Colleen K. Loo

Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in the Acute Treatment of Major Depression: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND We tested whether transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is effective and safe in the acute treatment of major depression. METHODS In a double-blind, multisite study, 301 medication-free patients with major depression who had not benefited from prior treatment were randomized to active (n = 155) or sham TMS (n = 146) conditions. Sessions were conducted five times per week with TMS at 10 pulses/sec, 120% of motor threshold, 3000 pulses/session, for 4-6 weeks. Primary outcome was the symptom score change as assessed at week 4 with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Secondary outcomes included changes on the 17- and 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and response and remission rates with the MADRS and HAMD. RESULTS Active TMS was significantly superior to sham TMS on the MADRS at week 4 (with a post hoc correction for inequality in symptom severity between groups at baseline), as well as on the HAMD17 and HAMD24 scales at weeks 4 and 6. Response rates were significantly higher with active TMS on all three scales at weeks 4 and 6. Remission rates were approximately twofold higher with active TMS at week 6 and significant on the MADRS and HAMD24 scales (but not the HAMD17 scale). Active TMS was well tolerated with a low dropout rate for adverse events (4.5%) that were generally mild and limited to transient scalp discomfort or pain. CONCLUSIONS Transcranial magnetic stimulation was effective in treating major depression with minimal side effects reported. It offers clinicians a novel alternative for the treatment of this disorder.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for depression: 3-week, randomised, sham-controlled trial {

BACKGROUND Preliminary evidence suggests transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has antidepressant efficacy. AIMS To further investigate the efficacy of tDCS in a double-blind, sham-controlled trial (registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00763230). METHOD Sixty-four participants with current depression received active or sham anodal tDCS to the left prefrontal cortex (2 mA, 15 sessions over 3 weeks), followed by a 3-week open-label active treatment phase. Mood and neuropsychological effects were assessed. RESULTS There was significantly greater improvement in mood after active than after sham treatment (P<0.05), although no difference in responder rates (13% in both groups). Attention and working memory improved after a single session of active but not sham tDCS (P<0.05). There was no decline in neuropsychological functioning after 3-6 weeks of active stimulation. One participant with bipolar disorder became hypomanic after active tDCS. CONCLUSIONS Findings confirm earlier reports of the antidepressant efficacy and safety of tDCS. Vigilance for mood switching is advised when administering tDCS to individuals with bipolar disorder.

A double-blind, sham-controlled trial of transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of depression

Two recent sham-controlled studies found that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was an effective treatment for depression. As tDCS is painless, relatively safe and inexpensive, its efficacy in treating depression warrants further investigation. This double-blind, randomized study tested tDCS at the same stimulation parameters as a previous positive study (1 mA current strength, five treatment sessions, active or sham, given on alternate days) in 40 depressed participants. Anodal stimulation was centred over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, with the cathode placed on the lateral aspect of the contralateral orbit. tDCS was continued up to a total of ten active sessions per participant. Mood outcomes were measured by psychiatrist raters blind to treatment condition using the Montgomery-Asberg and other depression rating scales. Psychomotor speed was assessed immediately before and after a single tDCS session and attention, frontal executive function, working memory and verbal learning were assessed after each group of five sessions. Overall depression scores improved significantly over ten tDCS treatments, but there was no between-group difference in the five-session, sham-controlled phase. tDCS was found to be safe, with no adverse effects on neuropsychological function, and only minor side-effects. It is recommended that the efficacy of tDCS in depression be further evaluated over a longer treatment period, using enhanced stimulation parameters.

Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Evidence Based Update 2016.

This review updates and consolidates evidence on the safety of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS). Safety is here operationally defined by, and limited to, the absence of evidence for a Serious Adverse Effect, the criteria for which are rigorously defined. This review adopts an evidence-based approach, based on an aggregation of experience from human trials, taking care not to confuse speculation on potential hazards or lack of data to refute such speculation with evidence for risk. Safety data from animal tests for tissue damage are reviewed with systematic consideration of translation to humans. Arbitrary safety considerations are avoided. Computational models are used to relate dose to brain exposure in humans and animals. We review relevant dose-response curves and dose metrics (e.g. current, duration, current density, charge, charge density) for meaningful safety standards. Special consideration is given to theoretically vulnerable populations including children and the elderly, subjects with mood disorders, epilepsy, stroke, implants, and home users. Evidence from relevant animal models indicates that brain injury by Direct Current Stimulation (DCS) occurs at predicted brain current densities (6.3-13 A/m(2)) that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by conventional tDCS. To date, the use of conventional tDCS protocols in human trials (≤40 min, ≤4 milliamperes, ≤7.2 Coulombs) has not produced any reports of a Serious Adverse Effect or irreversible injury across over 33,200 sessions and 1000 subjects with repeated sessions. This includes a wide variety of subjects, including persons from potentially vulnerable populations.

