Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Parkinson´s Disease-related Pain

January 25, 2023 updated by: Universidad Francisco de Vitoria

Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Targeting Pain in Parkinson´s Disease Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Pain is an under-reported but prevalent symptom in Parkinson´s Disease (PD), impacting patients' quality of life. Both pain and PD conditions cause cortical excitability reduction, but non-invasive brain stimulation is thought to be able to counteract it, resulting also effective in chronic pain conditions. The investigators in the present project aim to evaluate the efficacy of a novel brain stimulation protocol in the management of pain in PD patients during the ON state. The investigators hypothesize that active transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) over the Primary Motor Cortex (M1) can improve clinical pain and its central processing features.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Parkinson´s Disease (PD) affects between 4.1 and 4.6 million people in the world. Diagnosis of PD is currently clinical and based on its motor manifestations (bradykinesia, rest tremor, and rigidity). However, non-motor symptoms such as pain, fatigue and neuropsychiatric manifestations are present in more than 70% of subjects. Pain affects about 85% of patients but is paradoxically under-reported and consequently under-treated in PD patients with a great impact on their quality of life. Levodopa, which is the election treatment in PD, has shown controversial results regarding pain sensitivity and has been shown ineffective for enhancing the endogenous pain modulation system. Furthermore, there is a lack of management protocols and nonpharmacologic treatments for pain in PD. Several syndromes are hypothesized to be involved in PD pain generation. Generally, PD patients suffer from alterations in peripheral transmission, sensitive-discriminative processing, pain perception, and pain interpretation in multiple levels, due to neurodegenerative changes in dopaminergic pathways and non-dopaminergic pain-related structures. Therefore, central mechanisms are proposed to be crucial for the development and establishment of pain in PD patients. Regarding pain processing features, PD patients have reduced pain thresholds, an augmented Temporal Summation (TS) after repetitive nociceptive stimulus, and the impairment of their Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) is correlated with greater severity and premature onset of the disease. Cortical excitability reduction is common in patients with pain. Therefore, diverse therapies are being developed to counteract this cortical excitability reduction and obtaining, consequently, effective pain relief. In consonance with these findings, in PD condition, especially in off state, there is also evidence of cortical excitability decrease but, to the best of the investigators´ knowledge, there are no studies targeting cortical excitability to treat pain in PD. Thus, the present study proposes non-invasive brain stimulation therapy for the treatment of PD-related pain. The non-invasive brain stimulation therapy will be transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the Primary Motor Cortex (M1). tDCS over M1 is capable of increase corticospinal excitability in both M1 and other pain processing-related areas such as the thalamus, Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC), cingulate cortex, and insula, also involved in PD pain processing. These increments of cortical excitability have been correlated with pain relief in chronic pain such as fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, migraine, and spinal cord injury. It is also hypothesized that tDCS would be an effective strategy to treat central sensitivity-related pain, a process whose features are common with PD condition. Moreover, specifically in PD, tDCS over M1 has shown to increase cortical excitability, augmenting the Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) amplitude by 78.5%, correlating with motor improvements. The main aim of this study is to conduct an independent parallel randomized controlled trial based on tDCS targeting changes in 1. validated general and specific PD related pain scales and 2. psychophysical measurements of pain modulation mechanisms. The investigators´ main hypothesis is that active tDCS will be superior to its respective control placebo intervention.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

22

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Madrid, Spain, 28007
        • Hospital Beata María Ana
        • Contact:
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Yeray Gonzalez Zamorano, PT Msc

