Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Patients With Mild or Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Study

Takuma Inagawa, Yuma Yokoi, Zui Narita, Kazushi Maruo, Mitsutoshi Okazaki, Kazuyuki Nakagome, Takuma Inagawa, Yuma Yokoi, Zui Narita, Kazushi Maruo, Mitsutoshi Okazaki, Kazuyuki Nakagome

Abstract

Introduction: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potentially novel strategy for cognitive enhancement in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of tDCS during cognitive training on cognitive functioning in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders.

Methods: This study was primarily a single arm for safety, secondary a two-arm, parallel, randomized, and sham-controlled trial for potential efficacy. Patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders were recruited. The participants and raters were blinded to the group assignment. The participants in the active arm received tDCS (anodal; F3, cathodal, Fp2, 2A, 20 min) twice daily for five consecutive days, whereas those in the sham arm received the same amount of sham-tDCS. Calculation and reading tasks were conducted in both arms as a form of cognitive intervention for 20 min during tDCS. The primary outcome was the attrition rate during the trial in the active arm, which is expected to be less than 10%. The secondary outcomes were the between-group differences of adjusted means for several cognitive scales from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up.

Results: Twenty patients [nine women (45%)], with a mean (standard deviation) age of 76.1 years participated; nine patients (45%) with minor neurocognitive disorders and 11 (55%) with major neurocognitive disorders were randomized, and 19 of them completed the trial. The attrition rate in the active arm was 0%, with no serious adverse events. Further, in the Intention-to-Treat analysis, patients in the active arm showed no statistically significant improvement compared with those who received the sham in the mean change scores of the mini-mental state examination [0.41; 95% CI (-1.85; 2.67) at day five, 1.08; 95% CI (-1.31; 3.46) at follow-up] and Alzheimer's disease assessment scale - cognition subscale [1.61; 95% CI (-4.2; 0.98) at day 5, 0.36; 95%CI (-3.19; 2.47) at follow-up].

Conclusion: These findings suggest that tDCS is safe and tolerable but causes no statistically significant cognitive effects in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. Additional large-scale, well-designed clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the cognitive effects of tDCS as an augmentation to cognitive training.

Clinical trial registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03050385.

Keywords: cognitive training; dementia; mild cognitive impairment; neurocognitive disorder; transcranial direct current stimulation.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Kanji connection task. (a) The participants began from the first Kanji letter in the upper-left corner of the 10 × 10 grid. (b) The participants were instructed to look at the Kanji letters on the right and toward the bottom of the first Kanji letter. (c) The participants were instructed to match it with a Kanji letter included in the list of 20 different Kanji letters in the table. (d) When one of them would match, they connected this Kanji letter to the first Kanji by drawing a line from one to another. (e) The new Kanji letter would take the place of the first Kanji letter. (f) The participants were asked to repeat this process for all the Kanji letters until they reached the Kanji letter in the bottom-right corner of the grid.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Flow chart of participant selection.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
The change scores in adjusted mean difference from baseline on ADAS-Cog and MMSE. In order to understand the mean change from baseline in each group easily, baseline scores in each group were shown as zero in this graph.

