Mapping Inter-individual Functional Connectivity Variability in TMS Targets for Major Depressive Disorder.
E-fields
TMS
depression
functional connectivity
human
modeling
Journal
Frontiers in psychiatry
ISSN: 1664-0640
Titre abrégé: Front Psychiatry
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101545006
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
22
03
2022
accepted:
23
05
2022
entrez:
11
7
2022
pubmed:
12
7
2022
medline:
12
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an emerging alternative to existing treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). The effects of TMS on both brain physiology and therapeutic outcomes are known to be highly variable from subject to subject, however. Proposed reasons for this variability include individual differences in neurophysiology, in cortical geometry, and in brain connectivity. Standard approaches to TMS target site definition tend to focus on coordinates or landmarks within the individual brain regions implicated in MDD, such as the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). Additionally considering the network connectivity of these sites (i.e., the wider set of brain regions that may be mono- or poly-synaptically activated by TMS stimulation) has the potential to improve subject-specificity of TMS targeting and, in turn, improve treatment outcomes. In this study, we looked at the functional connectivity (FC) of dlPFC and OFC TMS targets, based on induced electrical field (E-field) maps, estimated using the SimNIBS library. We hypothesized that individual differences in spontaneous functional brain dynamics would contribute more to downstream network engagement than individual differences in cortical geometry (i.e., E-field variability). We generated individualized E-field maps on the cortical surface for 121 subjects (67 female) from the Human Connectome Project database using tetrahedral head models generated from T1- and T2-weighted MR images. F3 and Fp1 electrode positions were used to target the left dlPFC and left OFC, respectively. We analyzed inter-subject variability in the shape and location of these TMS target E-field patterns, their FC, and the major functional networks to which they belong. Our results revealed the key differences in TMS target FC between the dlPFC and OFC, and also how this connectivity varies across subjects. Three major functional networks were targeted across the dlPFC and OFC: the ventral attention, fronto-parietal and default-mode networks in the dlPFC, and the fronto-parietal and default mode networks in the OFC. Inter-subject variability in cortical geometry and in FC was high. Our analyses showed that the use of normative neuroimaging reference data (group-average or representative FC and subject E-field) allows prediction of which networks are targeted, but fails to accurately quantify the relative loading of TMS targeting on each of the principal networks. Our results characterize the FC patterns of canonical therapeutic TMS targets, and the key dimensions of their variability across subjects. The high inter-individual variability in cortical geometry and FC, leading to high variability in distributions of targeted brain networks, may account for the high levels of variability in physiological and therapeutic TMS outcomes. These insights should, we hope, prove useful as part of the broader effort by the psychiatry, neurology, and neuroimaging communities to help improve and refine TMS therapy, through a better understanding of the technology and its neurophysiological effects.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35815008
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.902089
pmc: PMC9260048
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
902089Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Harita, Momi, Mazza and Griffiths.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Cortex. 2018 Nov;108:160-172
pubmed: 30195825
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 1999 Jan;9(1-2):83-91
pubmed: 10082232
Neuroimage. 2011 Oct 1;58(3):849-59
pubmed: 21749927
Neuroimage. 2017 Nov 15;162:289-296
pubmed: 28912081
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:222-5
pubmed: 26736240
J Neurophysiol. 2011 Sep;106(3):1125-65
pubmed: 21653723
Neuroimage. 2020 Apr 1;209:116486
pubmed: 31877374
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2018 Jan;28(1):109-117
pubmed: 29153927
Clin Neurophysiol. 2004 Jul;115(7):1697-708
pubmed: 15203072
Neuroscientist. 2012 Jun;18(3):251-70
pubmed: 21677128
Neuroimage. 2011 Jan 1;54(1):234-43
pubmed: 20682353
Brain Stimul. 2013 May;6(3):231-40
pubmed: 22975030
Neuroreport. 1995 Oct 2;6(14):1853-6
pubmed: 8547583
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 May 17;12:47
pubmed: 25981522
Biol Psychiatry. 2021 Nov 15;90(10):689-700
pubmed: 32800379
Neuropsychologia. 2019 May;128:14-43
pubmed: 28951164
Front Neuroinform. 2014 Feb 21;8:14
pubmed: 24600388
Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Oct;15(10):483-506
pubmed: 21908230
J ECT. 2018 Jun;34(2):e16-e19
pubmed: 29053484
Nat Commun. 2019 Jun 14;10(1):2642
pubmed: 31201331
Commun Biol. 2020 Dec 4;3(1):738
pubmed: 33277621
Neuroimage. 2021 Aug 15;237:118093
pubmed: 33940146
Neuron. 2013 Feb 6;77(3):586-95
pubmed: 23395382
J Clin Neurophysiol. 1998 Jul;15(4):333-43
pubmed: 9736467
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Sep;42(13):4079-4080
pubmed: 34032348
Lancet. 1996 Jul 27;348(9022):233-7
pubmed: 8684201
Can J Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;62(1):11-23
pubmed: 27554483
Neuroimage. 2013 Oct 15;80:105-24
pubmed: 23668970
Chin Med J (Engl). 2012 Oct;125(20):3701-6
pubmed: 23075728
Neuroimage. 2013 Oct 15;80:62-79
pubmed: 23684880
Neuron. 2005 Jan 20;45(2):201-6
pubmed: 15664172
JAMA Psychiatry. 2015 Jun;72(6):603-11
pubmed: 25785575
Neuroimage. 2013 Feb 1;66:151-60
pubmed: 23142067
Biol Psychiatry. 2012 Oct 1;72(7):595-603
pubmed: 22658708
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Sep;6(9):691-702
pubmed: 16136173
Brain Res. 2016 Nov 1;1650:134-141
pubmed: 27590719
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jul 5;102(27):9673-8
pubmed: 15976020
Cereb Cortex. 2018 Sep 1;28(9):3095-3114
pubmed: 28981612
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2008;2008:5675-9
pubmed: 19164005
J Neurosci. 2013 Feb 6;33(6):2242-53
pubmed: 23392656
Nat Med. 2017 Jan;23(1):28-38
pubmed: 27918562
Cereb Cortex. 2014 Jan;24(1):232-48
pubmed: 23042731
Brain Stimul. 2009 Apr;2(2):58-80
pubmed: 20633405
Depress Anxiety. 2016 Aug;33(8):746-53
pubmed: 27059158
Brain Topogr. 2019 Nov;32(6):926-942
pubmed: 31707621
Neuroimage. 2012 Oct 1;62(4):2222-31
pubmed: 22366334
Am J Psychiatry. 2020 May 1;177(5):373-375
pubmed: 32354264
J Neurosci. 2014 Apr 16;34(16):5603-12
pubmed: 24741050
Biol Psychiatry. 2018 Jul 1;84(1):28-37
pubmed: 29274805
Brain Struct Funct. 2010 Jun;214(5-6):655-67
pubmed: 20512370
Neuroimage. 2016 Feb 15;127:86-96
pubmed: 26608241
Brain Stimul. 2009 Oct;2(4):188-200
pubmed: 20633419
Neuroimage. 2013 Oct 15;80:80-104
pubmed: 23702417
Clin Neurophysiol. 2021 Sep;132(9):2306-2316
pubmed: 34167891