Sertraline vs. ELectrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Trial--SELECT TDCS: design, rationale and objectives

Application of Transcranial Direct and Alternating Current Stimulation (tDCS and tACS) on Major Depressive Disorder

The exploration of brain stimulation methods offers a promising avenue to overcome the shortcomings of traditional drug therapies and psychological treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). Over the past years, there has been an increasing focus on transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), notably for its ease of use and potentially fewer side effects. This chapter delves into the use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), which are key components of tES, in managing depression. It begins by introducing tDCS and tACS, summarizing their action mechanisms. Following this introduction, the chapter provides an in-depth analysis of existing meta-analyses, systematic reviews, clinical studies, and case reports that have applied tES in MDD treatment. It also considers the role of tES in personalized medicine by looking at specific patient groups and evaluating research on possible biomarkers that could predict how patients with MDD respond to tES therapy.

Specificity in Generalization Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Left Inferior Frontal Gyrus in Primary Progressive Aphasia

OBJECTIVES

Generalization (or near-transfer) effects of an intervention to tasks not explicitly trained are the most desirable intervention outcomes. However, they are rarely reported and even more rarely explained. One hypothesis for generalization effects is that the tasks improved share the same brain function/computation with the intervention task. We tested this hypothesis in this study of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) that is claimed to be involved in selective semantic retrieval of information from the temporal lobes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, we examined whether tDCS over the left IFG in a group of patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA), paired with a lexical/semantic retrieval intervention (oral and written naming), may specifically improve semantic fluency, a nontrained near-transfer task that relies on selective semantic retrieval, in patients with PPA.

RESULTS

Semantic fluency improved significantly more in the active tDCS than in the sham tDCS condition immediately after and two weeks after treatment. This improvement was marginally significant two months after treatment. We also found that the active tDCS effect was specific to tasks that require this IFG computation (selective semantic retrieval) but not to other tasks that may require different computations of the frontal lobes.

CONCLUSIONS

We provided interventional evidence that the left IFG is critical for selective semantic retrieval, and tDCS over the left IFG may have a near-transfer effect on tasks that depend on the same computation, even if they are not specifically trained.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT02606422.

Bifrontal-transcranial direct current stimulation as an early augmentation strategy in major depressive disorder: A single-blind randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with major depressive disorder who have a poor or inconsistent response to antidepressants have been treated using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Early tDCS augmentation may help with the early amelioration of symptoms. In this study, the efficacy and safety of tDCS as early augmentation therapy in major depressive disorder were evaluated.

METHODS

Fifty adults were randomized into two groups and were administered either active tDCS or sham tDCS, along with escitalopram 10 mg/day. A total of 10 tDCS sessions with anodal stimulation at the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and cathode at the right DLPFC were given over two weeks. Assessments were done using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI), and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) at baseline, two weeks, and four weeks. A tDCS side effect checklist was administered during therapy.

RESULTS

A significant reduction in HAM-D, BDI, and HAM-A scores were observed in both groups from baseline to week-4. At week-2, the active group had a significantly greater reduction in HAM-D and BDI scores than the sham group. However, at the end of therapy, both groups were comparable. The active group was 1.12 times more likely to experience any side effect than the sham group, but the intensity ranged from mild to moderate.

CONCLUSION

tDCS is an effective and safe strategy for managing depression as an early augmentation strategy, and it produces an early reduction of depressive symptoms and is well tolerated in moderate to severe depressive episodes.

Examining the synergistic effects of a cognitive control video game and a home-based, self-administered non-invasive brain stimulation on alleviating depression: the DiSCoVeR trial protocol

Enhanced behavioral interventions are gaining increasing interest as innovative treatment strategies for major depressive disorder (MDD). In this study protocol, we propose to examine the synergistic effects of a self-administered home-treatment, encompassing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) along with a video game based training of attentional control. The study is designed as a two-arm, double-blind, randomized and placebo-controlled multi-center trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04953208). At three study sites (Israel, Latvia, and Germany), 114 patients with a primary diagnosis of MDD undergo 6 weeks of intervention (30 × 30 min sessions). Patients assigned to the intervention group receive active tDCS (anode F3 and cathode F4; 2 mA intensity) and an action-like video game, while those assigned to the control group receive sham tDCS along with a control video game. An electrode-positioning algorithm is used to standardize tDCS electrode positioning. Participants perform their designated treatment at the clinical center (sessions 1-5) and continue treatment at home under remote supervision (sessions 6-30). The endpoints are feasibility (primary) and safety, treatment efficacy (secondary, i.e., change of Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores at week six from baseline, clinical response and remission, measures of social, occupational, and psychological functioning, quality of life, and cognitive control (tertiary). Demonstrating the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of this novel combined intervention could expand the range of available treatments for MDD to neuromodulation enhanced interventions providing cost-effective, easily accessible, and low-risk treatment options.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04953208.

Bibliometric and visual analysis of transcranial direct current stimulation in the web of science database from 2000 to 2022 via CiteSpace

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the current research hotspots and development tendency of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in the field of neurobiology from a bibliometric perspective by providing visualized information to scientists and clinicians.

Materials and methods

Publications related to tDCS published between 2000 and 2022 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) on May 5, 2022. Bibliometric features including the number of publications and citations, citation frequency, H-index, journal impact factors, and journal citation reports were summarized using Microsoft Office Excel. Co-authorship, citation, co-citation, and co-occurrence analyses among countries, institutions, authors, co-authors, journals, publications, references, and keywords were analyzed and visualized using CiteSpace (version 6.1.R3).

Results

A total of 4,756 publications on tDCS fulfilled the criteria we designed and then were extracted from the WOSCC. The United States (1,190 publications, 25.02%) and Harvard University (185 publications, 3.89%) were the leading contributors among all the countries and institutions, respectively. NITSCHE MA and FREGNI F, two key researchers, have made great achievements in tDCS. Brain Stimulation (306 publications) had the highest number of publications relevant to tDCS and the highest number of citations (4,042 times). In terms of potential hotspots, we observed through reference co-citation analysis timeline viewer related to tDCS that "depression"#0, "Sensorimotor network"#10, "working memory"#11, and "Transcranial magnetic stimulation"#9 might be the future research hotspots, while keywords with the strong burst and still ongoing were "intensity" (2018-2022), "impairment" (2020-2022), "efficacy" (2020-2022), and "guideline" (2020-2022).

Conclusion

This was the first-ever study of peer-reviewed publications relative to tDCS using several scientometric and visual analytic methods to quantitatively and qualitatively reveal the current research status and trends in the field of tDCS. Through the bibliometric method, we gained an in-depth understanding of the current research status and development trend on tDCS. Our research and analysis results might provide some practical sources for academic scholars and clinicians.