References

    1. American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edn Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
    1. Arsalidou M., Taylor M. J. (2011). Is 2+2=4? Meta-analyses of brain areas needed for numbers and calculations. Neuroimage 54 2382–2393. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.009
    1. Bikson M., Grossman P., Thomas C., Zannou A. L., Jiang J., Adnan T., et al. (2016). Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation: evidence-based update 2016. Brain Stimul. 9 641–661. 10.1016/j.brs.2016.06.004
    1. Birks J. (2006). Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer’s disease. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 1:CD005593. 10.1002/14651858.CD005593
    1. Brunoni A. R., Amadera J., Berbel B., Volz M. S., Rizzerio B. G., Fregni F. (2011). A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation. Int. J. Neuropsychopharmacol. 14 1133–1145. 10.1017/S1461145710001690
    1. Brunoni A. R., Valiengo L., Baccaro A., Zanao T. A., de Oliveira J. F., Goulart A., et al. (2013). The sertraline vs. electrical current therapy for treating depression clinical study: results from a factorial, randomized, controlled trial. JAMA Psychiatry 70 383–391. 10.1001/2013.jamapsychiatry.32
    1. Butler M., McCreedy E., Nelson V. A., Desai P., Ratner E., Fink H. A., et al. (2018). Does cognitive training prevent cognitive decline? a systematic review. Ann. Intern. Med. 168 63–68. 10.7326/M17-1531
    1. Clopper C. J., Pearson E. S. (1934). The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26 404–413. 10.1093/biomet/26.4.404
    1. Dedoncker J., Brunoni A. R., Baeken C., Vanderhasselt M. A. (2016). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in healthy and neuropsychiatric samples: influence of stimulation parameters. Brain Stimul. 9 501–517. 10.1016/j.brs.2016.04.006
    1. Gauthier S., Reisberg B., Zaudig M., Petersen R. C., Ritchie K., Broich K., et al. (2006). Mild cognitive impairment. Lancet 367 1262–1270. 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68542-5
    1. Gill L., Sommerlad A., Orgeta V., Costafreda S. G., Huntley J., Ames D., et al. (2017). Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 390 2673–2734. 10.1016/j.brs.2016.06.004
    1. Herwig U., Satrapi P., Schonfeldt-Lecuona C. (2003). Using the international 10-20 EEG system for positioning of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Brain Topogr. 16 95–99. 10.1023/b:brat.0000006333.93597.9d
    1. Hill N. T., Mowszowski L., Naismith S. L., Naismith S. L., Chadwick V. L., Valenzuela M., et al. (2017). Computerized cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment or dementia: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. Am. J. Psychiatry 174 329–340. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.16030360
    1. Hsu W. Y., Ku Y., Zanto T. P., Gazzaley A. (2015). Effects of noninvasive brain stimulation on cognitive function in healthy aging and Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurobiol. Aging 36 2348–2359. 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2015.04.016
    1. Inagawa T., Narita Z., Sugawara N., Maruo K., Stickley A., Yokoi Y., et al. (2018). A Meta-analysis of the effect of multisession transcranial direct current stimulation on cognition in dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Clin. EEG Neurosci. 19:1550059418800889. 10.1177/1550059418800889
    1. Kawashima R., Okita K., Yamazaki R., Tajima N., Yoshida H., Taira M., et al. (2005). Reading aloud and arithmetic calculation improve frontal function of people with dementia. J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 60 380–384. 10.1093/gerona/60.3.380
    1. Khedr E. M., Gamal N. F., El-Fetoh N. A., Khalifa H., Ahmed E. M., Ali A. M., et al. (2014). A double-blind randomized clinical trial on the efficacy of cortical direct current stimulation for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Front. Aging Neurosci. 6:275. 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00275
    1. Kim J. H., Kim D. W., Chang W. H., Kim Y. H., Kim K., HwanIm C. (2014). Inconsistent outcomes of transcranial direct current stimulation may originate from anatomical differences among individuals: electric field simulation using individual MRI data. Neurosci. Lett. 564 6–10. 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.01.054
    1. Liu C. S., Rau A., Gallagher D., Rajii T. K., Lanctot K. L., Herrmann N. (2017). Using transcranial direct current stimulation to treat symptoms in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheiemer’s disease. Neurodegener. Dis. Manag. 7 317–329. 10.2217/nmt-2017-0021
    1. Manenti R., Brambilla M., Benussi A., Rosini S., Cobelli C., Ferrari C., et al. (2016). Mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease is improved by transcranial direct current stimulation combined with physical therapy. Mov. Disord. 31 715–724. 10.1002/mds.26561
    1. Martin D. M., Liu R., Alonzo A., Green M., Player M. J., Sachdev P., et al. (2013). Can transcranial direct current stimulation enhance outcomes from cognitive training? A randomized controlled trial in healthy participants. Int. J. Neuropsychopharmaco. 16 1927–1936. 10.1017/S1461145713000539
    1. McAvinue L. P., Golemme M., Castorina M., Tatti E., Pigni F. M., Salomone S., et al. (2013). An evaluation of a working memory training scheme in older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 5:20. 10.3389/fnagi.2013.00020
    1. Meinzer M., Lindenberg R., Phan M. T., Ulm L., Volk C., Floel A. (2015). Transcranial direct current stimulation in mild cognitive impairment: behavioral effects and neural mechanisms. Alzheimer’s Dement 11 1032–1040. 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.07.159
    1. Moher D., Hopewell S., Schulz K. F., Montori V., Gotzsche P. C., Devereaux P. J., et al. (2010). CONSORT. CONSORT explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int. J. Surg. 10 28–55. 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001
    1. Narita Z., Inagawa T., Sueyoshi K., Lin C., Sumiyoshi T. (2017). Possible facilitative effects of repeated anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on functional outcome 1 month later in schizophrenia: an open trial. Front. Psychiatry. 8:184. 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00184
    1. Nitsche M. A., Fricke K., Henschke U., Schlitterlau A., Liebetanz D., Lang N., et al. (2003). Pharmacological modulation of cortical excitability shifts induced by transcranial direct current stimulation in humans. J. Physiol. 533 293–301. 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.049916
    1. Nouchi R., Taki Y., Takeuchi H., Nozawa T., Sekiguchi A., Kawashima R. (2016). Reading aloud and solving simple arithmetic calculation intervention (learning therapy) improves inhibition, verbal episodic memory, focus attention and processing speed in healthy elderly people: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 10:217. 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00217
    1. Petersen R. C., Smith G. E., Waring S. C., Ivnik R. J., Tangalos E. G., Kokmen E. (1999). Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch. Neurol. 56 303–308. 10.1001/archneur.56.3.303
    1. Philip N. S., Nelson B. G., Frohlich F., Lim K. O., Widge A. S., Carpenter L. L. (2017). Low-intensity transcranial current stimulation in psychiatry. Am. J. Psychiatry 174 628–639. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.16090996
    1. Suemoto C. K., Apolinario D., Nakamura-Palacios E. M., Lopes L., Leite R. E., Sales M. C., et al. (2014). Effects of a non-focal plasticity protocol on apathy in moderate Alzheimer’s disease: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial. Brain Stimul. 7 308–313. 10.1016/j.brs.2013.10.003
    1. Yokoi Y., Narita Z., Sumiyoshi T. (2018). Transcranial direct current stimulation in depression and psychosis: a systematic review. Clin. EEG Neurosci. 49 93–102. 10.1177/1550059417732247

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera