- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT06712225
Anomia Therapy and Executive Function Training in Chronic Post-stroke Aphasia: Pilot Study of Multidimensional Effects (ATAC2PILOT)
Combining Anomia Therapy and Executive Function Training in Chronic Post-stroke Aphasia: a Pilot Study of Multidimensional Effects
The goal of this clinical trial is to measure the effects of a speech therapy protocol combining anomia therapy and executive function training on naming and discourse in people with chronic aphasia, and to study the related brain changes.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does the protocol improve naming skills ?
- Do the improvements observed transfer to discourse abilities ?
- Are there any brain changes induced by this protocol ?
Researchers will compare anomia therapy alone to anomia therapy + executive function training to see if the latter works better.
Participants will:
- Have a whole language assessment and a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scan in the hospital before and after the protocol
- Receive 18 sessions of the protocol, 3 times a week during 6 weeks, in the hospital
- Have several naming assessments during the protocol
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Sylvie MORITZ-GASSER, Pr
- Phone Number: 0620472276
- Email: s-moritzgasser@chu-montpellier.fr
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adult (18-80 years old) with post-stroke aphasia (> 6 months post-stroke)
- Participant or legal representative able to understand the aims of the study
- Participant or legal representative who have signed an informed consent form
Exclusion Criteria:
- Aphasia with severe anarthria (mutism), comprehension disorders or alexia, incompatible with the purpose of the study
- Contraindications for MRI
- History of head trauma, brain tumor, neurodegenerative disease, or any other neurological or psychiatric condition
- Non-affiliation to social welfare
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Arm A: Anomia Therapy alone
|
After the initial assessment + functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), participants will first receive their usual speech therapy rehabilitation for 10 to 15 sessions (baseline phase), and then enter the experimental phase: 18 sessions (3 per week) of either anomia therapy alone or anomia therapy + executive function training, according to the arm they were assigned to.
All sessions will last 45 minutes.
Naming skills will be repeatedly measured during both phases.
A second assessment of language + fMRI will then be conducted and participants will return to their usual rehabilitation.
Four weeks later, a final assessment of naming and discourse will be conducted.
|
|
Experimental: Arm B: Anomia Therapy + Executive Function Training
|
After the initial assessment + functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), participants will first receive their usual speech therapy rehabilitation for 10 to 15 sessions (baseline phase), and then enter the experimental phase: 18 sessions (3 per week) of either anomia therapy alone or anomia therapy + executive function training, according to the arm they were assigned to.
All sessions will last 45 minutes.
Naming skills will be repeatedly measured during both phases.
A second assessment of language + fMRI will then be conducted and participants will return to their usual rehabilitation.
Four weeks later, a final assessment of naming and discourse will be conducted.
Executive function training will be conducted by means of a computerized material specifically designed for the study, consisting of verbal and nonverbal exercises targeting, always in the same order, inhibition, shifting, working memory and planning functions, with a gradient of difficulty.
Training will always be done at the beginning of the session, during 20 minutes, before anomia therapy.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in repeated measures of naming scores
Time Frame: Every 2 or 3 sessions during the baseline phase (3 sessions per week during 3,5 to 5 weeks) and during the experimental phase (3 sessions per week during 6 weeks)
|
Naming skills will be repeatedly assessed for each participant every 2 or 3 sessions during the 3,5 to 5 weeks of the baseline phase (usual rehabilitation): 5 to 7 measures, and during the 6 weeks of the experimental phase: 6 to 9 measures.
A naming task specifically designed for the study ("Deno 100"), including 100 black and white line drawing pictures will be used to this end.
Scores will range from 0 (no item correctly named) to 100 (all items correctly named).
A visual analysis (mean and trend) and statistical analyses will then be applied in order to measure the effect of the experimental treatment on treated words and the effect size.
|
Every 2 or 3 sessions during the baseline phase (3 sessions per week during 3,5 to 5 weeks) and during the experimental phase (3 sessions per week during 6 weeks)
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention control naming scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups.
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, 6 weeks after: just after the intervention, and 4 weeks after
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on non-treated words (transfer), a control naming task (French Battery of lexical disorders assessment, score range [0-54]) will be administered to each participant.
Mean scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, 6 weeks after: just after the intervention, and 4 weeks after
|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention discourse scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups: Productivity (number of words produced / minute)
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on discourse abilities (transfer), five samples of discourse will be collected from each participant (two picture descriptions, one wordless picture book-supported narrative, one personal narrative and one procedural information).
Different scores will be calculated: productivity (number of words produced / min), informativity (% of correct information units), lexical diversity (type-token ratio), syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure), and efficience (Main Concept Analysis).
These scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention discourse scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups: Informativity (% of correct information units)
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on discourse abilities (transfer), five samples of discourse will be collected from each participant (two picture descriptions, one wordless picture book-supported narrative, one personal narrative and one procedural information).
Different scores will be calculated: productivity (number of words produced / min), informativity (% of correct information units), lexical diversity (type-token ratio), syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure), and efficience (Main Concept Analysis).
These scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention discourse scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups: Lexical diversity (type-token ratio)
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on discourse abilities (transfer), five samples of discourse will be collected from each participant (two picture descriptions, one wordless picture book-supported narrative, one personal narrative and one procedural information).
Different scores will be calculated: productivity (number of words produced / min), informativity (% of correct information units), lexical diversity (type-token ratio), syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure), and efficience (Main Concept Analysis).
These scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention discourse scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups: Syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure)
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on discourse abilities (transfer), five samples of discourse will be collected from each participant (two picture descriptions, one wordless picture book-supported narrative, one personal narrative and one procedural information).
Different scores will be calculated: productivity (number of words produced / min), informativity (% of correct information units), lexical diversity (type-token ratio), syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure), and efficience (Main Concept Analysis).
These scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
|
Comparison of pre and post intervention discourse scores for each group (arm A / arm B) and between groups: Efficience (Main Concept Analysis)
Time Frame: First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the effects of the experimental treatment on discourse abilities (transfer), five samples of discourse will be collected from each participant (two picture descriptions, one wordless picture book-supported narrative, one personal narrative and one procedural information).
Different scores will be calculated: productivity (number of words produced / min), informativity (% of correct information units), lexical diversity (type-token ratio), syntactic structure (Predicate Argument Structure), and efficience (Main Concept Analysis).
These scores will be compared for each group at several times, and between groups at each time.
|
First day of the baseline phase, 3,5 to 5 weeks after: first day of the experimental phase, and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
|
MRI: Quantitative analyses
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
Location of the cerebral vascular accident (3DT1) and analysis of lesion volumes (3D FLAIR)
|
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
|
MRI: Qualitative analyses
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
Functional connectivity: Task-based functional MRI (Naming, phonological and semantic processes); Rest-based functional MRI |
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Aphasia profile and severity score
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
The aphasia profile and severity score will be determined by means of the Quick Aphasia Battery.
Scores range from 0 to 10: < 5 = severe aphasia; 5 to 7,5 = moderate aphasia; 7,5 to 8,9 = mild aphasia
|
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
|
Semantic association
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
Semantic processing will be assessed by means of the semantic association task of the French Battery of lexical disorders assessment, in which the participant is asked to match semantically related pictures (score range [0-54])
|
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
|
Executive function: Modified Card Sorting Test
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
The Modified Card Sorting Test explores flexibility, inhibition, updating and attention skills through a card sorting task following 3 rules: colour, number and shape.
|
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
|
Executive function: Verbal fluency
Time Frame: Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
Each participant will be asked to produce words beginning with the letter /p/ in 2 minutes and then names of animals during 2 minutes.
The number of words produced in each category will be compared with French norms (Grefex)
|
Before the baseline and just after the intervention: 9,5 to 11 weeks after
|
|
Questionnaire of Quality of Life
Time Frame: Before the baseline and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
In order to measure the functional effects of the experimental treatment, a quality of life scale (Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life scale: score ranging from 1: low quality of life to 39: good quality of life) will be completed.
|
Before the baseline and 4 weeks after the intervention
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Sylvie MORITZ-GASSER, Pr, University Hospital, Montpellier
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimated)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- RECHMPL22_0566
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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 Aphasia, Acquired
-
Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia HospitalNot yet recruitingAphasia, Acquired | Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction | Post Stroke Aphasia | Acute Ischemic Cerebrovascular DiseaseIndia
-
Rotman Research Institute at BaycrestHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaCompleted
-
University of California, BerkeleyUniversity of California, San Francisco; National Institute on Deafness and... and other collaboratorsRecruitingAphasia | Aphasia, Acquired | Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction | Aphasia, Non-fluent | Aphasia, Fluent | Aphasia Following Nontraumatic Intracerebral HemorrhageUnited States
-
Teachers College, Columbia UniversityRecruitingAphasia | Aphasia, Acquired | Aphasia, Broca | Aphasia Non Fluent | Aphasia, Anomic | Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction | Aphasia, Mixed | Aphasia, Expressive | Aphasia, Conduction | Aphasia, RehabilitationUnited States
-
University of ArkansasActive, not recruitingStroke | Rehabilitation | Aphasia, Acquired | Language Disorder, AcquiredUnited States
-
University of OuluPeili Vision Oy; Verve Oulu; City of OuluNot yet recruitingAphasia, Acquired
-
California State University, East BayCompletedAphasia, AcquiredUnited States
-
Klinik BavariaNot yet recruitingAphasia, Acquired
-
Boston University Charles River CampusTemple University; Adler Aphasia CenterActive, not recruiting
-
University of California, BerkeleyUniversity of California, San Francisco; California State University, East Bay and other collaboratorsCompletedAphasia | Aphasia, Acquired | Aphasia Non Fluent | Aphasia, FluentUnited States
Clinical Trials on Anomia therapy: semantic feature analysis and phonological components analysis;
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentCompleted
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentUniversity of Washington; Portland State UniversityCompleted
-
Göteborg UniversityThe Swedish Research Council; Swedish Council for Working Life and Social ResearchCompletedStroke | Multiple Sclerosis | Parkinson Disease | Aphasia | AnomiaSweden
-
Penn State UniversityCompleted
-
Boston University Charles River CampusNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)Recruiting
-
Rutgers, The State University of New JerseyNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)Recruiting
-
Teachers College, Columbia UniversityRecruitingAphasia | Aphasia, Acquired | Aphasia, Broca | Aphasia Non Fluent | Aphasia, Anomic | Aphasia Following Cerebral Infarction | Aphasia, Mixed | Aphasia, Expressive | Aphasia, Conduction | Aphasia, RehabilitationUnited States
-
US Department of Veterans AffairsCompletedLanguage Disorders | Aphasia | Speech DisordersUnited States
-
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare SystemPenn State UniversityActive, not recruiting
-
State University of New York at BuffaloCompleted