Magdalena Lang

Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the brain: guidelines for pain treatment research

Abstract Recognizing that electrically stimulating the motor cortex could relieve chronic pain sparked development of noninvasive technologies. In transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), electromagnetic coils held against the scalp influence underlying cortical firing. Multiday repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can induce long-lasting, potentially therapeutic brain plasticity. Nearby ferromagnetic or electronic implants are contraindications. Adverse effects are minimal, primarily headaches. Single provoked seizures are very rare. Transcranial magnetic stimulation devices are marketed for depression and migraine in the United States and for various indications elsewhere. Although multiple studies report that high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex reduces neuropathic pain, their quality has been insufficient to support Food and Drug Administration application. Harvards Radcliffe Institute therefore sponsored a workshop to solicit advice from experts in TMS, pain research, and clinical trials. They recommended that researchers standardize and document all TMS parameters and improve strategies for sham and double blinding. Subjects should have common well-characterized pain conditions amenable to motor cortex rTMS and studies should be adequately powered. They recommended standardized assessment tools (eg, NIHs PROMIS) plus validated condition-specific instruments and consensus-recommended metrics (eg, IMMPACT). Outcomes should include pain intensity and qualities, patient and clinician impression of change, and proportions achieving 30% and 50% pain relief. Secondary outcomes could include function, mood, sleep, and/or quality of life. Minimum required elements include sample sources, sizes, and demographics, recruitment methods, inclusion and exclusion criteria, baseline and posttreatment means and SD, adverse effects, safety concerns, discontinuations, and medication-usage records. Outcomes should be monitored for at least 3 months after initiation with prespecified statistical analyses. Multigroup collaborations or registry studies may be needed for pivotal trials.

Non-invasive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) of the Motor Cortex for Neuropathic Pain-At the Tipping Point?

The term “neuropathic pain” (NP) refers to chronic pain caused by illnesses or injuries that damage peripheral or central pain-sensing neural pathways to cause them to fire inappropriately and signal pain without cause. Neuropathic pain is common, complicating diabetes, shingles, HIV, and cancer. Medications are often ineffective or cause various adverse effects, so better approaches are needed. Half a century ago, electrical stimulation of specific brain regions (neuromodulation) was demonstrated to relieve refractory NP without distant effects, but the need for surgical electrode implantation limited use of deep brain stimulation. Next, electrodes applied to the dura outside the brain’s surface to stimulate the motor cortex were shown to relieve NP less invasively. Now, electromagnetic induction permits cortical neurons to be stimulated entirely non-invasively using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Repeated sessions of many TMS pulses (rTMS) can trigger neuronal plasticity to produce long-lasting therapeutic benefit. Repeated TMS already has US and European regulatory approval for treating refractory depression, and multiple small studies report efficacy for neuropathic pain. Recent improvements include “frameless stereotactic” neuronavigation systems, in which patients’ head MRIs allow TMS to be applied to precise underlying cortical targets, minimizing variability between sessions and patients, which may enhance efficacy. Transcranial magnetic stimulation appears poised for the larger trials necessary for regulatory approval of a NP indication. Since few clinicians are familiar with TMS, we review its theoretical basis and historical development, summarize the neuropathic pain trial results, and identify issues to resolve before large-scale clinical trials.

IVIg for apparently autoimmune small-fiber polyneuropathy: first analysis of efficacy and safety:

Objectives: Small-fiber polyneuropathy (SFPN) has various underlying causes, including associations with systemic autoimmune conditions. We have proposed a new cause; small-fiber-targeting autoimmune diseases akin to Guillain-Barré and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). There are no treatment studies yet for this ‘apparently autoimmune SFPN’ (aaSFPN), but intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), first-line for Guillain-Barré and CIDP, is prescribed off-label for aaSFPN despite very high cost. This project aimed to conduct the first systematic evaluation of IVIg’s effectiveness for aaSFPN. Methods: With IRB approval, we extracted all available paper and electronic medical records of qualifying patients. Inclusion required having objectively confirmed SFPN, autoimmune attribution and other potential causes excluded. IVIg needed to have been dosed at ⩾1 g/kg/4 weeks for ⩾3 months. We chose two primary outcomes – changes in composite autonomic function testing (AFT) reports of SFPN and in ratings of pain severity – to capture objective as well as patient-prioritized outcomes. Results: Among all 55 eligible patients, SFPN had been confirmed by 3/3 nerve biopsies, 62% of skin biopsies, and 89% of composite AFT. Evidence of autoimmunity included 27% of patients having systemic autoimmune disorders, 20% having prior organ-specific autoimmune illnesses and 80% having ⩾1/5 abnormal blood-test markers associated with autoimmunity. A total of 73% had apparent small-fiber-restricted autoimmunity. IVIg treatment duration averaged 28 ± 25 months. The proportion of AFTs interpreted as indicating SFPN dropped from 89% at baseline to 55% (p ⩽ 0.001). Sweat production normalized (p = 0.039) and the other four domains all trended toward improvement. Among patients with pre-treatment pain ⩾3/10, severity averaging 6.3 ± 1.7 dropped to 5.2 ± 2.1 (p = 0.007). Overall, 74% of patients rated themselves ‘improved’ and their neurologists labeled 77% as ‘IVIg responders’; 16% entered remissions that were sustained after IVIg withdrawal. All adverse events were expected; most were typical infusion reactions. The two moderate complications (3.6%) were vein thromboses not requiring discontinuation. The one severe event (1.8%), hemolytic anemia, remitted after IVIg discontinuation. Conclusion: These results provide Class IV, real-world, proof-of-concept evidence suggesting that IVIg is safe and effective for rigorously selected SFPN patients with apparent autoimmune causality. They provide rationale for prospective trials, inform trial design and indirectly support the discovery of small-fiber-targeting autoimmune/inflammatory illnesses.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex for treating facial neuropathic pain – preliminary results of a randomized, sham-controlled, cross-over study

Background Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) noninvasively triggers action potentials in underlying brain cortex intended for therapeutic benefit. Currently marketed for refractory depression, rTMS is under investigation for treating several neurological conditions including pain. Facial neuropathic pain (NP) appears to respond well to rTMS [1]. The primary motor cortex (M1) is established as the best site to stimulate to relieve pain, but the best target within M1 remains unknown [1,2]. MRI guidance of rTMS permits repeated precise application to specific targets. The aim of this study was to compare pain relief obtained by applying MRI-guided rTMS to the M1 representation of subjects’ painful face vs. to adjacent M1 cortex innervating their non-painful hand.

Feeling Hurt: Pain Sensitivity is Correlated With and Modulated by Social Distress.

Objectives:Social distress, resulting from loss or threat to social relationships, shares similar psychological and neuronal processes with physical pain. Recent evidence demonstrated that social distress may have an impact on pain. The current study aimed to further assess the relationship between these 2 phenomena. Materials and Methods:Sixty healthy participants were randomly assigned to inclusion, noninclusion, or exclusion conditions of Cyberball, a virtual ball tossing game used to induce social distress. Pain and unpleasantness in response to noxious electrical stimuli were assessed before and after Cyberball manipulation. Psychological characteristics were evaluated by the Experiences in Close Relationships Questionnaire and the neuroticism scale of Big Five Inventory. Results:Significant correlations were found between social distress and pre-Cyberball unpleasantness thresholds: those who perceived the Cyberball task as more distressing demonstrated lower unpleasantness thresholds. Post-Cyberball manipulation pain intensity ratings, but not unpleasantness ratings, were lower in the inclusion condition. No associations were found between the psychological characteristic and the effects of Cyberball on pain or unpleasantness ratings. Discussion:The current study results indicate that participants’ pre-Cyberball unpleasantness threshold is related to their responsiveness to social distress and that physical pain may be modulated by social events. Further studies are needed to clarify the clinical relevance of these results.