1
|
Shah M, Suresh S, Paddick J, Mellow ML, Rees A, Berryman C, Stanton TR, Smith AE. Age-related changes in responsiveness to non-invasive brain stimulation neuroplasticity paradigms: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Clin Neurophysiol 2024; 162:53-67. [PMID: 38579515 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2024.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Revised: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/07/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We aimed to summarise and critically appraise the available evidence for the effect of age on responsiveness to non-invasive brain stimulation (NBS) paradigms delivered to the primary motor cortex. METHODS Four databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Scopus) were searched from inception to February 7, 2023. Studies investigating age group comparisons and associations between age and neuroplasticity induction from NBS paradigms were included. Only studies delivering neuroplasticity paradigms to the primary motor cortex and responses measured via motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in healthy adults were considered. RESULTS 39 studies, encompassing 40 experiments and eight NBS paradigms were included: paired associative stimulation (PAS; n = 12), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS; n = 2), intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS; n = 8), continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS; n = 7), transcranial direct and alternating current stimulation ((tDCS; n = 7; tACS; n = 2)), quadripulse stimulation (QPS; n = 1) and i-wave periodic transcranial magnetic stimulation (iTMS; n = 1). Pooled findings from PAS paradigms suggested older adults have reduced post-paradigm responses, although there was considerable heterogeneity. Mixed results were observed across all other NBS paradigms and post-paradigm timepoints. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE Whilst age-dependent reduction in corticospinal excitability is possible, there is extensive inter- and intra-individual variability both within and between studies, making it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from pooled analyses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahima Shah
- Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA) Research Centre, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Suraj Suresh
- Brain Stimulation, Imaging and Cognition Laboratory, The University of Adelaide, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Johanna Paddick
- Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA) Research Centre, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia; Persistent Pain Research Group, Hopwood Centre for Neurobiology, Lifelong Health Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI)
| | - Maddison L Mellow
- Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA) Research Centre, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Amy Rees
- Discipline of Physiology, School of Biomedicine. The University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Carolyn Berryman
- Brain Stimulation, Imaging and Cognition Laboratory, The University of Adelaide, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide 5000, Australia; South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), North Tce, Adelaide 5000, Australia; IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Tasha R Stanton
- Persistent Pain Research Group, Hopwood Centre for Neurobiology, Lifelong Health Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI); IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia
| | - Ashleigh E Smith
- Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA) Research Centre, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide 5000, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jannati A, Oberman LM, Rotenberg A, Pascual-Leone A. Assessing the mechanisms of brain plasticity by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychopharmacology 2023; 48:191-208. [PMID: 36198876 PMCID: PMC9700722 DOI: 10.1038/s41386-022-01453-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 46.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive technique for focal brain stimulation based on electromagnetic induction where a fluctuating magnetic field induces a small intracranial electric current in the brain. For more than 35 years, TMS has shown promise in the diagnosis and treatment of neurological and psychiatric disorders in adults. In this review, we provide a brief introduction to the TMS technique with a focus on repetitive TMS (rTMS) protocols, particularly theta-burst stimulation (TBS), and relevant rTMS-derived metrics of brain plasticity. We then discuss the TMS-EEG technique, the use of neuronavigation in TMS, the neural substrate of TBS measures of plasticity, the inter- and intraindividual variability of those measures, effects of age and genetic factors on TBS aftereffects, and then summarize alterations of TMS-TBS measures of plasticity in major neurological and psychiatric disorders including autism spectrum disorder, schizophrenia, depression, traumatic brain injury, Alzheimer's disease, and diabetes. Finally, we discuss the translational studies of TMS-TBS measures of plasticity and their therapeutic implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Jannati
- Neuromodulation Program, Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
- F. M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Lindsay M Oberman
- Center for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Alexander Rotenberg
- Neuromodulation Program, Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- F. M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation, Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research and Deanna and Sidney Wolk Center for Memory Health, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA.