Recent innovations in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for the treatment of unipolar and bipolar depression: a narrative review

Depression, either bipolar or unipolar, is a highly prevalent and disabling condition. Even though several treatment options exist for depressed patients, a significant portion of individuals receiving conventional pharmacotherapy fails to achieve and sustain remission. For this reason, there is a strong need for effective alternatives to pharmacotherapy. In this respect, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have been increasingly investigated in the last two decade as promising treatment strategies for major depression and treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Indeed, due to their safety and tolerability and to the growing evidence on their efficacy, NIBS has been included in international treatment guidelines, having become part of the standard clinical practice. Even though several clinical trials involving NIBS in patients with major depression and TRD have been conducted, literature in specific areas is still marked by some inconsistencies, due to small sample-sizes, lack of multicentre-studies and to the difficulty in comparing different treatment modalities and stimulation protocols. In light of the above, we sought to provide a brief, updated compendium of the latest innovative acquisition for the use of NIBS in the treatment of depression, either unipolar or bipolar, as well as TRD with a specific focus on innovative set-up, devices, target areas, and parameters that may affect the outcome.

Transcranial Magnetic and Direct Current Stimulation in the Treatment of Depression: Basic Mechanisms and Challenges of Two Commonly Used Brain Stimulation Methods in Interventional Psychiatry

Noninvasive neuromodulation, including repetitive trans-cranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and direct current stimulation (tDCS), provides researchers and health care professionals with the ability to gain unique insights into brain functions and treat several neurological and psychiatric conditions. Undeniably, the number of published research and clinical papers on this topic is increasing exponentially. In parallel, several methodological and scientific caveats have emerged in the transcranial stimulation field; these include less robust and reliable effects as well as contradictory clinical findings. These inconsistencies are maybe due to the fact that research exploring the relationship between the methodological aspects and clinical efficacy of rTMS and tDCS is far from conclusive. Hence, additional work is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying the effects of magnetic stimulation and low-intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) in order to optimize dosing, methodological designs, and safety aspects.

Clinical Effects of Immersive Multimodal BCI-VR Training after Bilateral Neuromodulation with rTMS on Upper Limb Motor Recovery after Stroke. A Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and Objectives: The motor sequelae after a stroke are frequently persistent and cause a high degree of disability. Cortical ischemic or hemorrhagic strokes affecting the cortico-spinal pathways are known to cause a reduction of cortical excitability in the lesioned area not only for the local connectivity impairment but also due to a contralateral hemisphere inhibitory action. Non-invasive brain stimulation using high frequency repetitive magnetic transcranial stimulation (rTMS) over the lesioned hemisphere and contralateral cortical inhibition using low-frequency rTMS have been shown to increase the excitability of the lesioned hemisphere. Mental representation techniques, neurofeedback, and virtual reality have also been shown to increase cortical excitability and complement conventional rehabilitation. Materials and Methods: We aim to carry out a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial aiming to study the efficacy of immersive multimodal Brain-Computer Interfacing-Virtual Reality (BCI-VR) training after bilateral neuromodulation with rTMS on upper limb motor recovery after subacute stroke (>3 months) compared to neuromodulation combined with conventional motor imagery tasks. This study will include 42 subjects in a randomized controlled trial design. The main expected outcomes are changes in the Motricity Index of the Arm (MI), dynamometry of the upper limb, score according to Fugl-Meyer for upper limb (FMA-UE), and changes in the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). The evaluation will be carried out before the intervention, after each intervention and 15 days after the last session. Conclusions: This trial will show the additive value of VR immersive motor imagery as an adjuvant therapy combined with a known effective neuromodulation approach opening new perspectives for clinical rehabilitation protocols.

Efficacy and Safety of tDCS and tACS in Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Factorial Placebo-Controlled Study Design

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) are regarded as promising antidepressant treatments.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of tDCS, tACS, escitalopram, and placebo/sham stimulation controls.

DESIGN

Randomized, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

METHODS

Sample sizes were calculated based on data from previous similar studies. Eligible non-treatment-resistant-depressive outpatient subjects with moderate-to-severe depression (HRDS ≥17) are randomized to receive (1) tDCS + placebo; (2) tACS + placebo; (3) escitalopram + placebo; or (4) sham stimulation + placebo. The intensity of electricity is 2 mA, lasting for 30 minutes over two consecutive working days (10 sessions in total). The medication lasts for 6 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the response rates within 6 weeks (week 6 is also the endpoint of the study), and secondary outcome measures included changes in other clinical measurements. Safety and acceptability are measured by adverse event rates and dropout rates. Exploring outcome consist of the performance of cognitive battery as well as neurophysiology results.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first double-blind controlled study comparing tDCS, tACS, and clinically used antidepressants, which will provide further evidence for their efficacy and safety in possible clinical applications.

Guidelines for TMS/tES clinical services and research through the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has broadly disrupted biomedical treatment and research including non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS). Moreover, the rapid onset of societal disruption and evolving regulatory restrictions may not have allowed for systematic planning of how clinical and research work may continue throughout the pandemic or be restarted as restrictions are abated. The urgency to provide and develop NIBS as an intervention for diverse neurological and mental health indications, and as a catalyst of fundamental brain research, is not dampened by the parallel efforts to address the most life-threatening aspects of COVID-19; rather in many cases the need for NIBS is heightened including the potential to mitigate mental health consequences related to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To facilitate the re-establishment of access to NIBS clinical services and research operations during the current COVID-19 pandemic and possible future outbreaks, we develop and discuss a framework for balancing the importance of NIBS operations with safety considerations, while addressing the needs of all stakeholders. We focus on Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and low intensity transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) - including transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS).

METHODS

The present consensus paper provides guidelines and good practices for managing and reopening NIBS clinics and laboratories through the immediate and ongoing stages of COVID-19. The document reflects the analysis of experts with domain-relevant expertise spanning NIBS technology, clinical services, and basic and clinical research - with an international perspective. We outline regulatory aspects, human resources, NIBS optimization, as well as accommodations for specific demographics.

RESULTS

A model based on three phases (early COVID-19 impact, current practices, and future preparation) with an 11-step checklist (spanning removing or streamlining in-person protocols, incorporating telemedicine, and addressing COVID-19-associated adverse events) is proposed. Recommendations on implementing social distancing and sterilization of NIBS related equipment, specific considerations of COVID-19 positive populations including mental health comorbidities, as well as considerations regarding regulatory and human resource in the era of COVID-19 are outlined. We discuss COVID-19 considerations specifically for clinical (sub-)populations including pediatric, stroke, addiction, and the elderly. Numerous case-examples across the world are described.

CONCLUSION

There is an evident, and in cases urgent, need to maintain NIBS operations through the COVID-19 pandemic, including anticipating future pandemic waves and addressing effects of COVID-19 on brain and mind. The proposed robust and structured strategy aims to address the current and anticipated future challenges while maintaining scientific rigor and managing risk.

Interactions between transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and pharmacological interventions in the Major Depressive Episode: Findings from a naturalistic study

Background:

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive, neuromodulatory technique with an emerging role for treating major depression.

Objective:

To investigate the interactions between tDCS and drug therapy in unipolar and bipolar depressed patients who were refractory for at least one pharmacological treatment.

