Exploring easily accessible neurophysiological biomarkers for predicting Alzheimer's disease progression: a systematic review

Alzheimer disease (AD) remains a significant global health concern. The progression from preclinical stages to overt dementia has become a crucial point of interest for researchers. This paper reviews the potential of neurophysiological biomarkers in predicting AD progression, based on a systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines, including 55 studies. EEG-based techniques have been predominantly employed, whereas TMS studies are less common. Among the investigated neurophysiological measures, spectral power measurements and event-related potentials-based measures, including P300 and N200 latencies, have emerged as the most consistent and reliable biomarkers for predicting the likelihood of conversion to AD. In addition, TMS-based indices of cortical excitability and synaptic plasticity have also shown potential in assessing the risk of conversion to AD. However, concerns persist regarding the methodological discrepancies among studies, the accuracy of these neurophysiological measures in comparison to established AD biomarkers, and their immediate clinical applicability. Further research is needed to validate the predictive capabilities of EEG and TMS measures. Advancements in this area could lead to cost-effective, reliable biomarkers, enhancing diagnostic processes and deepening our understanding of AD pathophysiology.

Monitoring Changes in TMS-Evoked EEG and EMG Activity During 1 Hz rTMS of the Healthy Motor Cortex

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique capable of inducing neuroplasticity as measured by changes in peripheral muscle electromyography (EMG) or electroencephalography (EEG) from pre-to-post stimulation. However, temporal courses of neuromodulation during ongoing rTMS are unclear. Monitoring cortical dynamics via TMS-evoked responses using EMG (motor-evoked potentials; MEPs) and EEG (transcranial-evoked potentials; TEPs) during rTMS might provide further essential insights into its mode of action - temporal course of potential modulations. The objective of this study was to first evaluate the validity of online rTMS-EEG and rTMS-EMG analyses, and second to scrutinize the temporal changes of TEPs and MEPs during rTMS. As rTMS is subject to high inter-individual effect variability, we aimed for single-subject analyses of EEG changes during rTMS. Ten healthy human participants were stimulated with 1,000 pulses of 1 Hz rTMS over the motor cortex, while EEG and EMG were recorded continuously. Validity of MEPs and TEPs measured during rTMS was assessed in sensor and source space. Electrophysiological changes during rTMS were evaluated with model fitting approaches on a group- and single-subject level. TEPs and MEPs appearance during rTMS was consistent with past findings of single pulse experiments. Heterogeneous temporal progressions, fluctuations or saturation effects of brain activity were observed during rTMS depending on the TEP component. Overall, global brain activity increased over the course of stimulation. Single-subject analysis revealed inter-individual temporal courses of global brain activity. The present findings are in favor of dose-response considerations and attempts in personalization of rTMS protocols.

Somatosensory input in the context of transcranial magnetic stimulation coupled with electroencephalography: An evidence-based overview

The transcranial evoked potential (TEP) is a powerful technique to investigate brain dynamics, but some methodological issues limit its interpretation. A possible contamination of the TEP by electroencephalographic (EEG) responses evoked by the somatosensory input generated by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been postulated; nonetheless, a characterization of these responses is lacking. The aim of this work was to review current evidence about possible somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) induced by sources of somatosensory input in the craniofacial region. Among these, only contraction of craniofacial muscle and stimulation of free cutaneous nerve endings may be able to induce EEG responses, but direct evidence is lacking due to experimental difficulties in isolating these inputs. Notably, EEG evoked activity in this context is represented by a N100/P200 complex, reflecting a saliency-related multimodal response, rather than specific activation of the primary somatosensory cortex. Strategies to minimize or remove these responses by EEG processing still yield uncertain results; therefore, data inspection is of paramount importance to judge a possible contamination of the TEP by multimodal potentials caused by somatosensory input.