A review of the safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as a clinical treatment for depression

There is growing interest worldwide in rTMS as a clinical treatment for depression. Apart from efficacy, its safety as a clinical treatment must be considered before its widespread use can be advocated. All published, sham-controlled rTMS depression trials were reviewed for reported side-effects and outcomes of formal neuropsychological testing. In addition, all reports of seizures occurring with rTMS were reviewed. Other safety concerns (effects on hearing; headache, pain, induced currents in electrical circuits, histotoxicity, electromagnetic field exposure, psychiatric complications, safety in pregnancy) are discussed. Common side-effects were of a minor nature, e.g. headache. There was a low incidence of accidental seizures and induced hypomania, both of which were associated with identified risk factors for which subjects should be screened. Long-term effects of repeated rTMS sessions are as yet unknown. When given within recommended guidelines, the overall safety profile of rTMS is good, and supports its further development as a clinical treatment.

Double-blind controlled investigation of bilateral prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of resistant major depression

BACKGROUND The efficacy and safety of bilateral prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating resistant major depression were examined in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHOD Nineteen medication-resistant depressed subjects were randomly assigned to 3 weeks of active or sham rTMS. Effects on mood and neuropsychological function were assessed. RESULTS Both groups improved significantly in mood over the 3 weeks, but there was no significant difference between active and sham treatments. There were no significant neuropsychological effects. CONCLUSIONS Bilateral rTMS was not superior to sham in treating resistant depression in this pilot study, but caused no neuropsychological impairment.

Effects of a 2- to 4-week course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on neuropsychologic functioning, electroencephalogram, and auditory threshold in depressed patients.

BACKGROUND The safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has only previously been formally studied in volunteers receiving a single session of stimulation or in a small number of depressed subjects receiving a 2-week treatment course. This study examined safety issues in depressed subjects receiving up to 4 weeks of rTMS. Efficacy results from this study have been previously reported. METHODS Eighteen subjects with DSM-IV major depression participated in a 2-week, parallel, double-blind, sham-controlled study of rTMS treatment. Twelve subjects then went on to receive 4 weeks active rTMS in an open follow-up. We examined the effects of rTMS on neuropsychologic function (up to 4 weeks), auditory threshold (up to 6 weeks exposure to rTMS noise), and an electroencephalogram (after 2 weeks). Data were analyzed by repeated measures analysis. RESULTS There were trends for improvement in neuropsychologic performance, probably due to practice effects. No mean changes in auditory threshold occurred, but two patients showed mild high-frequency hearing loss after several weeks of rTMS. Electroencephalograms in two patients, one of whom had sham stimulation, showed minor abnormality. CONCLUSIONS No significant mean deficits were demonstrated in this cohort. Overall, rTMS for up to 4 weeks is safe, but individual results suggest caution and the need for further investigation of the safety of several weeks of rTMS.

Daily transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) leads to greater increases in cortical excitability than second daily transcranial direct current stimulation

BACKGROUND Evidence from recent clinical trials suggests that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may have potential in treating neuropsychiatric disorders. However, the optimal frequency at which tDCS sessions should be administered is unknown. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS This study investigated the effects of daily or second daily tDCS sessions on motor cortical excitability, over a 5-day period. METHODS Twelve healthy volunteers received daily or second daily sessions of tDCS to the left primary motor cortex over the study period, in a randomized, intraindividual crossover design. Motor cortical excitability was assessed before and after tDCS at each session through responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation. RESULTS Over a fixed 5-day period, tDCS induced greater increases in MEP amplitude when given daily rather than second daily. Analyses showed that this difference reflected greater cumulative effects between sessions rather than a greater response to each individual tDCS session. CONCLUSIONS These results demonstrate that in the motor cortex of healthy volunteers, tDCS alters cortical excitability more effectively when given daily rather than second daily over a 5-day period.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder: a double-blind controlled investigation

BACKGROUND To determine the efficacy and tolerability of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) in a double-blind placebo-controlled study. METHOD Subjects with treatment-resistant OCD were randomized to rTMS (n = 10) or sham rTMS (n = 8) for 10 sessions of daily stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), with subjects and raters being blind to the treatment. Subjects were offered an open extension of up to 20 sessions of rTMS. RESULTS The two groups did not differ on change in Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) or Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory scores over 10 sessions, with or without correction for depression ratings. Over 20 sessions, there was a significant reduction in total YBOCS scores, but not after controlling for depression. rTMS over 20 sessions was well tolerated. CONCLUSION Two weeks of rTMS over the left DLPFC is ineffective for treatment-resistant OCD.

Regulatory considerations for the clinical and research use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Review and recommendations from an expert panel

Abstract The field of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has experienced significant growth in the past 15 years. One of the tES techniques leading this increased interest is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Significant research efforts have been devoted to determining the clinical potential of tDCS in humans. Despite the promising results obtained with tDCS in basic and clinical neuroscience, further progress has been impeded by a lack of clarity on international regulatory pathways. Therefore, a group of research and clinician experts on tDCS were convened to review the research and clinical use of tDCS. This report reviews the regulatory status of tDCS and summarizes the results according to research, off-label, and compassionate use of tDCS in the following countries: Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, India, Iran, Italy, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan, and the US. Research use, off label treatment, and compassionate use of tDCS are employed in most of the countries reviewed in this study. It is critical that a global or local effort is organized to pursue definite evidence to either approve and regulate or restrict the use of tDCS in clinical practice on the basis of adequate randomized controlled treatment trials.