Methods:

This was a naturalistic study using data from 54 female and 28 male patients (mean age of 54 years) that consecutively visited our psychiatric unit. They received active tDCS (five consecutive days, 2 mA, anodal stimulation over the left and cathodal over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, twice a day, 20 minutes). The outcome variable (mood) was evaluated using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Predictor variables were age, gender, disorder and pharmacological treatment (seven dummy variables). We performed univariate and multivariate analyses as to identify predictors associated to the outcome.

Results:

After 5 days of treatment, BDI and HDRS scores decreased significantly (29% ± 36%, 18% ± 9%, respectively, P < 0.01 for both). Benzodiazepine use was independently associated with a worse outcome in both univariate (β = 4.92, P < 0.01) and multivariate (β = 5.8, P < 0.01) analyses; whereas use of dual-reuptake inhibitors positively changed tDCS effects in the multivariate model (β = –4.7, P = 0.02). A similar trend was observed for tricyclics (β = –4, P = 0.06) but not for antipsychotics, non-benzodiazepine anticonvulsants and other drugs.

Conclusion:

tDCS over the DLPFC acutely improved depressive symptoms. Besides the inherent limitations of our naturalistic design, our results suggest that tDCS effects might vary according to prior pharmacological treatment, notably benzodiazepines and some antidepressant classes. This issue should be further explored in controlled studies.

Differential Neuroplastic Changes in Fibromyalgia and Depression Indexed by Up-Regulation of Motor Cortex Inhibition and Disinhibition of the Descending Pain System: An Exploratory Study

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) and fibromyalgia (FM) present overlapped symptoms. Although the connection between these two disorders has not been elucidated yet, the disruption of neuroplastic processes that mediate the equilibrium in the inhibitory systems stands out as a possible mechanism. Thus, the purpose of this cross-sectional exploratory study was: (i) to compare the motor cortex inhibition indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measures [short intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF)], as well as the function of descending pain modulatory systems (DPMS) among FM, MDD, and healthy subjects (HS); (ii) to compare SICI, ICF, and the role of DPMS evaluated by the change on Numerical Pain Scale (NPS) during the conditioned pain modulation test (CPM-test) between FM and MDD considering the BDNF-adjusted index; (iii) to assess the relationship between the role of DPMS and the BDNF-adjusted index, despite clinical diagnosis. Patients and Methods: A cohort of 63 women, aged 18 to 75 years [FM (n = 18), MDD (n = 19), and HC (n = 29)]. Results: The MANCOVA analysis revealed that the mean of SICI was 53.40% larger in FM compared to MDD [1.03 (0.50) vs. 0.55 (0.43)] and 66.99% larger compared to HC [1.03 (0.50) vs. 0.34 (0.19)], respectively. The inhibitory potency of the DPMS assessed by the change on the NPS during CPM-test was 112.29 % lower in the FM compared to MDD [0.22 (1.37) vs. -0.87 (1.49)]. The mean of BDNF from FM compared to MDD was 35.70% higher [49.82 (16.31) vs. 14.12 (8.86)]. In FM, the Spearman's coefficient between the change in the NPS during CPM-test with the SICI was Rho = -0.49, [confidence interval (CI) 95%; -0.78 to -0.03]. The BDNF-adjusted index was positively correlated with the disinhibition of the DPMS. Conclusion: These findings support the hypothesis that in FM a deteriorated function of cortical inhibition, indexed by a higher SICI parameter, a lower function of the DPMS, together with a higher level of BDNF indicate that FM has different pathological substrates from depression. They suggest that an up-regulation phenomenon of intracortical inhibitory networks associated with a disruption of the DPMS function occurs in FM.

Neurostimulation Combined With Cognitive Intervention in Alzheimer's Disease (NeuroAD): Study Protocol of Double-Blind, Randomized, Factorial Clinical Trial

Despite advances in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), there is currently no prospect of a cure, and evidence shows that multifactorial interventions can benefit patients. A promising therapeutic alternative is the use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) simultaneously with cognitive intervention. The combination of these non-pharmacological techniques is apparently a safe and accessible approach. This study protocol aims to compare the efficacy of tDCS and cognitive intervention in a double-blind, randomized and factorial clinical trial. One hundred participants diagnosed with mild-stage AD will be randomized to receive both tDCS and cognitive intervention, tDCS, cognitive intervention, or placebo. The treatment will last 8 weeks, with a 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be the improvement of global cognitive functions, evaluated by the AD Assessment Scale, cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). The secondary outcomes will include measures of functional, affective, and behavioral components, as well as a neurophysiological marker (Brain-derived neurotrophic factor, BDNF). This study will enable us to assess, both in the short and long term, whether tDCS is more effective than the placebo and to examine the effects of combined therapy (tDCS and cognitive intervention) and isolated treatments (tDCS vs. cognitive intervention) on patients with AD.

Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02772185—May 5, 2016.

Clinical and demographic predictors of response to rTMS treatment in unipolar and bipolar depressive disorders

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies investigated predictors of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) response in depressive disorders but there is still limited knowledge about clinical predictors. Moreover, predictors of rTMS response in bipolar depression (BDD) are less studied than unipolar depression (UDD).

METHODS

We performed a binary logistic regression analysis in 248 patients with depressive disorders (unipolar N=102, bipolar N=146) who received 20 sessions of DLPFC rTMS (High-frequency rTMS, low-frequency rTMS, bilateral rTMS) to investigate significant clinical and demographic predictors of rTMS response. We also investigated effects of depression type, response (yes, no) and time on reducing somatic and cognitive-affective symptoms of patients.

RESULTS

Depression type (unipolar vs. bipolar) did not have a significant effect on rTMS response. 45% of all patients, 51.5% of UDD patients and 41% of BDD patients, responded to rTMS treatment. Age was the only significant demographic predictor of treatment response in all patients. Cognitive-affective symptoms, compared to somatic symptoms were significant predictors for treatment response to rTMS. Common and unique clinical predictor for UDD and BDD were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Younger patients and those with cognitive-affective rather than somatic symptoms benefit more from DLPFC rTMS treatment. rTMS is effective in UDD and BDD patients. Patients should be selected based on clinical and demographic profile.

SIGNIFICANCE

Findings are based on the largest thus far reported sample of patients with depressive disorders that received DLPFC rTMS.

Modulation of Brain Activity with Noninvasive Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS): Clinical Applications and Safety Concerns

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a widely-used tool to induce neuroplasticity and modulate cortical function by applying weak direct current over the scalp. In this review, we first introduce the underlying mechanism of action, the brief history from discovery to clinical scientific research, electrode positioning and montages, and parameter setup of tDCS. Then, we review tDCS application in clinical samples including people with drug addiction, major depression disorder, Alzheimer's disease, as well as in children. This review covers the typical characteristics and the underlying neural mechanisms of tDCS treatment in such studies. This is followed by a discussion of safety, especially when the current intensity is increased or the stimulation duration is prolonged. Given such concerns, we provide detailed suggestions regarding safety procedures for tDCS operation. Lastly, future research directions are discussed. They include foci on the development of multi-tech combination with tDCS such as with TMS and fMRI; long-term behavioral and morphological changes; possible applications in other research domains, and more animal research to deepen the understanding of the biological and physiological mechanisms of tDCS stimulation.