Reliability and Validity of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-Electroencephalography Biomarkers

Noninvasive brain stimulation and neuroimaging have revolutionized human neuroscience with a multitude of applications, including diagnostic subtyping, treatment optimization, and relapse prediction. It is therefore particularly relevant to identify robust and clinically valuable brain biomarkers linking symptoms to their underlying neural mechanisms. Brain biomarkers must be reproducible (i.e., have internal reliability) across similar experiments within a laboratory and be generalizable (i.e., have external reliability) across experimental setups, laboratories, brain regions, and disease states. However, reliability (internal and external) is not alone sufficient; biomarkers also must have validity. Validity describes closeness to a true measure of the underlying neural signal or disease state. We propose that these metrics, reliability and validity, should be evaluated and optimized before any biomarker is used to inform treatment decisions. Here, we discuss these metrics with respect to causal brain connectivity biomarkers from coupling transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with electroencephalography (EEG). We discuss controversies around TMS-EEG stemming from the multiple large off-target components (noise) and relatively weak genuine brain responses (signal), as is unfortunately often the case in noninvasive human neuroscience. We review the current state of TMS-EEG recordings, which consist of a mix of reliable noise and unreliable signal. We describe methods for evaluating TMS-EEG biomarkers, including how to assess internal and external reliability across facilities, cognitive states, brain networks, and disorders and how to validate these biomarkers using invasive neural recordings or treatment response. We provide recommendations to increase reliability and validity, discuss lessons learned, and suggest future directions for the field.

Motor potentials evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation: interpreting a simple measure of a complex system

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive technique that is increasingly used to study the human brain. One of the principal outcome measures is the motor-evoked potential (MEP) elicited in a muscle following TMS over the primary motor cortex (M1), where it is used to estimate changes in corticospinal excitability. However, multiple elements play a role in MEP generation, so even apparently simple measures such as peak-to-peak amplitude have a complex interpretation. Here, we summarize what is currently known regarding the neural pathways and circuits that contribute to the MEP and discuss the factors that should be considered when interpreting MEP amplitude measured at rest in the context of motor processing and patients with neurological conditions. In the last part of this work, we also discuss how emerging technological approaches can be combined with TMS to improve our understanding of neural substrates that can influence MEPs. Overall, this review aims to highlight the capabilities and limitations of TMS that are important to recognize when attempting to disentangle sources that contribute to the physiological state-related changes in corticomotor excitability.

Motor Cortical Correlates of Paired Associative Stimulation Induced Plasticity: A TMS-EEG Study

Paired associative stimulation (PAS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that modulates synaptic plasticity in the human motor cortex (M1). Since previous studies have primarily used motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) as outcome measure, cortical correlates of PAS-induced plasticity remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this observational study was to investigate cortical correlates of a standard PAS induced plasticity in the primary motor cortex by using a combined TMS-EEG approach in a cohort of eighteen healthy subjects. In addition to the expected long-lasting facilitatory modulation of MEPs amplitude, PAS intervention also induced a significant increase in transcranial magnetic stimulation-evoked potentials (TEPs) P30 and P60 amplitude. No significant correlation between the magnitude of PAS-induced changes in TEP components and MEP amplitude were observed. However, the linear regression analysis revealed that the combined changes in P30 and P60 component amplitudes significantly predicted the MEP facilitation after PAS. The findings of our study offer novel insight into the neurophysiological changes associated with PAS-induced plasticity at M1 cortical level and suggest a complex relationship between TEPs and MEPs changes following PAS.

Transferability of cathodal tDCS effects from the primary motor to the prefrontal cortex: A multimodal TMS-EEG study

Neurophysiological effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have been extensively studied over the primary motor cortex (M1). Much less is however known about its effects over non-motor areas, such as the prefrontal cortex (PFC), which is the neuronal foundation for many high-level cognitive functions and involved in neuropsychiatric disorders. In this study, we, therefore, explored the transferability of cathodal tDCS effects over M1 to the PFC. Eighteen healthy human participants (11 males and 8 females) were involved in eight randomized sessions per participant, in which four cathodal tDCS dosages, low, medium, and high, as well as sham stimulation, were applied over the left M1 and left PFC. After-effects of tDCS were evaluated via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-electroencephalography (EEG), and TMS-elicited motor evoked potentials (MEP), for the outcome parameters TMS-evoked potentials (TEP), TMS-evoked oscillations, and MEP amplitude alterations. TEPs were studied both at the regional and global scalp levels. The results indicate a regional dosage-dependent nonlinear neurophysiological effect of M1 tDCS, which is not one-to-one transferable to PFC tDCS. Low and high dosages of M1 tDCS reduced early positive TEP peaks (P30, P60), and MEP amplitudes, while an enhancement was observed for medium dosage M1 tDCS (P30). In contrast, prefrontal low, medium and high dosage tDCS uniformly reduced the early positive TEP peak amplitudes. Furthermore, for both cortical areas, regional tDCS-induced modulatory effects were not observed for late TEP peaks, nor TMS-evoked oscillations. However, at the global scalp level, widespread effects of tDCS were observed for both, TMS-evoked potentials and oscillations. This study provides the first direct physiological comparison of tDCS effects applied over different brain areas and therefore delivers crucial information for future tDCS applications.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in primary sleep disorders