- Guttmann Brain Health Institute, Institut Guttmann, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van den Bos MAJ, Menon P, Vucic S. Cortical hyperexcitability and plasticity in Alzheimer's disease: developments in understanding and management. Expert Rev Neurother 2022; 22:981-993. [PMID: 36683586 DOI: 10.1080/14737175.2022.2170784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive neurophysiological tool that provides important insights into Alzheimer's Disease (AD). A significant body of work utilizing TMS techniques has explored the pathophysiological relevance of cortical hyperexcitability and plasticity in AD and their modulation in novel therapies. AREAS COVERED This review examines the technique of TMS, the use of TMS to examine specific features of cortical excitability and the use of TMS techniques to modulate cortical function. A search was performed utilizing the PubMed database to identify key studies utilizing TMS to examine cortical hyperexcitability and plasticity in Alzheimer's dementia. We then translate this understanding to the study of Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology, examining the underlying neurophysiologic links contributing to these twin signatures, cortical hyperexcitability and abnormal plasticity, in the cortical dysfunction characterizing AD. Finally, we examine utilization of TMS excitability to guide targeted therapies and, through the use of repetitive TMS (rTMS), modulate cortical plasticity. EXPERT OPINION The examination of cortical hyperexcitability and plasticity with TMS has potential to optimize and expand the window of therapeutic interventions in AD, though remains at relatively early stage of development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mehdi A J van den Bos
- Brain and Nerve Research Centre, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Parvathi Menon
- Brain and Nerve Research Centre, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Steve Vucic
- Brain and Nerve Research Centre, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Identifying novel biomarkers with TMS-EEG - Methodological possibilities and challenges. J Neurosci Methods 2022; 377:109631. [PMID: 35623474 DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2022.109631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2021] [Revised: 05/09/2022] [Accepted: 05/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
5
|
Cha E, Ahn HJ, Kang W, Jung KI, Ohn SH, Bashir S, Yoo WK. Correlations between COMT polymorphism and brain structure and cognition in elderly subjects: An observational study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2022; 101:e29214. [PMID: 35550471 PMCID: PMC9276462 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000029214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2020] [Accepted: 03/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
The catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene has been noted to play an important role in individual variations in the aging process. We investigated whether COMT polymorphism could influence cognition related to white matter networks. More specifically, we examined whether methionine (Met) allele loading is associated with better individual cognitive performance. Thirty-four healthy elderly participants were recruited; each participant's COMT genotype was determined, and Korean version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores and a diffusion tensor image were obtained for all participants. The Met carrier group showed significantly lower mean diffusivity, axial diffusivity, and radial diffusivity values for the right hippocampus, thalamus, uncinate fasciculus, and left caudate nucleus than the valine homozygote group. The Met carrier group also scored higher for executive function and attention on the Korean version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Based on these results, we can assume that the COMT Met allele has a protective effect on cognitive decline contributing to individual differences in cognitive function in late life period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eunsil Cha
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Hyun Jung Ahn
- Hallym Institute of Translational Genomics & Bioinformatics, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Wonil Kang
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Kwang-Ik Jung
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Suk Hoon Ohn
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Shahid Bashir
- Neuroscience Center, King Fahad Specialist Hospital Dammam, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
| | - Woo-Kyoung Yoo
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Suppa A, Asci F, Guerra A. Transcranial magnetic stimulation as a tool to induce and explore plasticity in humans. HANDBOOK OF CLINICAL NEUROLOGY 2022; 184:73-89. [PMID: 35034759 DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-819410-2.00005-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Activity-dependent synaptic plasticity is the main theoretical framework to explain mechanisms of learning and memory. Synaptic plasticity can be explored experimentally in animals through various standardized protocols for eliciting long-term potentiation and long-term depression in hippocampal and cortical slices. In humans, several non-invasive protocols of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation have been designed and applied to probe synaptic plasticity in the primary motor cortex, as reflected by long-term changes in motor evoked potential amplitudes. These protocols mimic those normally used in animal studies for assessing long-term potentiation and long-term depression. In this chapter, we first discuss the physiologic basis of theta-burst stimulation, paired associative stimulation, and transcranial direct current stimulation. We describe the current biophysical and theoretical models underlying the molecular mechanisms of synaptic plasticity and metaplasticity, defined as activity-dependent changes in neural functions that modulate subsequent synaptic plasticity such as long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD), in the human motor cortex including calcium-dependent plasticity, spike-timing-dependent plasticity, the role of N-methyl-d-aspartate-related transmission and gamma-aminobutyric-acid interneuronal activity. We also review the putative microcircuits responsible for synaptic plasticity in the human motor cortex. We critically readdress the issue of variability in studies investigating synaptic plasticity and propose available solutions. Finally, we speculate about the utility of future studies with more advanced experimental approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonio Suppa
- Department of Human Neurosciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed Institute, Pozzilli (IS), Italy.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Corp DT, Bereznicki HGK, Clark GM, Youssef GJ, Fried PJ, Jannati A, Davies CB, Gomes-Osman J, Kirkovski M, Albein-Urios N, Fitzgerald PB, Koch G, Di Lazzaro V, Pascual-Leone A, Enticott PG. Large-scale analysis of interindividual variability in single and paired-pulse TMS data. Clin Neurophysiol 2021; 132:2639-2653. [PMID: 34344609 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2020] [Revised: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 06/29/2021] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study brought together over 60 transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) researchers to create the largest known sample of individual participant single and paired-pulse TMS data to date, enabling a more comprehensive evaluation of factors driving response variability. METHODS Authors of previously published studies were contacted and asked to share deidentified individual TMS data. Mixed-effects regression investigated a range of individual and study level variables for their contribution to variability in response to single and paired-pulse TMS data. RESULTS 687 healthy participant's data were pooled across 35 studies. Target muscle, pulse waveform, neuronavigation use, and TMS machine significantly predicted an individual's single-pulse TMS amplitude. Baseline motor evoked potential amplitude, motor cortex hemisphere, and motor threshold (MT) significantly predicted short-interval intracortical inhibition response. Baseline motor evoked potential amplitude, test stimulus intensity, interstimulus interval, and MT significantly predicted intracortical facilitation response. Age, hemisphere, and TMS machine significantly predicted MT. CONCLUSIONS This large-scale analysis has identified a number of factors influencing participants' responses to single and paired-pulse TMS. We provide specific recommendations to minimise interindividual variability in single and paired-pulse TMS data. SIGNIFICANCE This study has used large-scale analyses to give clarity to factors driving variance in TMS data. We hope that this ongoing collaborative approach will increase standardisation of methods and thus the utility of single and paired-pulse TMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel T Corp
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Hannah G K Bereznicki
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Gillian M Clark
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - George J Youssef
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Centre for Adolescent Health, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Australia
| | - Peter J Fried
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ali Jannati
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Charlotte B Davies
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Joyce Gomes-Osman
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Melissa Kirkovski
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Natalia Albein-Urios
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Paul B Fitzgerald
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Epworth Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, Epworth HealthCare and Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Giacomo Koch
- Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, Department of Clinical and Behavioral Neurology, IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome, Italy; Department of Biomedical and Specialty Surgical Sciences, Section of Human Physiology, University of Ferrara, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Di Lazzaro
- Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Università Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research and Deanna and Sidney Wolk Center for Memory Health, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Guttmann Brain Health Institute, Institut Guttmann de Neurorehabilitació, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Peter G Enticott
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Jannati A, Ryan MA, Block G, Kayarian FB, Oberman LM, Rotenberg A, Pascual-Leone A. Modulation of motor cortical excitability by continuous theta-burst stimulation in adults with autism spectrum disorder. Clin Neurophysiol 2021; 132:1647-1662. [PMID: 34030059 PMCID: PMC8197744 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.03.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2020] [Revised: 02/23/2021] [Accepted: 03/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To test whether change in motor evoked potential (ΔMEP) induced by continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) of motor cortex (M1) distinguishes adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) from neurotypicals, and to explore the contribution of two common polymorphisms related to neuroplasticity. METHODS 44 adult neurotypical (NT) participants (age 21-65, 34 males) and 19 adults with ASD (age 21-58, 17 males) prospectively underwent M1 cTBS. Their data were combined with previously obtained results from 35 NT and 35 ASD adults. RESULTS ΔMEP at 15 minutes post-cTBS (T15) was a significant predictor of diagnosis (p = 0.04) in the present sample (n=63). T15 remained a significant predictor in a larger sample (n=91) and when partially imputed based on T10-T20 from a yet-greater sample (N=133). T15 also remained a significant predictor of diagnosis among brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) Met+ and apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4- subjects (p's < 0.05), but not among Met- or ε4+ subjects (p's > 0.19). CONCLUSIONS ΔMEP at T15 post-cTBS is a significant biomarker for adults with ASD, and its utility is modulated by BDNF and APOE polymorphisms. SIGNIFICANCE M1 cTBS response is a physiologic biomarker for adults with ASD in large samples, and controlling for BDNF and APOE polymorphisms can improve its diagnostic utility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Jannati
