be reached effectively using neurostimulation? Here we focus on the research toward the application of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). tDCS is a portable and inexpensive technique that lends itself well to be combined with, and thus potentially augment, exposure-based treatment for PTSD. In this review, we discuss the behavioral model of threat and safety learning and memory as it relates to PTSD, the underlying neurobiology of PTSD, as well as the current understandings of tDCS action, including its limitations and opportunities. Through this lens, we summarize the research on the application of tDCS to modulated threat and safety learning and memory to date, and propose new directions for its future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Standard Non-Personalized Electric Field Modeling of Twenty Typical tDCS Electrode Configurations via the Computational Finite Element Method: Contributions and Limitations of Two Different Approaches

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation procedure to modulate cortical excitability and related brain functions. tDCS can effectively alter multiple brain functions in healthy humans and is suggested as a therapeutic tool in several neurological and psychiatric diseases. However, variability of results is an important limitation of this method. This variability may be due to multiple factors, including age, head and brain anatomy (including skull, skin, CSF and meninges), cognitive reserve and baseline performance level, specific task demands, as well as comorbidities in clinical settings. Different electrode montages are a further source of variability between tDCS studies. A procedure to estimate the electric field generated by specific tDCS electrode configurations, which can be helpful to adapt stimulation protocols, is the computational finite element method. This approach is useful to provide a priori modeling of the current spread and electric field intensity that will be generated according to the implemented electrode montage. Here, we present standard, non-personalized model-based electric field simulations for motor, dorsolateral prefrontal, and posterior parietal cortex stimulation according to twenty typical tDCS electrode configurations using two different current flow modeling software packages. The resulting simulated maximum intensity of the electric field, focality, and current spread were similar, but not identical, between models. The advantages and limitations of both mathematical simulations of the electric field are presented and discussed systematically, including aspects that, at present, prevent more widespread application of respective simulation approaches in the field of non-invasive brain stimulation.

Focality-Oriented Selection of Current Dose for Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Background: In transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), the injected current becomes distributed across the brain areas. The objective is to stimulate the target region of interest (ROI) while minimizing the current in non-target ROIs (the 'focality' of tDCS). For this purpose, determining the appropriate current dose for an individual is difficult. Aim: To introduce a dose-target determination index (DTDI) to quantify the focality of tDCS and examine the dose-focality relationship in three different populations. Method: Here, we extended our previous toolbox i-SATA to the MNI reference space. After a tDCS montage is simulated for a current dose, the i-SATA(MNI) computes the average (over voxels) current density for every region in the brain. DTDI is the ratio of the average current density at the target ROI to the ROI with a maximum value (the peak region). Ideally, target ROI should be the peak region, so DTDI shall range from 0 to 1. The higher the value, the better the dose. We estimated the variation of DTDI within and across individuals using T1-weighted brain images of 45 males and females distributed equally across three age groups: (a) young adults (20 ≤ x ˂ 40 years), (b) mid adults (40 ≤ x ˂ 60 years), and (c) older adults (60 ≤ x ˂ 80 years). DTDI's were evaluated for the frontal montage with electrodes at F3 and the right supraorbital for three current doses of 1 mA, 2 mA, and 3 mA, with the target ROI at the left middle frontal gyrus. Result: As the dose is incremented, DTDI may show (a) increase, (b) decrease, and (c) no change across the individuals depending on the relationship (nonlinear or linear) between the injected tDCS current and the distribution of current density in the target ROI. The nonlinearity is predominant in older adults with a decrease in focality. The decline is stronger in males. Higher current dose at older age can enhance the focality of stimulation. Conclusion: DTDI provides information on which tDCS current dose will optimize the focality of stimulation. The recommended DTDI dose should be prioritized based on the age (>40 years) and sex (especially for males) of an individual. The toolbox i-SATA(MNI) is freely available.

A reexamination of motor and prefrontal TMS in tobacco use disorder: Time for personalized dosing based on electric field modeling?

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we reexamined the use of 120% resting motor threshold (rMT) dosing for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) using electric field modeling.

METHODS

We computed electric field models in 38 tobacco use disorder (TUD) participants to compare figure-8 coil induced electric fields at 100% rMT over the primary motor cortex (M1), and 100% and 120% rMT over the DLPFC. We then calculated the percentage of rMT needed for motor-equivalent induced electric fields at the DLPFC and modeled this intensity for each person.

RESULTS

Electric fields from 100% rMT stimulation over M1 were significantly larger than what was modeled in the DLPFC using 100% rMT (p < 0.001) and 120% rMT stimulation (p = 0.013). On average, TMS would need to be delivered at 133.5% rMT (range = 79.9 to 247.5%) to produce motor-equivalent induced electric fields at the DLPFC of 158.2 V/m.