Transcranial direct current stimulation over the primary motor vs prefrontal cortex in refractory chronic migraine: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) represents a therapeutic option for the prophylaxis of chronic migraine, the target area for application of the electrical current to the cortex has not yet been well established. Here we sought to determine whether a treatment protocol involving 12 sessions of 2mA, 20min anodal stimulation of the left primary motor (M1) or dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) could offer clinical benefits in the management of pain from migraine. Thirteen participants were assessed before and after treatment, using the Headache Impact Test-6, Visual Analogue Scale and Medical Outcomes Study 36 - Item Short - Form Health Survey. After treatment, group DLPFC exhibited a better performance compared with groups M1 and sham. On intragroup comparison, groups DLPFC and M1 exhibited a greater reduction in headache impact and pain intensity and a higher quality of life after treatment. No significant change was found in group sham. The participants in group M1 exhibited more adverse effects, especially headache, heartburn, and sleepiness, than did those in the other two groups. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a safe and efficacious technique for treating chronic migraine. However, it should be kept in mind that the site of cortical stimulation might modulate the patient's response to treatment.

Cognitive effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in depression: Results from the SELECT-TDCS trial and insights for further clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Cognitive dysfunction treatment remains an unmet clinical need in major depressive disorder (MDD). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may improve cognitive symptoms in MDD. Our aim was to investigate the cognitive effects of tDCS in the Sertraline vs. Electric Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study (SELECT-TDCS). We also explored whether tDCS could have mood-independent cognitive effects.

METHODS

One hundred twenty MDD patients aged from 18 to 65 years received 12 sessions of active/sham tDCS (2mA for 30min) and real/placebo 50mg/d sertraline over 6 weeks in a factorial trial. We analyzed whether changes in performance of neuropsychological tests (Trail Making, Digit Span, Stroop Task, Mini-Mental Status Exam and Montreal Cognitive Assessment) occurred over time, according to treatment group and depression improvement. Exploratory analyses were carried out to verify the influence of clinical and demographic variables on the outcomes.

RESULTS

Cognitive improvement was showed in most tests used, although they occurred regardless of intervention type and depression improvement. Further exploratory analyses revealed that clinical response and education level could have mediated pro-cognitive tDCS effects on some of the tests used.

LIMITATIONS

The neuropsychological battery used might not have been sensitive to detect tDCS-induced effects on cognition. Lack of simultaneous cognitive training during application may have also limited its cognitive effects.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of beneficial or deleterious cognitive effects of tDCS as a treatment for depression. We discussed clinical trial design considerations for further tDCS studies assessing cognitive effects, including sample and outcomes considerations.

Optimizing Rehabilitation for Phantom Limb Pain Using Mirror Therapy and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial Study Protocol

Background

Despite the multiple available pharmacological and behavioral therapies for the management of chronic phantom limb pain (PLP) in lower limb amputees, treatment for this condition is still a major challenge and the results are mixed. Given that PLP is associated with maladaptive brain plasticity, interventions that promote cortical reorganization such as non-invasive brain stimulation and behavioral methods including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and mirror therapy (MT), respectively, may prove to be beneficial to control pain in PLP. Due to its complementary effects, a combination of tDCS and MT may result in synergistic effects in PLP.

Objective

The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS and MT as a rehabilitative tool for the management of PLP in unilateral lower limb amputees.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, factorial, superiority clinical trial will be carried out. Participants will be eligible if they meet the following inclusion criteria: lower limb unilateral traumatic amputees that present PLP for at least 3 months after the amputated limb has completely healed. Participants (N=132) will be randomly allocated to the following groups: (1) active tDCS and active MT, (2) sham tDCS and active MT, (3) active tDCS and sham MT, and (4) sham tDCS and sham MT. tDCS will be applied with the anodal electrode placed over the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the amputation side and the cathode over the contralateral supraorbital area. Stimulation will be applied at the same time of the MT protocol with the parameters 2 mA for 20 minutes. Pain outcome assessments will be performed at baseline, before and after each intervention session, at the end of MT, and in 2 follow-up visits. In order to assess cortical reorganization and correlate with clinical outcomes, participants will undergo functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) before and after the intervention.

Results

This clinical trial received institutional review board (IRB) approval in July of 2015 and enrollment started in December of 2015. To date 2 participants have been enrolled. The estimate enrollment rate is about 30 to 35 patients per year; thus we expect to complete enrollment in 4 years.

Conclusions

This factorial design will provide relevant data to evaluate whether tDCS combined with MT is more effective than each therapy alone, as well as with no intervention (sham/sham) in patients with chronic PLP after unilateral lower limb amputation. In addition, this randomized clinical trial will help to investigate the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the disease, which could potentially provide relevant findings for further management of this chronic condition and also help to optimize the use of this novel intervention.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02487966; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02487966 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6i3GrKMyf)

Adjuvant transcranial direct current stimulation for treating Alzheimer's disease: A case study

We report the case of a 73-year-old male patient with Alzheimer's disease who underwent 10-daily transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) sessions. tDCS was applied over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex as an adjuvant to the traditional treatment that the patient was receiving, which consisted of anticholinergic medication and cognitive training. The data were qualitatively analyzed and are presented in an analytic and structured form. The effects on cognitive performance were evaluated using the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were assessed with a set of tests consisting of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, the Blessed Dementia Scale and the Disability Assessment for Dementia. The data obtained revealed that the application of tDCS had a stabilizing effect on overall patient cognitive function and led to improved performance on all the secondary outcome tests. These preliminary results indicate that tDCS is a potential adjuvant therapeutic tool for cognitive rehabilitation in Alzheimer's disease .

Prefrontal Electrical Stimulation in Non-depressed Reduces Levels of Reported Negative Affects from Daily Stressors

Negative emotional responses to the daily life stresses have cumulative effects which, in turn, impose wide-ranging negative constraints on emotional well being and neurocognitive performance (Kalueff and Nutt, 2007; Nadler et al., 2010; Charles et al., 2013). Crucial cognitive functions such as memory and problem solving, as well more short term emotional responses (e.g., anticipation of- and response to- monetary rewards or losses) are influenced by mood. The negative impact of these behavioral responses is felt at the individual level, but it also imposes major economic burden on modern healthcare systems. Although much research has been undertaken to understand the underlying mechanisms of depressed mood and design efficient treatment pathways, comparatively little was done to characterize mood modulations that remain within the boundaries of a healthy mental functioning. In one placebo-controlled experiment, we applied daily prefrontal transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) at five points in time, and found reliable improvements on self-reported mood evaluation. Using a new team of experimenters, we replicated this finding in an independent double-blinded placebo-controlled experiment and showed that stimulation over a shorter period of time (3 days) is sufficient to create detectable mood improvements. Taken together, our data show that repeated bilateral prefrontal tDCS can reduce psychological distress in non-depressed individuals.

Stroke Treatment Associated with Rehabilitation Therapy and Transcranial DC Stimulation (START-tDCS): a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Traditional treatment for motor impairment after stroke includes medication and physical rehabilitation. The transcranial direct current stimulation associated with a standard physical therapy program may be an effective therapeutic alternative for these patients.