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Mary A Ryan
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Gabrielle Block
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Fae B Kayarian
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lindsay M Oberman
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alexander Rotenberg
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research and Deanna and Sidney Wolk Center for Memory Health, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA; Guttman Brain Health Institute, Institut Guttman de Neurorehabilitació, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Determining the optimal pulse number for theta burst induced change in cortical excitability. Sci Rep 2021; 11:8726. [PMID: 33888752 PMCID: PMC8062542 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87916-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2020] [Accepted: 04/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Theta-burst stimulation (TBS) is a form of non-invasive neuromodulation which is delivered in an intermittent (iTBS) or continuous (cTBS) manner. Although 600 pulses is the most common dose, the goal of these experiments was to evaluate the effect of higher per-dose pulse numbers on cortical excitability. Sixty individuals were recruited for 2 experiments. In Experiment 1, participants received 600, 1200, 1800, or sham (600) iTBS (4 visits, counterbalanced, left motor cortex, 80% active threshold). In Experiment 2, participants received 600, 1200, 1800, 3600, or sham (600) cTBS (5 visits, counterbalanced). Motor evoked potentials (MEP) were measured in 10-min increments for 60 min. For iTBS, there was a significant interaction between dose and time (F = 3.8296, p = 0.01), driven by iTBS (1200) which decreased excitability for up to 50 min (t = 3.1267, p = 0.001). For cTBS, there was no overall interaction between dose and time (F = 1.1513, p = 0.33). Relative to sham, cTBS (3600) increased excitability for up to 60 min (t = 2.0880, p = 0.04). There were no other significant effects of dose relative to sham in either experiment. Secondary analyses revealed high within and between subject variability. These results suggest that iTBS (1200) and cTBS (3600) are, respectively, the most effective doses for decreasing and increasing cortical excitability.
Collapse
|
10
|
Ghasemian-Shirvan E, Farnad L, Mosayebi-Samani M, Verstraelen S, Meesen RL, Kuo MF, Nitsche MA. Age-related differences of motor cortex plasticity in adults: A transcranial direct current stimulation study. Brain Stimul 2020; 13:1588-1599. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2020.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2020] [Revised: 08/21/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
|
11
|
Pellegrini M, Zoghi M, Jaberzadeh S. A Checklist to Reduce Response Variability in Studies Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Assessment of Corticospinal Excitability: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Brain Connect 2020; 10:53-71. [PMID: 32093486 DOI: 10.1089/brain.2019.0715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Response variability between individuals (interindividual variability) and within individuals (intraindividual variability) is an important issue in the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) literature. This has raised questions of the validity of TMS to assess changes in corticospinal excitability (CSE) in a predictable and reliable manner. Several participant-specific factors contribute to this observed response variability with a current lack of consensus on the degree each factor contributes. This highlights a need for consistency and structure in reporting study designs and methodologies. Currently, there is no summarized review of the participant-specific factors that can be controlled and may contribute to response variability. This systematic review aimed to develop a checklist of methodological measures taken by previously published research to increase the homogeneity of participant selection criteria, preparation of participants before experimental testing, participant scheduling, and the instructions given to participants throughout experimental testing to minimize their effect on response variability. Seven databases were searched in full. Studies were included if CSE was measured via TMS and included methodological measures to increase the homogeneity of the participants. Eighty-four studies were included. Twenty-three included measures to increase participant selection homogeneity, 21 included measures to increase participant preparation homogeneity, while 61 included measures to increase participant scheduling and instructions during experimental testing homogeneity. These methodological measures were summarized into a user-friendly checklist with considerations, suggestions, and rationale/justification for their inclusion. This may provide the framework for further insights into ways to reduce response variability in TMS research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Pellegrini
- Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation and Neuroplasticity Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Maryam Zoghi
- Department of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, Discipline of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Shapour Jaberzadeh
- Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation and Neuroplasticity Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Corp DT, Bereznicki HGK, Clark GM, Youssef GJ, Fried PJ, Jannati A, Davies CB, Gomes-Osman J, Stamm J, Chung SW, Bowe SJ, Rogasch NC, Fitzgerald PB, Koch G, Di Lazzaro V, Pascual-Leone A, Enticott PG. Large-scale analysis of interindividual variability in theta-burst stimulation data: Results from the 'Big TMS Data Collaboration'. Brain Stimul 2020; 13:1476-1488. [PMID: 32758665 PMCID: PMC7494610 DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2020.07.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Revised: 07/24/2020] [Accepted: 07/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many studies have attempted to identify the sources of interindividual variability in response to theta-burst stimulation (TBS). However, these studies have been limited by small sample sizes, leading to conflicting results. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS This study brought together over 60 TMS researchers to form the 'Big TMS Data Collaboration', and create the largest known sample of individual participant TBS data to date. The goal was to enable a more comprehensive evaluation of factors driving TBS response variability. METHODS 118 corresponding authors of TMS studies were emailed and asked to provide deidentified individual TMS data. Mixed-effects regression investigated a range of individual and study level variables for their contribution to iTBS and cTBS response variability. RESULTS 430 healthy participants' TBS data was pooled across 22 studies (mean age = 41.9; range = 17-82; females = 217). Baseline MEP amplitude, age, target muscle, and time of day significantly predicted iTBS-induced plasticity. Baseline MEP amplitude and timepoint after TBS significantly predicted cTBS-induced plasticity. CONCLUSIONS This is the largest known study of interindividual variability in TBS. Our findings indicate that a significant portion of variability can be attributed to the methods used to measure the modulatory effects of TBS. We provide specific methodological recommendations in order to control and mitigate these sources of variability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel T Corp
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Hannah G K Bereznicki
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Gillian M Clark
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - George J Youssef
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Centre for Adolescent Health, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Australia
| | - Peter J Fried
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ali Jannati
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Charlotte B Davies
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Joyce Gomes-Osman
- Berenson-Allen Center for Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Julie Stamm
- Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Sung Wook Chung
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Steven J Bowe
- Deakin Biostatistics Unit Faculty of Health Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| | - Nigel C Rogasch
- Discipline of Psychiatry, Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Hopwood Centre for Neurobiology, Lifelong Health Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia; The Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paul B Fitzgerald
- Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, The Alfred and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Epworth Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, Epworth HealthCare and Central Clinical School, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Giacomo Koch
- Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, Department of Clinical and Behavioral Neurology, IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome, Italy; Department of Biomedical and Specialty Surgical Sciences, Section of Human Physiology, University of Ferrara, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Di Lazzaro
- Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Università Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research. Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Guttmann Brain Health Institute, Institut Guttmann de Neurorehabilitació, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Peter G Enticott
- Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Palaus M, Viejo-Sobera R, Redolar-Ripoll D, Marrón EM. Cognitive Enhancement via Neuromodulation and Video Games: Synergistic Effects? Front Hum Neurosci 2020; 14:235. [PMID: 32636739 PMCID: PMC7319101 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2020] [Accepted: 05/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique able to modulate cortical excitability. This modulation may influence areas and networks responsible for specific cognitive processes, and the repetition of the induced temporary changes can produce long-lasting effects. TMS effectiveness may be enhanced when used in conjunction with cognitive training focused on specific cognitive functions. Playing video games can be an optimal cognitive training since it involves different cognitive components and high levels of engagement and motivation. The goal of this study is to assess the synergistic effects of TMS and video game training to enhance cognition, specifically, working memory and executive functions. We conducted a randomized 2 × 3 repeated measures (stimulation × time) study, randomly assigning 27 healthy volunteers to an active intermittent theta-burst stimulation or a sham stimulation group. Participants were assessed using a comprehensive neuropsychological battery before, immediately after, and 15 days after finishing the video game+TMS training. The training consisted of 10 sessions where participants played a 3D platform video game for 1.5 h. After each gaming session, TMS was applied over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). All participants improved their video gaming performance, but we did not find a synergistic effect of stimulation and video game training. Neither had we found cognitive improvements related to the stimulation. We explored possible confounding variables such as age, gender, and early video gaming experience through linear regression. The early video gaming experience was related to improvements in working memory and inhibitory control. This result, although exploratory, highlights the influence of individual variables and previous experiences on brain plasticity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Raquel Viejo-Sobera