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a widely used non-invasive neuromodulatory technique. When applied in sleep medicine, the main hypothesis explaining its effects concerns the modulation of synaptic plasticity and the strength of connections between the brain areas involved in sleep disorders. Recently, there has been a significant increase in the publication of rTMS studies in primary sleep disorders. A multi-database-based search converges on the evidence that rTMS is safe and feasible in chronic insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), restless legs syndrome (RLS), and sleep deprivation-related cognitive deficits, whereas limited or no data are available for narcolepsy, sleep bruxism, and REM sleep behavior disorder. Regarding efficacy, the stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally, right parietal cortex, and dominant primary motor cortex (M1) in insomnia, as well as the stimulation of M1 leg area bilaterally, left primary somatosensory cortex, and left M1 in RLS reduced subjective symptoms and severity scale scores, with effects lasting for up to weeks; conversely, no relevant effect was observed in OSAS and narcolepsy. Nevertheless, several limitations especially regarding the stimulation protocols need to be considered. This review should be viewed as a step towards the further contribution of individually tailored neuromodulatory techniques for sleep disorders.

Intraoperative electrical stimulation of the human dorsal spinal cord reveals a map of arm and hand muscle responses

Although epidural stimulation of the lumbar spinal cord has emerged as a powerful modality for recovery of movement, how it should be targeted to the cervical spinal cord to activate arm and hand muscles is not well understood, particularly in humans. We sought to map muscle responses to posterior epidural cervical spinal cord stimulation in humans. We hypothesized that lateral stimulation over the dorsal root entry zone would be most effective and responses would be strongest in the muscles innervated by the stimulated segment. Twenty-six people undergoing clinically indicated cervical spine surgery consented to mapping of motor responses. During surgery, stimulation was performed in midline and lateral positions at multiple exposed segments; six arm and three leg muscles were recorded on each side of the body. Across all segments and muscles tested, lateral stimulation produced stronger muscle responses than midline despite similar latency and shape of responses. Muscles innervated at a cervical segment had the largest responses from stimulation at that segment, but responses were also observed in muscles innervated at other cervical segments and in leg muscles. The cervical responses were clustered in rostral (C4-C6) and caudal (C7-T1) cervical segments. Strong responses to lateral stimulation are likely due to the proximity of stimulation to afferent axons. Small changes in response sizes to stimulation of adjacent cervical segments argue for local circuit integration, and distant muscle responses suggest activation of long propriospinal connections. This map can help guide cervical stimulation to improve arm and hand function.NEW & NOTEWORTHY A map of muscle responses to cervical epidural stimulation during clinically indicated surgery revealed strongest activation when stimulating laterally compared to midline and revealed differences to be weaker than expected across different segments. In contrast, waveform shapes and latencies were most similar when stimulating midline and laterally, indicating activation of overlapping circuitry. Thus, a map of the cervical spinal cord reveals organization and may help guide stimulation to activate arm and hand muscles strongly and selectively.

Synaptic Plasticity 101: The Story of the AMPA Receptor for the Brain Stimulation Practitioner

The fields of Neurobiology and Neuromodulation have never been closer. Consequently, the phrase "synaptic plasticity" has become very familiar to non-basic scientists, without actually being very familiar. We present the "Story of the AMPA receptor," an easy-to-understand "10,000 ft" narrative overview of synaptic plasticity, oriented toward the brain stimulation clinician or scientist without basic science training. Neuromodulation is unparalleled in its capacity to both modulate and probe plasticity, yet many are not comfortable with their grasp of the topic. Here, we describe the seminal discoveries that defined the canonical mechanisms of long-term potentiation (LTP), long-term depression (LTD), and homeostatic plasticity. We then provide a conceptual framework for how plasticity at the synapse is accomplished, describing the functional roles of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors and calcium, their effect on calmodulin, phosphatases (ie, calcineurin), kinases (ie, calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase [CaMKII]), and structural "scaffolding" proteins (ie, post-synaptic density protein [PSD-95]). Ultimately, we describe how these affect the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole propionic acid (AMPA) receptor. More specifically, AMPA receptor delivery to (LTP induction), removal from (LTD), or recycling within (LTP maintenance) the synapse is determined by the status of phosphorylation and protein binding at specific sites on the tails of AMPA receptor subunits: GluA1 and GluA2. Finally, we relate these to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) treatment, highlighting evidences for LTP as the basis of high-frequency TMS therapy, and briefly touch on the role of plasticity for other brain stimulation modalities. In summary, we present Synaptic Plasticity 101 as a singular introductory reference for those less familiar with the mechanisms of synaptic plasticity.