Methods

This study is a sham-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial aiming to evaluate the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation in activities of daily living and motor function post subacute stroke. In total there will be 40 patients enrolled, diagnosed with subacute, ischemic, unilateral, non-recurring stroke. Participants will be randomized to two groups, one with active stimulation and the other with a placebo current. Patients and investigators will be blinded. Everyone will receive systematic physical therapy, based on constraint-induced movement therapy. The intervention will be applied for 10 consecutive days. Patients will undergo three functional assessments: at baseline, week 2, and week 4. Neuropsychological tests will be performed at baseline and week 4. Adverse effects will be computed at each session. On completion of the baseline measures, randomization will be conducted using random permuted blocks. The randomization will be concealed until group allocation.

Discussion

This study will investigate the combined effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and physical therapy on functional improvement after stroke. We tested whether the combination of these treatments is more effective than physical therapy alone when administered in the early stages after stroke.

Trial registration

NCT02156635 - May 30, 2014. Randomization is ongoing (40 participants randomized as of the end of December 2015).

BDNF in sleep, insomnia, and sleep deprivation

The protein brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is a member of the neurotrophin family of growth factors involved in plasticity of neurons in several brain regions. There are numerous evidence that BDNF expression is decreased by experiencing psychological stress and that, accordingly, a lack of neurotrophic support causes major depression. Furthermore, disruption in sleep homeostatic processes results in higher stress vulnerability and is often associated with stress-related mental disorders. Recently, we reported, for the first time, a relationship between BDNF and insomnia and sleep deprivation (SD). Using a biphasic stress model as explanation approach, we discuss here the hypothesis that chronic stress might induce a deregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal system. In the long-term it leads to sleep disturbance and depression as well as decreased BDNF levels, whereas acute stress like SD can be used as therapeutic intervention in some insomniac or depressed patients as compensatory process to normalize BDNF levels. Indeed, partial SD (PSD) induced a fast increase in BDNF serum levels within hours after PSD which is similar to effects seen after ketamine infusion, another fast-acting antidepressant intervention, while traditional antidepressants are characterized by a major delay until treatment response as well as delayed BDNF level increase. Key messages Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) plays a key role in the pathophysiology of stress-related mood disorders. The interplay of stress and sleep impacts on BDNF level. Partial sleep deprivation (PSD) shows a fast action on BDNF level increase.

Plasma levels of soluble TNF receptors 1 and 2 after tDCS and sertraline treatment in major depression: Results from the SELECT-TDCS trial

BACKGROUND

The cytokine hypothesis of depression postulates that the pathophysiology of this illness incorporates an increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which leads to an over-activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis as well as monoaminergic disturbances. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether the amelioration of depressive symptoms could decrease cytokine levels. Notwithstanding antidepressant drug therapy might exert anti-inflammatory effects, the effects of non-invasive neuromodulatory approaches like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on pro-inflammatory cytokine networks are largely unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated, in the Sertraline vs. Electric Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study (SELECT-TDCS) trial, whether the plasma levels of the soluble TNF receptors 1 and 2 (sTNFRs) changed after antidepressant treatment in a sample of 73 antidepressant-free patients with unipolar depressive disorder in an episode of at least moderate intensity.

RESULTS

Although both tDCS and sertraline exerted antidepressant effects, the plasma levels of sTNFRs did not change over time regardless of the intervention and clinical response. Also, baseline sTNFRs levels did not predict antidepressant response.

LIMITATIONS

Our negative findings could be a type II error, as this trial did not use an equivalence design.

CONCLUSIONS

To conclude, in this novel placebo-controlled trial prospectively evaluating the changes of sTNFRs in depressed patients, we found that these molecules are not surrogate biomarkers of treatment response of tDCS, whose antidepressant effects occurred regardless of normalization of immunological activity.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in the treatment of depression: Systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potential alternative treatment option for major depressive episodes (MDE).

OBJECTIVES

We address the efficacy and safety of tDCS in MDE.

METHODS

The outcome measures were Hedges' g for continuous depression ratings, and categorical response and remission rates.

RESULTS

A random effects model indicated that tDCS was superior to sham tDCS (k=11, N=393, g=0.30, 95% CI=[0.04, 0.57], p=0.027). Adjunctive antidepressant medication and cognitive control training negatively impacted on the treatment effect. The pooled log odds ratios (LOR) for response and remission were positive, but statistically non-significant (response: k=9, LOR=0.36, 95% CI[-0.16, 0.88], p=0.176, remission: k=9, LOR=0.25, 95% CI [-0.42, 0.91], p=0.468). We estimated that for a study to detect the pooled continuous effect (g=0.30) at 80% power (alpha=0.05), a total N of at least 346 would be required (with the total N required to detect the upper and lower bound being 49 and 12,693, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS may be efficacious for treatment of MDE. The data do not support the use of tDCS in treatment-resistant depression, or as an add-on augmentation treatment. Larger studies over longer treatment periods are needed.

Assessment of non-BDNF neurotrophins and GDNF levels after depression treatment with sertraline and transcranial direct current stimulation in a factorial, randomized, sham-controlled trial (SELECT-TDCS): an exploratory analysis

The neurotrophic hypothesis of depression states that the major depressive episode is associated with lower neurotrophic factors levels, which increase with amelioration of depressive symptoms. However, this hypothesis has not been extended to investigate neurotrophic factors other than the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). We therefore explored whether plasma levels of neurotrophins 3 (NT-3) and 4 (NT-4), nerve growth factor (NGF) and glial cell line derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) changed after antidepressant treatment and correlated with treatment response. Seventy-three patients with moderate-to-severe, antidepressant-free unipolar depression were assigned to a pharmacological (sertraline) and a non-pharmacological (transcranial direct current stimulation, tDCS) intervention in a randomized, 2 × 2, placebo-controlled design. The plasma levels of NT-3, NT-4, NGF and GDNF were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay before and after a 6-week treatment course and analyzed according to clinical response and allocation group. We found that tDCS and sertraline (separately and combined) produced significant improvement in depressive symptoms. Plasma levels of all neurotrophic factors were similar across groups at baseline and remained significantly unchanged regardless of the intervention and of clinical response. Also, baseline plasma levels were not associated with clinical response. To conclude, in this 6-week placebo-controlled trial, NT-3, NT-4, NGF and GDNF plasma levels did not significantly change with sertraline or tDCS. These data suggest that these neurotrophic factors are not surrogate biomarkers of treatment response or involved in the antidepressant mechanisms of tDCS.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for treatment of major depression during pregnancy: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background

Women with depression in pregnancy are faced with difficult treatment decisions. Untreated, antenatal depression has serious negative implications for mothers and children. While antidepressant drug treatment is likely to improve depressive symptoms, it crosses the placenta and may pose risks to the unborn child. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a focal brain stimulation treatment that improves depressive symptoms within 3 weeks of treatment by inducing changes to brain areas involved in depression, without impacting any other brain areas, and without inducing changes to heart rate, blood pressure or core body temperature. The localized nature of transcranial direct current stimulation makes it an ideal therapeutic approach for treating depression during pregnancy, although it has never previously been evaluated in this population.