- Cognitive NeuroLab, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC), Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Raginis-Zborowska A, Cheng I, Pendleton N, Payton A, Ollier W, Michou E, Hamdy S. Genetic influences on the variability of response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in human pharyngeal motor cortex. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2019; 31:e13612. [PMID: 31033149 DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13612] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2019] [Revised: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 04/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent studies have reported substantial variability in response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). We hypothesized that an individual's genetic predisposition may contribute to such variability in the pharyngeal motor cortex. This study aimed to investigate the response to 1 and 5 Hz rTMS paradigms on pharyngeal motor cortex in healthy participants and its relationship with genetic predisposition. METHODS Forty-one healthy participants (25.4 ± 4.6 years old) received either or both 1 Hz (n = 39) and 5 Hz rTMS (n = 40) over pharyngeal motor cortex. Pharyngeal and thenar motor-evoked potentials were recorded at baseline and for 1 hour post-rTMS. The participants were then classified according to their response. The associations between rTMS response and gender, time of day of the stimulation, and eight prespecified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were analyzed. KEY RESULTS There was no direction-specific response to either paradigm (1 Hz: F[3.69, 129.21] = 0.78, P = 0.56; 5 Hz: F[4.08, 146.85] = 1.38, P = 0.25). Only 13% of participants showed the expected bidirectional response (inhibition for 1 Hz and excitation for 5 Hz). Significant associations were found between response and COMT (1 Hz: P = 0.03) and DRD2 (1 Hz: P = 0.02; 5 Hz: P = 0.04) polymorphisms. Carriers of minor allele G from SNP rs6269 (COMT) were more likely to show inhibitory or excitatory outcomes after 1 Hz rTMS. By contrast, carriers of minor allele A from SNP rs1800497 (DRD2) were more likely to show no response to 1 Hz rTMS and inhibition after 5 Hz rTMS. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES Two SNPs from COMT and DRD2 genes may partially explain the response variability to rTMS in the pharyngeal motor system. Further research should focus on stratified approaches for neurostimulatory dysphagia treatment using rTMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alicja Raginis-Zborowska
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Centre for Gastrointestinal Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Ivy Cheng
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Centre for Gastrointestinal Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Neil Pendleton
- Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Antony Payton
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - William Ollier
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
| | - Emilia Michou
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Centre for Gastrointestinal Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.,Department of Speech and Language Therapy, Western Greece University of Applied Sciences, Patras, Greece
| | - Shaheen Hamdy
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Gastroenterology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Centre for Gastrointestinal Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Rocchi L, Ibáñez J, Benussi A, Hannah R, Rawji V, Casula E, Rothwell J. Variability and Predictors of Response to Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation: A TMS-EEG Study. Front Neurosci 2018; 12:400. [PMID: 29946234 PMCID: PMC6006718 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2018.00400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2018] [Accepted: 05/24/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) is a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation paradigm reported to decrease the excitability of the stimulated cortical area and which is thought to reflect a form of inhibitory synaptic plasticity. However, since its introduction, the effect of cTBS has shown a remarkable variability in its effects, which are often quantified by measuring the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Part of this inconsistency in experimental results might be due to an intrinsic variability of TMS effects caused by genetic or neurophysiologic factors. However, it is also possible that MEP only reflect the excitability of a sub-population of output neurons; resting EEG power and measures combining TMS and electroencephalography (TMS-EEG) might represent a more thorough reflection of cortical excitability. The aim of the present study was to verify the robustness of several predictors of cTBS response, such as I wave recruitment and baseline MEP amplitude, and to test cTBS after-effects on multiple neurophysiologic measurements such as MEP, resting EEG power, local mean field power (LMFP), TMS-related spectral perturbation (TRSP), and inter-trial phase clustering (ITPC). As a result, we were not able to confirm either the expected decrease of MEP amplitude after cTBS or the ability of I wave recruitment and MEP amplitude to predict the response to cTBS. Resting EEG power, LMFP, TRSP, and ITPC showed a more consistent trend toward a decrease after cTBS. Overall, our data suggest that the effect of cTBS on corticospinal excitability is variable and difficult to predict with common electrophysiologic markers, while its effect might be clearer when probed with combined TMS and EEG.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorenzo Rocchi
