Search

Multiple pharmacologic agents now have been approved in the United States and other countries as treatment to slow disease and clinical progression for Alzheimer's disease. Given these treatments have not been proven to lessen the cognitive deficits already manifested in the Alzheimer's Clinical Syndrome (ACS), and none are aimed for another debilitating dementia syndrome identified as primary progressive aphasia (PPA), there is an urgent need for new, safe, tolerable, and efficacious treatments to mitigate the cognitive deficits experienced in ACS and PPA. Noninvasive brain stimulation has shown promise for enhancing cognitive functioning, and there has been interest in its potential therapeutic value in ACS and PPA. This review critically examines the evidence of five technologies in ACS and PPA: transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS). Many randomized controlled trials of tDCS and rTMS report positive treatment effects on cognition in ACS and PPA that persist out to at least 8 weeks, whereas there are few trials for tACS and none for tRNS and nVNS. However, most positive trials did not identify clinically meaningful changes, underscoring that clinical efficacy has yet to be established in ACS and PPA. Much is still to be learned about noninvasive brain stimulation in ACS and PPA, and shifting the focus to prioritize clinical significance in addition to statistical significance in trials could yield greater success in understanding its potential cognitive effects and optimal parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop an individualized method for detecting cognitive adverse events (CAEs) in the context of an ongoing trial of electroconvulsive therapy for refractory agitation and aggression for advanced dementia (ECT-AD study). Methods: Literature search aimed at identifying (a) cognitive measures appropriate for patients with advanced dementia, (b) functional scales to use as a proxy for cognitive status in patients with floor effects on baseline cognitive testing, and (c) statistical approaches for defining a CAE, to develop CAEs monitoring plan specifically for the ECT-AD study. Results: Using the Severe Impairment Battery-8 (SIB-8), baseline floor effects are defined as a score of ≤5/16. For patients without floor effects, a decline of ≥6 points is considered a CAE. For patients with floor effects, a decline of ≥30 points from baseline on the Barthel Index is considered a CAE. These values were derived using the standard deviation index (SDI) approach to measuring reliable change. Conclusions: The proposed plan accounts for practical and statistical challenges in detecting CAEs in patients with advanced dementia. While this protocol was developed in the context of the ECT-AD study, the general approach can potentially be applied to other interventional neuropsychiatric studies that carry the risk of CAEs in patients with advanced dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Is magnetic seizure therapy (MST) as effective as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in patients with major depressive episode? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial including 73 patients, assessments of antidepressant response showed significantly decreased Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores with treatment with either MST or ECT, with no significant difference in response or remission rates. The speed of response was similar between MST and ECT, although ECT showed faster time to remission; the time to orientation after treatment was significantly faster with MST than ECT. Meaning: The findings suggest that MST confers antidepressant benefit while maximizing cognitive safety. Importance: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is highly effective and rapid in treating depression, but it carries a risk of significant cognitive adverse effects. Magnetic seizure therapy (MST), an investigational antidepressant treatment, may maintain the robust antidepressant efficacy of ECT while substantially reducing adverse effects due to its enhanced focality and weaker stimulation strength; however, previous clinical trials of MST were limited by small sample sizes. Objective: To compare the antidepressant efficacy of MST vs ultrabrief pulse right unilateral (RUL) ECT. Design, Setting, and Participants: A between-participants, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 academic hospitals from June 2007 to August 2012. Adults aged 18 to 90 years who were referred for treatment with ECT, had a major depressive episode in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder, and had a baseline 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-24) total score of 18 or higher were included. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with MST or ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT. After the treatment course, patients were naturalistically followed up for up to 6 months to examine the durability of clinical effects. Interventions: Treatment with MST, applied at 100 Hz at 100% of the maximum device power for 10 seconds, or ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT, applied at 6 times seizure threshold. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change from baseline in HDRS-24 total score, with patients followed up for up to 6 months. A reduction of at least 50% in the HDRS-24 score indicated response, and at least a 60% decrease in the HDRS-24 score and a total score of 8 or less indicated remission. Results: Of the 73 participants (41 [56.2%] female; mean [SD] age, 48 [14.1] years), 35 were randomized to MST and 38 to ECT. Among them, 53 (72.6%) were classified as completers (29 in the MST group and 24 in the ECT group). Both MST and ECT demonstrated clinically meaningful antidepressant effects. In the intent-to-treat sample, 18 participants (51.4%) in the MST group and 16 (42.1%) in the ECT group met response criteria; 13 (37.1%) in the MST group and 10 (26.3%) in the ECT group met remission criteria. Among completers, 17 of 29 (58.6%) in the MST group and 15 of 24 (62.5%) in the ECT group met response criteria; 13 of 29 (44.8%) in the MST group and 10 of 24 (41.7%) in the ECT group met remission criteria. There was no significant difference between MST and ECT for either response or remission rates. However, the mean (SD) number of treatments needed to achieve remission was 9.0 (3.1) with MST and 6.7 (3.3) with ECT, a difference of 2.3 treatments (t71.0 = 3.1; P =.003). Both MST and ECT showed a sustained benefit over a 6-month follow-up period, again with no significant difference between them. Compared with MST, ECT had significantly longer time to orientation after treatment (threshold level: F1,56 = 10.0; P =.003) and greater severity of subjective adverse effects, particularly in the physical and cognitive domains. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that the efficacy of MST was indistinguishable from that of ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT, the safest form of ECT currently available. These results support the continued development of MST and provide evidence for advantages relative to state-of-the-art ECT. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00488748 This randomized clinical trial investigates whether magnetic seizure therapy is as efficacious as ultrabrief pulse right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy in treating patients with major depressive episode. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Subanesthetic ketamine is a rapidly acting antidepressant that has also been found to improve neurocognitive performance in adult patients with treatment resistant depression (TRD). Provisional evidence suggests that ketamine may induce change in hippocampal volume and that larger pre-treatment volumes might be related to positive clinical outcomes. Here, we examine the effects of serial ketamine treatment on hippocampal subfield volumes and relationships between pre-treatment subfield volumes and changes in depressive symptoms and neurocognitive performance. Methods: Patients with TRD (N = 66; 31M/35F; age = 39.5 ± 11.1 years) received four ketamine infusions (0.5 mg/kg) over 2 weeks. Structural MRI scans, the National Institutes of Health Toolbox (NIHT) Cognition Battery, and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) were collected at baseline, 24 h after the first and fourth ketamine infusion, and 5 weeks post-treatment. The same data was collected for 32 age and sex matched healthy controls (HC; 17M/15F; age = 35.03 ± 12.2 years) at one timepoint. Subfield (CA1/CA3/CA4/subiculum/molecular layer/GC-ML-DG) volumes corrected for whole hippocampal volume were compared across time, between treatment remitters/non-remitters, and patients and HCs using linear regression models. Relationships between pre-treatment subfield volumes and clinical and cognitive outcomes were also tested. All analyses included Bonferroni correction. Results: Patients had smaller pre-treatment left CA4 (p = 0.004) and GC.ML. DG (p = 0.004) volumes compared to HC, but subfield volumes remained stable following ketamine treatment (all p > 0.05). Pre-treatment or change in hippocampal subfield volumes over time showed no variation by remission status nor correlated with depressive symptoms (p > 0.05). Pre-treatment left CA4 was negatively correlated with improved processing speed after single (p = 0.0003) and serial ketamine infusion (p = 0.005). Left GC.ML.DG also negatively correlated with improved processing speed after single infusion (p = 0.001). Right pretreatment CA3 positively correlated with changes in list sorting working memory at follow-up (p = 0.0007). Discussion: These results provide new evidence to suggest that hippocampal subfield volumes at baseline may present a biomarker for neurocognitive improvement following ketamine treatment in TRD. In contrast, pre-treatment subfield volumes and changes in subfield volumes showed negligible relationships with ketamine-related improvements in depressive symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]