Methods/design

We describe a pilot randomized controlled trial of transcranial direct current stimulation among women with depression in pregnancy to assess the feasibility of a larger, multicentre efficacy study. Women over 18 years of age and between 14 and 32 weeks gestation can be enrolled in the study provided they meet diagnostic criteria for a major depressive episode of at least moderate severity and have been offered but refused antidepressant medication. Participants are randomized to receive active transcranial direct current stimulation or a sham condition that is administered in 15 30-minute treatments over three weeks. Women sit upright during treatment and receive obstetrical monitoring prior to, during and after each treatment session. Depressive symptoms, treatment acceptability, and pregnancy outcomes are assessed at baseline (prior to randomization), at the end of each treatment week, every four weeks post-treatment until delivery, and at 4 and 12 weeks postpartum.

Discussion

Transcranial direct current stimulation is a novel therapeutic option for treating depression during pregnancy. This protocol allows for assessment of the feasibility of, acceptability of and adherence with a clinical trial protocol to administer this treatment to pregnant women with moderate to severe depression. Results from this pilot study will guide the development of a larger multicentre trial to definitively test the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation for pregnant women with depression.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials Gov NCT02116127.

BDNF plasma levels after antidepressant treatment with sertraline and transcranial direct current stimulation: results from a factorial, randomized, sham-controlled trial

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation intervention that modifies cortical excitability according to the stimulation parameters. Preclinical and clinical studies in healthy volunteers suggest that tDCS induces neuroplastic alterations of cortical excitability, which might explain its clinical effects in major depressive disorder (MDD). We therefore examined whether tDCS, as compared to the antidepressant sertraline, increases plasma brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels, a neurotrophin associated with neuroplasticity. Patients (n=73) with major depressive disorder were randomized to active/sham tDCS and sertraline/placebo (four groups) in this 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We measured BDNF plasma levels at baseline and endpoint, observing no significant changes of BDNF levels after treatment. In addition, no significant changes were observed in responders and non-responders as well as no relationships between BDNF levels and clinical and psychopathological variables related to depression. Thus, in one of the few placebo-controlled trials evaluating BDNF changes over an antidepressant treatment course, we did not observe BDNF increase regardless of clinical improvement in depressed patients. Regarding tDCS, BDNF plasma levels might not be a good candidate biomarker to evaluate depression improvement or be a predictor of response in patients treated with tDCS, as our results showed that BDNF increase was not necessary to induce clinical response. Finally, our findings do not support a relationship between BDNF and improvement of depression.

Impact of two or less missing treatment sessions on tDCS clinical efficacy: results from a factorial, randomized, controlled trial in major depression

OBJECTIVES

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory intervention with recent clinical trials showing promising results in major depression treatment. Although tDCS has some appealing characteristics (e.g., low cost, ease of use, and relatively benign profile of adverse effects), one important drawback of the technique is the need to deliver consecutive, repeated sessions for several weekdays. However, no study investigated whether absences during this acute treatment phase impact on tDCS efficacy, and, if so, whether absences should be considered dropouts, therefore increasing attrition.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

To examine this issue, we used data from a randomized, factorial, sham-controlled tDCS study that recruited 120 depressed patients. In this trial, the acute treatment phase consisted of ten consecutive sessions delivered once daily from Monday to Friday; two nonconsecutive missed visits were allowed, with extra tDCS sessions being performed to complete the original number of sessions.

RESULTS

Our main finding was that the procedure of granting one to two absences during the acute treatment phase did not impact on tDCS antidepressant efficacy. Moreover, out of 103 completers, only 41 (39.8%) patients presented no missing visits and 25 (24.3%) presented two absences. These patients did not differ in clinical and demographic characteristics; thus, absences were probably circumstantial (e.g., traffic congestion, personal obligations).

CONCLUSIONS

Absences during the acute tDCS treatment phase are common, which support the use of flexible schedules in future tDCS trials as to minimize attrition. Also, further studies should access whether higher number of absences can compromise optimal tDCS efficacy.

Cytokines plasma levels during antidepressant treatment with sertraline and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): results from a factorial, randomized, controlled trial

RATIONALE

The inflammatory hypothesis of depression states that increased levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines triggered by external and internal stressors are correlated to the acute depressive state. This hypothesis also suggests that pharmacotherapy partly acts in depression through anti-inflammatory effects. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a novel, promising, non-invasive somatic treatment for depression, although its antidepressant mechanisms are only partly understood.

OBJECTIVES

We explored the effects of tDCS and sertraline over the immune system during an antidepressant treatment trial.

METHODS

In a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 73 antidepressant-free patients with unipolar depression were randomized to active/sham tDCS and sertraline/placebo (2 × 2 design). Plasma levels of several cytokines (IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IL-17a, IFN-γ, and TNF-α) were determined to investigate the effects of the interventions and of clinical response on them.

RESULTS

All cytokines, except TNF-α, decreased over time, these effects being similar across the different intervention-groups and in responders vs. non-responders.

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS and sertraline (separately and combined) acute antidepressant effects might not specifically involve normalization of the immune system. In addition, being one of the first placebo-controlled trials measuring cytokines over an antidepressant treatment course, our study showed that the decrease in cytokine levels during the acute depressive episode could involve a placebo effect, highlighting the need of further placebo-controlled trials and observational studies examining cytokine changes during depression treatment and also after remission of the acute depressive episode.

Differential improvement in depressive symptoms for tDCS alone and combined with pharmacotherapy: an exploratory analysis from the Sertraline vs. Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising therapy for major depression treatment, although little is known of its effects in ameliorating distinct symptoms of depression. Thus, it is important, not only to increase knowledge of its antidepressant mechanisms, but also to guide its potential use in clinical practice. Using data from a recent factorial, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial applying tDCS-alone and combined with sertraline to treat 120 depressed outpatients over 6 wk (Brunoni et al., 2013), we investigated the pattern of improvement in symptoms of depression from the Montgomery-Asberg depression scale (MADRS). First, we performed one multivariate analysis of variance with the score improvement of the 10 MADRS items as dependent variables. Significant (p < 0.05) results were further explored with follow-up analyses of variance. TDCS (alone and combined with sertraline) improved concentration difficulties and pessimistic and suicidal thoughts. The combined treatment also improved apparent and reported sadness, lassitude and inability to feel. Indeed, tDCS/sertraline significantly ameliorated all but the 'vegetative' depression symptoms (inner tension, sleep and appetite items). We further discuss whether bifrontal tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex could be associated with improvement in cognitive (concentration) and affective (pessimistic/suicidal thoughts) processing, while the combined treatment might have a more widespread antidepressant effect by simultaneously acting on different depression pathways. We also identified patterns of antidepressant improvement for tDCS that might aid in tailoring specific interventions for different subtypes of depressed patients, e.g. particularly those with suicidal ideation.