Identifying transcranial magnetic stimulation induced EEG signatures of different neuronal elements in primary motor cortex

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the neuronal elements involved in the activation of corticospinal neurons in the primary motor cortex (M1).

METHODS

We studied 10 healthy subjects. Cortical evoked potentials with different components induced by monophasic transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in anterior-posterior and posterior-anterior currents recorded with electroencephalography (EEG) were analyzed.

RESULTS

EEG signatures with P25 and N45 components recorded at the C3 electrode with posterior-anterior current were larger than those with anterior-posterior current, while the signatures with P180 and N280 components recorded at the FC1 electrode with anterior-posterior current were larger than those with posterior-anterior current. The source localization analysis revealed that the cortical evoked potential with anterior-posterior current distributed both in the M1 and premotor cortex while that with posterior-anterior current only located in the M1.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the activation of corticospinal pyramidal neurons in the M1 is affected by various neuronal elements including the local intracortical circuits in the M1 and inputs from premotor cortex with different sensitivities to TMS in opposite current directions.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our finding helped answer a longstanding question about how the corticospinal pathway from the M1 is functionally organized and activated.

The influence of sensory potentials on transcranial magnetic stimulation - Electroencephalography recordings

OBJECTIVE

It remains unclear to what extent Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-evoked potentials (TEPs) reflect sensory (auditory and somatosensory) potentials as opposed to cortical excitability. The present study aimed to determine; a) the extent to which sensory potentials contaminate TEPs using a spatially-matched sham condition, and b) whether sensory potentials reflect auditory or somatosensory potentials alone, or a combination of the two.

METHODS

Twenty healthy participants received active or sham stimulation, with the latter consisting a sham coil click combined with scalp electrical stimulation. Two additional conditions i) electrical stimulation and ii) auditory stimulation alone, were included in a subset of 13 participants.

RESULTS

Signals from active and sham stimulation were correlated in spatial and temporal domains > 55 ms post-stimulation. Relative to auditory or electrical stimulation alone, sham stimulation resulted in a) larger potentials, b) stronger correlations with active stimulation and c) a signal that was not a linear sum of electrical and auditory stimulation alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Sensory potentials can confound interpretations of TEPs at timepoints > 55 ms post-stimulation. Furthermore, TEP contamination cannot be explained by auditory or somatosensory potentials alone, but instead reflects a non-linear interaction between both.

SIGNIFICANCE

Future studies may benefit from controlling for sensory contamination using spatially-matched sham conditions, and which consist of combined auditory and somatosensory stimulation.

Utilising TMS-EEG to Assess the Response to Cerebellar-Brain Inhibition

Cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) is a transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigm indexing excitability of cerebellar projections to motor cortex (M1). Stimulation involved with CBI is often considered to be uncomfortable, and alternative ways to index connectivity between cerebellum and the cortex would be valuable. We therefore sought to assess the utility of electroencephalography in conjunction with TMS (combined TMS-EEG) to record the response to CBI. A total of 33 volunteers (25.7 ± 4.9 years, 20 females) participated across three experiments. These investigated EEG responses to CBI induced with a figure-of-eight (F8; experiment 1) or double cone (DC; experiment 2) conditioning coil over cerebellum, in addition to multisensory sham stimulation (experiment 3). Both F8 and DC coils suppressed early TMS-evoked EEG potentials (TEPs) produced by TMS to M1 (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the TEP produced by CBI stimulation was related to the motor inhibitory response to CBI recorded in a hand muscle (P < 0.05), but only when using the DC coil. Multisensory sham stimulation failed to modify the M1 TEP. Cerebellar conditioning produced changes in the M1 TEP that were not apparent following sham stimulation, and that were related to the motor inhibitory effects of CBI. Our findings therefore suggest that it is possible to index the response to CBI using TMS-EEG. In addition, while both F8 and DC coils appear to recruit cerebellar projections, the nature of these may be different.