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Neuroimaging study without previous pathologies.
  • Score > 5 in transfers (bed to chair and back) item in Barthel Index.
  • Score = or > 24 in Mini-Mental State Examination.
  • Tolerability for the application of electrotherapy.
  • Able to provide informed consent to participate in the study.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Neurologic disease different from PD.
  • Pain non-related to PD.
  • Dermatologic problems, wounds, or ulcers in the electrode's application area.
  • Presence of implants or metal pieces in the head.
  • Presence of cardiac pacemaker, vagal, brain or transcutaneous stimulators, medication pumps, ventriculoperitoneal shunts or aneurysm clips.
  • Significative difficulties in language.
  • History of alcohol or drugs abuse.
  • Non-controlled medical problems.
  • Pregnancy.
  • Epilepsy.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Active Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Active Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (a-tDCS) will be applied over the Primary Motor Cortex during 10 sessions of 20 minutes at 2 milli amps.
The Starstim tDCS® stimulator will be used by an experienced physical therapist to transfer direct current by a saline-soak pair of surface sponge electrodes (35cm2). The anode electrode will be placed over C3 (EEG 10/20 system) and the cathode electrode over the contralateral supraorbital area (Fp2), in order to enhance the excitability of M1 (32). Regarding the stimulated hemisphere, contralateral M1 will be stimulated in patients with asymmetric pain and the dominant (contrary to the dominant hand determined by the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory) in patients with symmetric pain, due to the widespread changes induced by tDCS in other cortical areas, including contralateral M1. A constant current of 2 milli amps intensity (subthreshold intensity) will be applied for 20 min, with 30 seconds of ramp-up and 30 seconds of ramp-down.
Sham Comparator: Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Sham Transcranial Direct Current (s-tDCS) will be applied over the Primary Motor Cortex during 10 sessions of 20 minutes.
The electrodes will be placed in the same positions as for M1 stimulation, but only applying ramping active current for 30 seconds in the beginning and at the end of the procedure for a reliable blinding.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in King´s Parkinson´s Disease Pain Scale score
Time Frame: From Baseline at 2 weeks
Parkinson´s Disease specific scale that evaluates the localization, frequency, and intensity of pain. It has 14 items distributed in 7 domains: 1. Musculoskeletal Pain; 2. Chronic Pain; 3. Fluctuation-related Pain; 4. Nocturnal Pain; 5. Oro-facial Pain; 6. Discoloration, Oedema/Swelling Pain; 7. Radicular Pain. Each item is scored by severity (0, none to 3, very severe) multiplied by frequency (0, never to 4, all the time) resulting in a subscore of 0 to 12, the sum of which gives the total score with a theoretical range from 0 to 168, with higher scores indicating more severity and frequency of pain.
From Baseline at 2 weeks
Change in King´s Parkinson´s Disease Pain Scale score
Time Frame: From Baseline at 1 month
Parkinson´s Disease specific scale that evaluates the localization, frequency, and intensity of pain. It has 14 items distributed in 7 domains: 1. Musculoskeletal Pain; 2. Chronic Pain; 3. Fluctuation-related Pain; 4. Nocturnal Pain; 5. Oro-facial Pain; 6. Discoloration, Oedema/Swelling Pain; 7. Radicular Pain. Each item is scored by severity (0, none to 3, very severe) multiplied by frequency (0, never to 4, all the time) resulting in a subscore of 0 to 12, the sum of which gives the total score with a theoretical range from 0 to 168, with higher scores indicating more severity and frequency of pain.
From Baseline at 1 month
Change in Brief Pain Inventory score
Time Frame: From Baseline at 2 weeks
It contains 15 items, including 2 multi-item scales to measure the intensity of pain and its impact on the function and welfare of patients. It also presents open questions to assess the localization of pain and the treatment used for its management, just as its effectiveness. Scores oscillate from 0 to 110, with higher scores indicating more pain and more impact on function and welfare of patients.
From Baseline at 2 weeks
Change in Brief Pain Inventory score
Time Frame: From Baseline at 1 month
It contains 15 items, including 2 multi-item scales to measure the intensity of pain and its impact on the function and welfare of patients. It also presents open questions to assess the localization of pain and the treatment used for its management, just as its effectiveness. Scores oscillate from 0 to 110, with higher scores indicating more pain and more impact on function and welfare of patients.
From Baseline at 1 month
Change in Conditioned Pain Modulation
Time Frame: From Baseline at 2 weeks
Assesses the descending pain modulatory system. The Pain Pressure Threshold will be assessed in the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb with ta handheld algometer, corresponding to the first test stimulus. Afterward, the patient will immerse the contrary hand up to the wrist into stirred ice-cold water (0-4º) maintaining it for 3 minutes, corresponding to the conditioning stimulus. If the pain is unbearable before the 3 minutes, the patient will be able to remove his/her hand. Immediately after removing the hand, a second Pain Pressure Threshold measure will be performed in the same place as the first one, corresponding to the second test stimulus. After 1-minute rest, a third Pain Pressure Threshold will be measured to assess the Conditioned Pain Modulation residual functioning.
From Baseline at 2 weeks
Change in Conditioned Pain Modulation
Time Frame: From Baseline at 1 month
Assesses the descending pain modulatory system. The Pain Pressure Threshold will be assessed in the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb with ta handheld algometer, corresponding to the first test stimulus. Afterward, the patient will immerse the contrary hand up to the wrist into stirred ice-cold water (0-4º) maintaining it for 3 minutes, corresponding to the conditioning stimulus. If the pain is unbearable before the 3 minutes, the patient will be able to remove his/her hand. Immediately after removing the hand, a second Pain Pressure Threshold measure will be performed in the same place as the first one, corresponding to the second test stimulus. After 1-minute rest, a third Pain Pressure Threshold will be measured to assess the Conditioned Pain Modulation residual functioning.
From Baseline at 1 month
Change in Temporal Summation
Time Frame: From Baseline at 2 weeks
Represents excitatory modulation processes. It will be generated through the application of 10 pulses of the handheld pressure algometer over the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb with the intensity of the Pain Pressure Threshold, previously calculated. In each pulse, pressure intensity will be increasing at a rate of 2 kg/s over the previously determined Pain Pressure Threshold intensity, leaving an interstimulus interval of one second according to the optimal method reported for inducing Temporal Summation with pressure pain. Before the first pressure pulse, subjects were taught to use a verbal numeric pain rating scale to rate the pain intensity of the first, fifth, and 10th pressure pulses. The verbal numeric pain rating scale ranged from 0 ("no pain") to 10 ("the worst possible pain").
From Baseline at 2 weeks
Change in Temporal Summation
Time Frame: From Baseline at 1 month
Represents excitatory modulation processes. It will be generated through the application of 10 pulses of the handheld pressure algometer over the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb with the intensity of the Pain Pressure Threshold, previously calculated. In each pulse, pressure intensity will be increasing at a rate of 2 kg/s over the previously determined Pain Pressure Threshold intensity, leaving an interstimulus interval of one second according to the optimal method reported for inducing Temporal Summation with pressure pain. Before the first pressure pulse, subjects were taught to use a verbal numeric pain rating scale to rate the pain intensity of the first, fifth, and 10th pressure pulses. The verbal numeric pain rating scale ranged from 0 ("no pain") to 10 ("the worst possible pain").
From Baseline at 1 month
Changes in Pain Pressure Threshold
Time Frame: From Baseline at 2 weeks
Two Pain Pressure Thresholds will be measured by a handheld algometer, one over the most painful area (peripheric hyperalgesia) and the other one over the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb (central hyperalgesia). The Pain Pressure Threshold will be applied with the algometer perpendicular to the skin increasing at a rate of 1 kg/s until the first sensation of pain. 3 measures with 30-seconds rest between them will be performed, taking the average as Pain Pressure Threshold.
From Baseline at 2 weeks
Changes in Pain Pressure Threshold
Time Frame: From Baseline at 1 month
Two Pain Pressure Thresholds will be measured by a handheld algometer, one over the most painful area (peripheric hyperalgesia) and the other one over the middle of the distal phalanx of the thumb (central hyperalgesia). The Pain Pressure Threshold will be applied with the algometer perpendicular to the skin increasing at a rate of 1 kg/s until the first sensation of pain. 3 measures with 30-seconds rest between them will be performed, taking the average as Pain Pressure Threshold.
From Baseline at 1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Beck Depression Inventory
Time Frame: Baseline
Measures depressive symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 63 leading to 6 groups: 0-10, normal; 11-16, mild mood disturbance; 17-20, borderline clinical depression; 21-30, moderate depression; 31-40, severe depression; and over 40, extreme depression.
Baseline
Beck Depression Inventory
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Measures depressive symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 63 leading to 6 groups: 0-10, normal; 11-16, mild mood disturbance; 17-20, borderline clinical depression; 21-30, moderate depression; 31-40, severe depression; and over 40, extreme depression.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Beck Depression Inventory
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Measures depressive symptoms. Scores range from 0 to 63 leading to 6 groups: 0-10, normal; 11-16, mild mood disturbance; 17-20, borderline clinical depression; 21-30, moderate depression; 31-40, severe depression; and over 40, extreme depression.
At 1 month from Baseline
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
Time Frame: Baseline
Measures anxious states and anxious traits. It has 20 items for assessing trait anxiety and 20 for state anxiety. All items are rated on a 4-point scale (e.g., from "Almost Never" to "Almost Always"). Higher scores indicate greater anxiety.
Baseline
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Measures anxious states and anxious traits. It has 20 items for assessing trait anxiety and 20 for state anxiety. All items are rated on a 4-point scale (e.g., from "Almost Never" to "Almost Always"). Higher scores indicate greater anxiety.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Measures anxious states and anxious traits. It has 20 items for assessing trait anxiety and 20 for state anxiety. All items are rated on a 4-point scale (e.g., from "Almost Never" to "Almost Always"). Higher scores indicate greater anxiety.
At 1 month from Baseline
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia
Time Frame: Baseline
Measures fear of movement-related pain. Its scores range from 11-44 points with higher scores indicating greater fear of pain, movement, and injury.