Impact of 5-HTTLPR and BDNF polymorphisms on response to sertraline versus transcranial direct current stimulation: implications for the serotonergic system

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been intensively investigated as a non-pharmacological treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). While many studies have examined the genetic predictors of antidepressant medications, this issue remains to be investigated for tDCS. In the current study, we evaluated whether the BDNF Val66Met and the 5-HTT (5-HTTLPR) polymorphisms were associated with tDCS antidepressant response. We used data from a factorial trial that evaluated the efficacy of tDCS and sertraline and enrolled 120 moderate-to-severe, antidepressant-free participants. In the present study, we used analyses of variance to evaluate whether the BDNF (Val/Val vs. Met-carries) and 5-HTTLPR alleles (long/long vs short-carriers) were predictors of tDCS (active/sham) and sertraline (sertraline/placebo) response. Analyses were conducted on the polymorphisms separately and also on their interaction. Genotype frequencies were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. BDNF polymorphism was not associated with treatment response. We found that 5-HTTLPR predicted tDCS effects as long/long homozygotes displayed a larger improvement comparing active vs. sham tDCS, while short-allele carriers did not. A dose-response relationship between active-sham differences with the long allele was also suggested. These results strengthen the role of the serotonergic system in the tDCS antidepressant effects and expand previous findings that reported that tDCS mechanisms of action partially involve serotonergic receptors. Therefore, we hypothesize that tDCS is a neuromodulation technique that acts over depression through the modulation of serotonergic system and that tDCS "top-down" antidepressant effects might not be optimal in brain networks with a hyperactive amygdala inducing bottom-up effects, such as occurs in short-carriers.

Heart rate variability is a trait marker of major depressive disorder: evidence from the sertraline vs. electric current therapy to treat depression clinical study

Decreased heart rate variability (HRV) is a cardiovascular predictor of mortality. Recent debate has focused on whether reductions in HRV in major depressive disorder (MDD) are a consequence of the disorder or a consequence of pharmacotherapy. Here we report on the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-pharmacological intervention, vs. sertraline to further investigate this issue. The employed design was a double-blind, randomized, factorial, placebo-controlled trial. One hundred and eighteen moderate-to-severe, medication-free, low-cardiovascular risk depressed patients were recruited for this study and allocated to either active/sham tDCS (10 consecutive sessions plus two extra sessions every other week) or placebo/sertraline (50 mg/d) for 6 wk. Patients were age and gender-matched to healthy controls from a concurrent cohort study [the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil)]. The impact of disorder, treatment and clinical response on HRV (root mean square of successive differences and high frequency) was examined. Our findings confirmed that patients displayed decreased HRV relative to controls. Furthermore, HRV scores did not change following treatment with either a non-pharmacological (tDCS) or pharmacological (sertraline) intervention, nor did HRV increase with clinical response to treatment. Based on these findings, we discuss whether reduced HRV is a trait-marker for MDD, which may predispose patients to a host of conditions and disease even after response to treatment. Our findings have important implications for our understanding of depression pathophysiology and the relationship between MDD, cardiovascular disorders and mortality.

Comparison of blinding effectiveness between sham tDCS and placebo sertraline in a 6-week major depression randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare blinding integrity and associated factors for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) vs. placebo-pill, the gold standard blinding method.

METHODS

Parallel trial. Depressed participants were randomized to verum/placebo sertraline and active/sham tDCS (2mA, 30-min 10-daily sessions and two additional, fortnight sessions) over 6weeks. Blinding was assessed in completers (n=102) and in a random subgroup (n=35) of raters and participants, in which we also inquired to qualitatively describe their strongest guessing reason.

RESULTS

Participants and raters presented similar performance for predicting treatment assignment at endpoint, correctly guessing tDCS and sertraline beyond chance. Nevertheless, clinical response was associated with correct prediction and tDCS non-responders failed to predict the allocation group. For tDCS, "trouble concentrating" was inversely associated with correct prediction. "Skin redness" was more reported for active-tDCS, but did not predict the allocation group. The qualitative reasons for raters' guessing were not associated with correct prediction, whereas for participants clinical response and adverse effects were directly and inversely associated with correct prediction, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Blinding integrity of tDCS and sertraline were comparable and mainly associated with efficacy rather than blinding failure.

SIGNIFICANCE

TDCS blinding can be improved by adopting parallel designs and avoiding subjects' awareness of skin redness.

The sertraline versus electrical current therapy for treating depression clinical study (select-TDCS): results of the crossover and follow-up phases

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising nonpharmacological therapy for major depression. In the Sertraline versus Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Trial (SELECT-TDCS) trial, phase-I (Brunoni et al., JAMA Psychiatry, 2013) we found that tDCS is effective for the acute episode. Here, we describe tDCS effects during phases II (crossover) and III (follow-up) of this trial (NCTs: 01149889 and 01149213).

METHODS

Phase II (n = 25) was the open-label, crossover phase in which phase-I nonresponders who had received sham-tDCS received a 10-day course of active-tDCS. In phase-III (n = 42), all active-tDCS responders (>50% Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) improvement or MADRS ≤ 12) were enrolled to a 24-week, follow-up phase in which a maximum of nine tDCS sessions were performed-every other week for 3 months and, thereafter, once a month for the subsequent 3 months-sessions would be interrupted earlier whether the subject relapsed. TDCS was applied at 2 mA/30 min, with the anode over the left and the cathode over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Relapse was the outcome measure.

RESULTS

In phase-II, 52% of completers responded to tDCS. In phase-III, the mean response duration was 11.7 weeks. The survival rate per Kaplan-Meier analysis was 47%. Patients with treatment-resistant depression presented a much lower 24-week survival rate as compared to nonrefractory patients (10% vs. 77%, OR = 5.52; P < .01). Antidepressant use (sertraline 50 mg/day, eight patients) was not a predictor of relapse. TDCS was well tolerated and with few side effects.

CONCLUSION

Continuation tDCS protocols should be optimized as to prevent relapse among tDCS responders, particularly for patients with baseline treatment-resistant depression.

Bifrontal tDCS prevents implicit learning acquisition in antidepressant-free patients with major depressive disorder

The findings for implicit (procedural) learning impairment in major depression are mixed. We investigated this issue using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a method that non-invasively increases/decreases cortical activity. Twenty-eight age- and gender-matched, antidepressant-free depressed subjects received a single-session of active/sham tDCS. We used a bifrontal setup - anode and cathode over the left and the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), respectively. The probabilistic classification-learning (PCL) task was administered before and during tDCS. The percentage of correct responses improved during sham; although not during active tDCS. Procedural or implicit learning acquisition between tasks also occurred only for sham. We discuss whether DLPFC activation decreased activity in subcortical structures due to the depressive state. The deactivation of the right DLPFC by cathodal tDCS can also account for our results. To conclude, active bifrontal tDCS prevented implicit learning in depressive patients. Further studies with different tDCS montages and in other samples are necessary.