CONCLUSIONS

TMS would have to be applied at an average of 133.5% rMT over the left DLPFC to produce equivalent electric fields to 100% rMT stimulation over M1 in these 38 TUD patients. The high interindividual variability between motor and prefrontal electric fields for each participant supports using personalized electric field modeling for TMS dosing to ensure that each participant is not under- or over-stimulated.

SIGNIFICANCE

These electric field modeling in TUD data suggest that 120% rMT stimulation over the DLPFC delivers sub-motor equivalent electric fields in many individuals (73.7%). With further validation, electric field modeling may be an impactful method of individually dosing TMS.

Predicting Response to Brain Stimulation in Depression: a Roadmap for Biomarker Discovery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinical response to brain stimulation treatments for depression is highly variable. A major challenge for the field is predicting an individual patient's likelihood of response. This review synthesises recent developments in neural predictors of response to targeted brain stimulation in depression. It then proposes a framework to evaluate the clinical potential of putative 'biomarkers'.

RECENT FINDINGS

Largely, developments in identifying putative predictors emerge from two approaches: data-driven, including machine learning algorithms applied to resting state or structural neuroimaging data, and theory-driven, including task-based neuroimaging. Theory-driven approaches can also yield mechanistic insight into the cognitive processes altered by the intervention.

SUMMARY

A pragmatic framework for discovery and testing of biomarkers of brain stimulation response in depression is proposed, involving (1) identification of a cognitive-neural phenotype; (2) confirming its validity as putative biomarker, including out-of-sample replicability and within-subject reliability; (3) establishing the association between this phenotype and treatment response and/or its modifiability with particular brain stimulation interventions via an early-phase randomised controlled trial RCT; and (4) multi-site RCTs of one or more treatment types measuring the generalisability of the biomarker and confirming the superiority of biomarker-selected patients over randomly allocated groups.

i-SATA: A MATLAB based toolbox to estimate current density generated by transcranial direct current stimulation in an individual brain

OBJECTIVE

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a technique where a weak current is passed through the electrodes placed on the scalp. The distribution of the electric current induced in the brain due to tDCS is provided by simulation toolbox like Realistic volumetric Approach based Simulator for Transcranial electric stimulation (ROAST). However, the procedure to estimate the total current density induced at the target and the intermediary region of the cortex is complex. The Systematic-Approach-for-tDCS-Analysis (SATA) was developed to overcome this problem. However, SATA is limited to standardized (MNI152) headspace only. Here we develop individual-SATA (i-SATA) to extend it to individual head.

APPROACH

T1-weighted images of 15 subjects were taken from two Magnetic Resonance Imaging scanners of different strengths. Across the subjects, the montages were simulated in ROAST. i-SATA converts the ROAST output to Talairach space. The x, y and z coordinates of the anterior commissure (AC), posterior commissure (PC), and Mid-Sagittal (MS) points are necessary for the conversion. AC and PC are detected using the acpcdetect toolbox. We developed a method to determine the MS in the image and cross-verified its location manually using BrainSight®.

MAIN RESULTS

Determination of points with i-SATA is fast and accurate. The i-SATA provided estimates of the current-density induced across an individual's cortical lobes and gyri as tested on images from two different scanners.

SIGNIFICANCE

Researchers can use i-SATA for customizing tDCS-montages. With i-SATA it is also easier to compute the inter-individual variation in current-density across the target and intermediary regions of the brain. The software is publicly available.

Brain stimulation in zero gravity: transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) motor threshold decreases during zero gravity induced by parabolic flight

We are just beginning to understand how spaceflight may impact brain function. As NASA proceeds with plans to send astronauts to the Moon and commercial space travel interest increases, it is critical to understand how the human brain and peripheral nervous system respond to zero gravity. Here, we developed and refined head-worn transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) systems capable of reliably and quickly determining the amount of electromagnetism each individual needs to detect electromyographic (EMG) threshold levels in the thumb (called the resting motor threshold (rMT)). We then collected rMTs in 10 healthy adult participants in the laboratory at baseline, and subsequently at three time points onboard an airplane: (T1) pre-flight at Earth gravity, (T2) during zero gravity periods induced by parabolic flight and (T3) post-flight at Earth gravity. Overall, the subjects required 12.6% less electromagnetism applied to the brain to cause thumb muscle activation during weightlessness compared to Earth gravity, suggesting neurophysiological changes occur during brief periods of zero gravity. We discuss several candidate explanations for this finding, including upward shift of the brain within the skull, acute increases in cortical excitability, changes in intracranial pressure, and diffuse spinal or neuromuscular system effects. All of these possible explanations warrant further study. In summary, we documented neurophysiological changes during brief episodes of zero gravity and thus highlighting the need for further studies of human brain function in altered gravity conditions to optimally prepare for prolonged microgravity exposure during spaceflight.