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jaime Ibáñez
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alberto Benussi
- Neurology Unit, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Ricci Hannah
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Vishal Rawji
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Elias Casula
- Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, IRCCS Santa Lucia Foundation, Rome, Italy
| | - John Rothwell
- Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Jannati A, Block G, Oberman LM, Rotenberg A, Pascual-Leone A. Interindividual variability in response to continuous theta-burst stimulation in healthy adults. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128:2268-2278. [PMID: 29028501 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.08.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2017] [Revised: 07/10/2017] [Accepted: 08/23/2017] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We used complete-linkage cluster analysis to identify healthy subpopulations with distinct responses to continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS). METHODS 21 healthy adults (age±SD, 36.9±15.2years) underwent cTBS of left motor cortex. Natural log-transformed motor evoked potentials (LnMEPs) at 5-50min post-cTBS (T5-T50) were calculated. RESULTS Two clusters were found; Group 1 (n=12) that showed significant MEP facilitation at T15, T20, and T50 (p's<0.006), and Group 2 (n=9) that showed significant suppression at T5-T15 (p's<0.022). LnMEPs at T10 and T40 were best predictors of, and together accounted for 80% of, cluster assignment. In an exploratory analysis, we examined the roles of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and apolipoprotein E (APOE) polymorphisms in the cTBS response. Val66Met participants showed greater facilitation at T10 than Val66Val participants (p=0.025). BDNF and cTBS intensity predicted 59% of interindividual variability in LnMEP at T10. APOE did not significantly affect LnMEPs at any time point (p's>0.32). CONCLUSIONS Data-driven cluster analysis can identify healthy subpopulations with distinct cTBS responses. T10 and T40 LnMEPs were best predictors of cluster assignment. T10 LnMEP was influenced by BDNF polymorphism and cTBS intensity. SIGNIFICANCE Healthy adults can be sorted into subpopulations with distinct cTBS responses that are influenced by genetics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Jannati
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Gabrielle Block
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Lindsay M Oberman
- Neuroplasticity and Autism Spectrum Disorder Program, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, E.P. Bradley Hospital, Warrent Alpert Medical School of Brown University, East Providence, RI, USA
| | - Alexander Rotenberg
- Neuromodulation Program and Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Alvaro Pascual-Leone
- Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Division of Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Institut Guttman de Neurorehabilitació, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Saghazadeh A, Esfahani SA, Rezaei N. Genetic polymorphisms and the adequacy of brain stimulation: state of the art. Expert Rev Neurother 2016; 16:1043-54. [PMID: 27228124 DOI: 10.1080/14737175.2016.1194202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Heterogeneity of therapeutic response to brain stimulation techniques has inspired scientists to uncover the secrets to success or failure of these projects. Genetic polymorphisms are one of the major causes of this heterogeneity. AREAS COVERED More than twenty genetic variants within more than ten genes (e.g. BDNF, COMT, DRD2, TRPV1, 5-HT1A, 5-HHT, P2RX7, VEGF, TPH1, TPH2, ACE, APOE, GNB3, NET, NMDA receptors, and RGS4) have been investigated, among which the BDNF gene and its polymorphism, Val66Met, is the best documented variant. We review the genotypic combinations, which are reported to interact with the work of brain stimulation, of which the DRD2 C957T polymorphism is the most prominent type. Finally, implications of transcranial magnetic stimulation in deciphering the interaction between genetic background (e.g. SCN1A and 5-HTT) and drugs (e.g. carbamazepine and citalopram) at the cortical excitability level is explained. Expert commentary: Studies are ongoing to find missing factors responsible for heterogeneity of response to brain stimulation techniques. Further knowledge about genetic factors affecting the therapeutic response to brain stimulation techniques might provide helpful guidelines for choosing ideal candidates for treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amene Saghazadeh
- a Research Center for Immunodeficiencies, Children's Medical Center , Tehran University of Medical Sciences , Tehran , Iran.,b NeuroImmunology Research Association (NIRA) , Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN) , Tehran , Iran
| | - Shadi A Esfahani
- c Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital , Harvard Medical School , Boston , MA , USA.,d Network of Immunity in Infection, Malignancy and Autoimmunity (NIIMA) , Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN) , Boston , MA , USA
| | - Nima Rezaei
- a Research Center for Immunodeficiencies, Children's Medical Center , Tehran University of Medical Sciences , Tehran , Iran.,e Department of Immunology, School of Medicine , Tehran University of Medical Sciences , Tehran , Iran.,f Network of Immunity in Infection, Malignancy and Autoimmunity (NIIMA) , Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN) , Tehran , Iran
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Suppa A, Huang YZ, Funke K, Ridding M, Cheeran B, Di Lazzaro V, Ziemann U, Rothwell J. Ten Years of Theta Burst Stimulation in Humans: Established Knowledge, Unknowns and Prospects. Brain Stimul 2016; 9:323-335. [DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 288] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2015] [Revised: 01/14/2016] [Accepted: 01/21/2016] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
|