Personalizing behavioral interventions: the case of late-life depression

This article reviews the potential utility of behavioral interventions in personalized depression treatment. The paper begins with a definition of personalized treatment, moves to current thinking regarding the various causes of depression, and proposes how those causes can be used to inform the selection of behavioral interventions. Two examples from the late-life depression field will illustrate how a team of researchers at Cornell University (NY, USA) and University of California, San Francisco (CA, USA) created a research partnership to select and study behavioral interventions for older adults with risk factors associated with poor response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor medications. The paper ends with a discussion of how the process used by the Cornell University-University of California, San Francisco team can be applied to the selection and development of behavioral interventions for other psychiatric disorders.

Motor and parietal cortex stimulation for phantom limb pain and sensations

Limb amputation may lead to chronic painful sensations referred to the absent limb, ie phantom limb pain (PLP), which is likely subtended by maladaptive plasticity. The present study investigated whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a noninvasive technique of brain stimulation that can modulate neuroplasticity, can reduce PLP. In 2 double-blind, sham-controlled experiments in subjects with unilateral lower or upper limb amputation, we measured the effects of a single session of tDCS (2 mA, 15 min) of the primary motor cortex (M1) and of the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) on PLP, stump pain, nonpainful phantom limb sensations and telescoping. Anodal tDCS of M1 induced a selective short-lasting decrease of PLP, whereas cathodal tDCS of PPC induced a selective short-lasting decrease of nonpainful phantom sensations; stump pain and telescoping were not affected by parietal or by motor tDCS. These findings demonstrate that painful and nonpainful phantom limb sensations are dissociable phenomena. PLP is associated primarily with cortical excitability shifts in the sensorimotor network; increasing excitability in this system by anodal tDCS has an antalgic effect on PLP. Conversely, nonpainful phantom sensations are associated to a hyperexcitation of PPC that can be normalized by cathodal tDCS. This evidence highlights the relationship between the level of excitability of different cortical areas, which underpins maladaptive plasticity following limb amputation and the phenomenology of phantom limb, and it opens up new opportunities for the use of tDCS in the treatment of PLP.

Neuromodulation for treatment-resistant depression

Treatment-resistant depression affects at least 1-3% of the US population. This article reviews the current state of focal neuromodulation therapies for treatment-resistant depression, focusing on those treatments published clinical data. These include transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, vagus nerve stimulation, direct cortical stimulation, and deep brain stimulation among others. Of these, only two (transcranial magnetic stimulation and vagus nerve stimulation) currently have US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of depression.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of major depressive disorder: a summary of preclinical, clinical and translational findings

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common psychiatric illness, with 6-12% lifetime prevalence. It is also among the five most disabling diseases worldwide. Current pharmacological treatments, although relatively effective, present important side effects that lead to treatment discontinuation. Therefore, novel treatment options for MDD are needed. Here, we discuss the recent advancements of one new neuromodulatory technique--transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)--that has undergone intensive research over the past decade with promising results. tDCS is based on the application of weak, direct electric current over the scalp, leading to cortical hypo- or hyper-polarization according to the specified parameters. Recent studies have shown that tDCS is able to induce potent changes in cortical excitability as well as to elicit long-lasting changes in brain activity. Moreover, tDCS is a technique with a low rate of reported side effects, relatively easy to apply and less expensive than other neuromodulatory techniques--appealing characteristics for clinical use. In the past years, 4 of 6 phase II clinical trials and one recent meta-analysis have shown positive results in ameliorating depression symptoms. tDCS has some interesting, unique aspects such as noninvasiveness and low rate of adverse effects, being a putative substitutive/augmentative agent for antidepressant drugs, and low-cost and portability, making it suitable for use in clinical practice. Still, further phase II and phase III trials are needed as to better clarify tDCS role in the therapeutic arsenal of MDD.

Transcranial direct current stimulation in the treatment of major depression: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

So far, no comprehensive answer has emerged to the question of whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can make a clinically useful contribution to the treatment of major depression. We aim to present a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS in the treatment of depression.

METHOD

Medline and Embase were searched for open-label and randomized controlled trials of tDCS in depression using the expressions ('transcranial direct current stimulation' or 'tDCS') and ('depression' or 'depressed'). Study data were extracted with a standardized data sheet. For randomized controlled trials, effect size (Hedges' g) was calculated and the relationships between study variables and effect size explored using meta-regression.

RESULTS

A total of 108 citations were screened and 10 studies included in the systematic review. Six randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis, with a cumulative sample of 96 active and 80 sham tDCS courses. Active tDCS was found to be more effective than sham tDCS for the reduction of depression severity (Hedges' g=0.743, 95% confidence interval 0.21-1.27), although study results differed more than expected by chance (Q=15.52, df=6, p=0.017, I2=61.35). Meta-regression did not reveal any significant correlations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study was limited by the small number of studies included, which often had small sample size. Future studies should use larger, if possible representative, health service patient samples, and optimized protocols to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS in the treatment of depression further.

Epidural direct current stimulation over the left medial prefrontal cortex facilitates spatial working memory performance in rats

BACKGROUND

Extensive evidence supports the notion that modulation of PFC excitability using low-intensity electrical stimulation is a promising modality for treating neuropsychiatric diseases and improving cognitive function.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the effects of epidural direct current stimulation (eDCS), a method providing smaller shunting of current and more focal stimulation, on spatial working memory.

METHODS

Male Wistar rats that were well trained in an 8-arm radial maze and in which 5-mm round electrodes were implanted over the left medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) received anodal eDCS (400 μA during 11 min) (n = 9) or sham procedure (n = 9) five minutes before delayed tests in the radial maze.

RESULTS

Animals that received eDCS over the left mPFC had significantly fewer errors in the post-delay performance on the 1-h (P < 0.01), 4-h (P < 0.001), and 10-h (P < 0.001) delayed tests compared with sham-treated animals. General locomotor activity was unaffected because time spent in each visited arm did not change significantly by eDCS. There was no evidence of neuronal lesions in the mPFC underneath the eDCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that epidural direct current stimulation over the mPFC facilitates spatial working memory in rats, an effect that persisted over the long term.

Clinical research with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): challenges and future directions

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory technique that delivers low-intensity, direct current to cortical areas facilitating or inhibiting spontaneous neuronal activity. In the past 10 years, tDCS physiologic mechanisms of action have been intensively investigated giving support for the investigation of its applications in clinical neuropsychiatry and rehabilitation. However, new methodologic, ethical, and regulatory issues emerge when translating the findings of preclinical and phase I studies into phase II and III clinical studies. The aim of this comprehensive review is to discuss the key challenges of this process and possible methods to address them.

METHODS

We convened a workgroup of researchers in the field to review, discuss, and provide updates and key challenges of tDCS use in clinical research.

MAIN FINDINGS/DISCUSSION

We reviewed several basic and clinical studies in the field and identified potential limitations, taking into account the particularities of the technique. We review and discuss the findings into four topics: (1) mechanisms of action of tDCS, parameters of use and computer-based human brain modeling investigating electric current fields and magnitude induced by tDCS; (2) methodologic aspects related to the clinical research of tDCS as divided according to study phase (ie, preclinical, phase I, phase II, and phase III studies); (3) ethical and regulatory concerns; and (4) future directions regarding novel approaches, novel devices, and future studies involving tDCS. Finally, we propose some alternative methods to facilitate clinical research on tDCS.