A protocol for a multicenter randomized and personalized controlled trial using rTMS in patients with disorders of consciousness.
angular gyrus
coma
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
minimally conscious state
non-invasive brain stimulation
treatment
unresponsive wakefulness syndrome
vegetative state
Journal
Frontiers in neurology
ISSN: 1664-2295
Titre abrégé: Front Neurol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101546899
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
03
05
2023
accepted:
06
07
2023
medline:
7
8
2023
pubmed:
7
8
2023
entrez:
7
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Improving the functional recovery of patients with DoC remains one of the greatest challenges of the field. Different theories exist about the role of the anterior (prefrontal areas) versus posterior (parietal areas) parts of the brain as hotspots for the recovery of consciousness. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a powerful non-invasive brain stimulation technique for the treatment of DoC. However, a direct comparison of the effect of TMS treatment on the front versus the back of the brain has yet to be performed. In this study, we aim to assess the short- and long-term effects of frontal and parietal rTMS on DoC recovery and characterize responders phenotypically. Ninety patients with subacute and prolonged DoC will be included in a two-part multicenter prospective study. In the first phase (randomized controlled trial, RCT), patients will undergo four rTMS sessions in a crossover design over 10 days, targeting (i) the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and (ii) the left angular gyrus (AG), as well as (iii & iv) their sham alternatives. In the second phase (longitudinal personalized trial), patients will receive personalized stimulations for 20 working days targeting the brain area that showed the best results in the RCT and will be randomly assigned to either active or sham intervention. The effects of rTMS on neurobehavioral and neurophysiological functioning in patients with DoC will be evaluated using clinical biomarkers of responsiveness (i.e., the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised; CRS-R), and electrophysiological biomarkers (e.g., power spectra, functional and effective connectivity, perturbational complexity index before and after intervention). Functional long-term outcomes will be assessed at 3 and 6 months post-intervention. Adverse events will be recorded during the treatment phase. This study seeks to identify which brain region (front or back) is best to stimulate for the treatment of patients with DoC using rTMS, and to characterize the neural correlates of its action regarding recovery of consciousness and functional outcome. In addition, we will define the responders' profile based on patients' characteristics and functional impairments; and develop biomarkers of responsiveness using EEG analysis according to the clinical responsiveness to the treatment. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04401319, Clinicaltrials.gov, n° NCT04401319.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Improving the functional recovery of patients with DoC remains one of the greatest challenges of the field. Different theories exist about the role of the anterior (prefrontal areas) versus posterior (parietal areas) parts of the brain as hotspots for the recovery of consciousness. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a powerful non-invasive brain stimulation technique for the treatment of DoC. However, a direct comparison of the effect of TMS treatment on the front versus the back of the brain has yet to be performed. In this study, we aim to assess the short- and long-term effects of frontal and parietal rTMS on DoC recovery and characterize responders phenotypically.
Methods/design
UNASSIGNED
Ninety patients with subacute and prolonged DoC will be included in a two-part multicenter prospective study. In the first phase (randomized controlled trial, RCT), patients will undergo four rTMS sessions in a crossover design over 10 days, targeting (i) the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and (ii) the left angular gyrus (AG), as well as (iii & iv) their sham alternatives. In the second phase (longitudinal personalized trial), patients will receive personalized stimulations for 20 working days targeting the brain area that showed the best results in the RCT and will be randomly assigned to either active or sham intervention. The effects of rTMS on neurobehavioral and neurophysiological functioning in patients with DoC will be evaluated using clinical biomarkers of responsiveness (i.e., the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised; CRS-R), and electrophysiological biomarkers (e.g., power spectra, functional and effective connectivity, perturbational complexity index before and after intervention). Functional long-term outcomes will be assessed at 3 and 6 months post-intervention. Adverse events will be recorded during the treatment phase.
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
This study seeks to identify which brain region (front or back) is best to stimulate for the treatment of patients with DoC using rTMS, and to characterize the neural correlates of its action regarding recovery of consciousness and functional outcome. In addition, we will define the responders' profile based on patients' characteristics and functional impairments; and develop biomarkers of responsiveness using EEG analysis according to the clinical responsiveness to the treatment.
Clinical Trial Registration
UNASSIGNED
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04401319, Clinicaltrials.gov, n° NCT04401319.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37545735
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1216468
pmc: PMC10401598
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04401319']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1216468Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Vitello, Rosenfelder, Cardone, Niimi, Willacker, Thibaut, Lejeune, Laureys, Bender and Gosseries.