Baseline
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Measures fear of movement-related pain. Its scores range from 11-44 points with higher scores indicating greater fear of pain, movement, and injury.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Measures fear of movement-related pain. Its scores range from 11-44 points with higher scores indicating greater fear of pain, movement, and injury.
At 1 month from Baseline
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Time Frame: Baseline
Measures catastrophizing thinking. Its total score range from 0-52, along with three subscale scores assessing rumination, magnification and helplessness, with higher scores indicating higher level of catastrophizing.
Baseline
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Measures catastrophizing thinking. Its total score range from 0-52, along with three subscale scores assessing rumination, magnification and helplessness, with higher scores indicating higher level of catastrophizing.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Measures catastrophizing thinking. Its total score range from 0-52, along with three subscale scores assessing rumination, magnification and helplessness, with higher scores indicating higher level of catastrophizing.
At 1 month from Baseline
Unified Parkinson´s Disease Rating Scale
Time Frame: Baseline
Measures disability in Parkinson´s Disease patients. The scale itself has four components: Part I, Mentation, Behavior and Mood; Part II, Activities of Daily Living; Part III, Motor aspects; Part IV, Associated Complications. Scores range from 0 to 159 with higher scores indicating more severity.
Baseline
Unified Parkinson´s Disease Rating Scale
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Measures disability in Parkinson´s Disease patients. The scale itself has four components: Part I, Mentation, Behavior and Mood; Part II, Activities of Daily Living; Part III, Motor aspects; Part IV, Associated Complications. Scores range from 0 to 159 with higher scores indicating more severity.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Unified Parkinson´s Disease Rating Scale
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Measures disability in Parkinson´s Disease patients. The scale itself has four components: Part I, Mentation, Behavior and Mood; Part II, Activities of Daily Living; Part III, Motor aspects; Part IV, Associated Complications. Scores range from 0 to 159 with higher scores indicating more severity.
At 1 month from Baseline
Reaction Times
Time Frame: Baseline
Performed through 2 related subtasks. Finger Taping task, where the participants will be instructed to press the space bar on the keyboard as fast as possible and repeatedly with the index finger, to measure motor function. And Simple Reaction Time task, where participants will be instructed to press the left mouse button as fast as possible when the stimulus "+" appears in the center of the screen at a size of 2 cm x 2 cm, to measure simple perception and sustained alertness.
Baseline
Reaction Times
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Performed through 2 related subtasks. Finger Taping task, where the participants will be instructed to press the space bar on the keyboard as fast as possible and repeatedly with the index finger, to measure motor function. And Simple Reaction Time task, where participants will be instructed to press the left mouse button as fast as possible when the stimulus "+" appears in the center of the screen at a size of 2 cm x 2 cm, to measure simple perception and sustained alertness.
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Reaction Times
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Performed through 2 related subtasks. Finger Taping task, where the participants will be instructed to press the space bar on the keyboard as fast as possible and repeatedly with the index finger, to measure motor function. And Simple Reaction Time task, where participants will be instructed to press the left mouse button as fast as possible when the stimulus "+" appears in the center of the screen at a size of 2 cm x 2 cm, to measure simple perception and sustained alertness.
At 1 month from Baseline
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Time Frame: Baseline
Action Motor Threshold in millivolts
Baseline
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Time Frame: At 2 weeks from Baseline
Action Motor Threshold in millivolts
At 2 weeks from Baseline
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Time Frame: At 1 month from Baseline
Action Motor Threshold in millivolts
At 1 month from Baseline

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Josué Fernandez Carnero, PT PhD, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

May 3, 2021

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 30, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

January 23, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 19, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 25, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

December 3, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 26, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2023

Last Verified

March 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Yes

IPD Plan Description

Individual anonymized participant data will be available to other researchers under request.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Six months at the end of the study.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Individual anonymized participant data will be available to other researchers under request.

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • Study Protocol
  • Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP)
  • Informed Consent Form (ICF)

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pain

Clinical Trials on Active Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

3
Subscribe