Identifying novel biomarkers with TMS-EEG - Methodological possibilities and challenges

Biomarkers are essential for understanding the underlying pathologies in brain disorders and for developing effective treatments. Combined transcranial magnetic stimulation and electroencephalography (TMS-EEG) is an emerging neurophysiological tool that can be used for biomarker development. This method can identify biomarkers associated with the function and dynamics of the inhibitory and excitatory neurotransmitter systems and effective connectivity between brain areas. In this review, we outline the current state of the TMS-EEG biomarker field by summarizing the existing protocols and the possibilities and challenges associated with this methodology.

Designing and comparing cleaning pipelines for TMS-EEG data: a theoretical overview and practical example

Combining transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with electroencephalography (EEG) is growing in popularity as a method for probing the reactivity and connectivity of neural circuits in basic and clinical research. However, using EEG to measure the neural responses to TMS is challenging due to the unique artifacts introduced by combining the two techniques. In this paper, we overview the artifacts present in TMS-EEG data and the offline cleaning methods used to suppress these unwanted signals. We then describe how open science practices, including the development of open-source toolboxes designed for TMS-EEG analysis (e.g., TESA - the TMS-EEG signal analyser), have improved the availability and reproducibility of TMS-EEG cleaning methods. We provide theoretical and practical considerations for designing TMS-EEG cleaning pipelines and then give an example of how to compare different pipelines using TESA. We show that changing even a single step in a pipeline designed to suppress decay artifacts results in TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs) with small differences in amplitude and spatial topography. The variability in TEPs resulting from the choice of cleaning pipeline has important implications for comparing TMS-EEG findings between research groups which use different online and offline approaches. Finally, we discuss the challenges of validating cleaning pipelines and recommend that researchers compare outcomes from TMS-EEG experiments using multiple pipelines to ensure findings are not related to the choice of cleaning methods. We conclude that the continued improvement, availability, and validation of cleaning pipelines is essential to ensure TMS-EEG reaches its full potential as a method for studying human neurophysiology.

Recording brain responses to TMS of primary motor cortex by EEG - utility of an optimized sham procedure

•

Optimized sham TMS-EEG is introduced and tested.

•

Sham combined auditory and supramaximal electrical somatosensory stimulation.

•

Subjects reported equal sensory perception during sham and real TMS.

•

Subtraction revealed evoked EEG potentials and beta-band power specific to real TMS.

•

The optimized sham procedure is relevant in research and therapeutic settings.

Introduction

Electroencephalography (EEG) is increasingly used to investigate brain responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). A relevant issue is that TMS is associated with considerable auditory and somatosensory stimulation, causing peripherally evoked potentials (PEPs) in the EEG, which contaminate the direct cortical responses to TMS (TEPs). All previous attempts to control for PEPs suffer from significant limitations.

Objective/Hypothesis

To design an optimized sham procedure to control all sensory input generated by subthreshold real TMS targeting the hand area of the primary motor cortex (M1), enabling reliable separation of TEPs from PEPs.

Methods

In 23 healthy (16 female) subjects, we recorded EEG activity evoked by an optimized sham TMS condition which masks and matches auditory and somatosensory co-stimulation during the real TMS condition: auditory control was achieved by noise masking and by using a second TMS coil that was placed on top of the real TMS coil and produced a calibrated sound pressure level. Somatosensory control was obtained by electric stimulation (ES) of the scalp with intensities sufficient to saturate somatosensory input. ES was applied in both the sham and real TMS conditions. Perception of auditory and somatosensory inputs in the sham and real TMS conditions were compared by psychophysical testing. Transcranially evoked EEG signal changes were identified by subtraction of EEG activity in the sham condition from EEG activity in the real TMS condition.

Results

Perception of auditory and somatosensory inputs in the sham vs. real TMS conditions was comparable. Both sham and real TMS evoked a series of similar EEG signal deflections and induced broadband power increase in oscillatory activity. Notably, the present procedure revealed EEG potentials and a transient increase in beta band power at the site of stimulation that were only present in the real TMS condition.

Discussion

The results validate the effectiveness of our optimized sham approach. Despite the presence of typical responses attributable to sensory input, the procedure provided evidence for direct cortical activation by subthreshold TMS of M1. The findings are relevant for future TMS-EEG experiments that aim at measuring regional brain target engagement controlled by an optimized sham procedure.