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
Neural Plast. 2018 Mar 25;2018:5036184
pubmed: 29770146
Neural Plast. 2022 Nov 16;2022:7195699
pubmed: 36437902
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 May 28;99(11):7699-704
pubmed: 12032346
Neuroimage. 2004 Jan;21(1):99-111
pubmed: 14741647
J Neurosci. 2017 Oct 4;37(40):9603-9613
pubmed: 28978697
Brain Inj. 2019;33(11):1409-1412
pubmed: 31319707
Hum Brain Mapp. 2013 Jul;34(7):1652-69
pubmed: 22378543
Trends Neurosci. 2010 Jan;33(1):1-9
pubmed: 19954851
Arch Ital Biol. 2012 Dec;150(4):293-329
pubmed: 23802335
Brain Stimul. 2021 May-Jun;14(3):461-466
pubmed: 33677157
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 23;11(3):e0152241
pubmed: 27007747
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
Exp Brain Res. 2000 Jul;133(1):44-54
pubmed: 10933209
Ann Neurol. 2016 Nov;80(5):718-729
pubmed: 27717082
BMC Med. 2010 Nov 01;8:68
pubmed: 21040571
J Theor Biol. 2008 Oct 7;254(3):594-8
pubmed: 18514741
Front Neurosci. 2016 Oct 20;10:473
pubmed: 27812319
Brain Topogr. 2019 Jan;32(1):17-27
pubmed: 30019114
Front Neurol. 2023 Feb 16;14:1059789
pubmed: 36873436
BMC Neurol. 2022 Dec 9;22(1):468
pubmed: 36494776
Brain Stimul. 2009 Jan;2(1):22-35
pubmed: 20633400
CNS Spectr. 2007 Jul;12(7):545-52
pubmed: 17603406
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 May;88(5):410-8
pubmed: 19620954
Nat Rev Neurol. 2014 Feb;10(2):99-114
pubmed: 24468878
Cognition. 2001 Apr;79(1-2):1-37
pubmed: 11164022
Brain Topogr. 2003 Winter;16(2):95-9
pubmed: 14977202
J Neurotrauma. 2001 Jun;18(6):575-84
pubmed: 11437080
Brain Stimul. 2015 Jan-Feb;8(1):142-9
pubmed: 25481074
Cortex. 2015 Oct;71:368-76
pubmed: 26301875
Clin Rehabil. 2022 Jul;36(7):916-925
pubmed: 35322709
Brain Behav. 2023 May;13(5):e2971
pubmed: 36977194
Brain Sci. 2019 May 06;9(5):
pubmed: 31064138
Front Neurosci. 2023 Jan 26;16:1024278
pubmed: 36778900
Ann Neurol. 2012 Sep;72(3):335-43
pubmed: 23034909
Sci Transl Med. 2013 Aug 14;5(198):198ra105
pubmed: 23946194
Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 3;10(1):1644
pubmed: 32015398
Neuron. 2007 Jul 19;55(2):187-99
pubmed: 17640522
Neurol Sci. 2023 Jul;44(7):2311-2327
pubmed: 36943589
Neurology. 2002 Feb 12;58(3):349-53
pubmed: 11839831
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021 Dec;131:293-312
pubmed: 34555384
Trends Cogn Sci. 2006 May;10(5):204-11
pubmed: 16603406
Front Neurol. 2018 Nov 21;9:982
pubmed: 30519211
Neurocrit Care. 2021 Jul;35(Suppl 1):68-85
pubmed: 34236624
Brain Stimul. 2013 Jul;6(4):590-7
pubmed: 23403267
Conscious Cogn. 2015 Dec 15;38:1-8
pubmed: 26496476
Brain Inj. 2008 Sep;22(10):786-92
pubmed: 18787989
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982 Mar;63(3):118-23
pubmed: 7073452
Rev Neurosci. 2020 Aug 26;:
pubmed: 32845870
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011 Jan;25(1):98-102
pubmed: 20647501
Brain. 2010 Jan;133(Pt 1):161-71
pubmed: 20034928
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015 Aug;29(7):603-13
pubmed: 25539781
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 1;366(9):819-26
pubmed: 22375973
J Int Med Res. 2021 Feb;49(2):300060520976472
pubmed: 33535855
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Dec;85(12):2020-9
pubmed: 15605342
Neural Plast. 2019 Jun 11;2019:7089543
pubmed: 31308848
Semin Neurol. 2022 Jun;42(3):348-362
pubmed: 36100229
Brain. 2017 Aug 1;140(8):2120-2132
pubmed: 28666351
Lancet Neurol. 2019 Jun;18(6):600-614
pubmed: 31003899
Neuroreport. 2017 Oct 18;28(15):1022-1029
pubmed: 28902713
J Neurol. 2011 Jul;258(7):1373-84
pubmed: 21674197
Eur Neurol. 2016;76(1-2):1-7
pubmed: 27332827