Search

Sharing human brain data can yield scientific benefits, but because of various disincentives, only a fraction of these data is currently shared. We profile three successful data-sharing experiences from the NIH BRAIN Initiative Research Opportunities in Humans (ROH) Consortium and demonstrate benefits to data producers and to users.

ObjectiveDespite advances in the treatment of psychiatric diseases, currently available therapies do not provide sufficient and durable relief for as many as 30-40% of patients. Neuromodulation, including deep brain stimulation (DBS), has emerged as a potential therapy for persistent disabling disease, however it has not yet gained widespread adoption. In 2016, the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery (ASSFN) convened a meeting with leaders in the field to discuss a roadmap for the path forward. A follow-up meeting in 2022 aimed to review the current state of the field and to identify critical barriers and milestones for progress.DesignThe ASSFN convened a meeting on June 3, 2022 in Atlanta, Georgia and included leaders from the fields of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry along with colleagues from industry, government, ethics, and law. The goal was to review the current state of the field, assess for advances or setbacks in the interim six years, and suggest a future path forward. The participants focused on five areas of interest: interdisciplinary engagement, regulatory pathways and trial design, disease biomarkers, ethics of psychiatric surgery, and resource allocation/prioritization. The proceedings are summarized here.ConclusionThe field of surgical psychiatry has made significant progress since our last expert meeting. Although weakness and threats to the development of novel surgical therapies exist, the identified strengths and opportunities promise to move the field through methodically rigorous and biologically-based approaches. The experts agree that ethics, law, patient engagement, and multidisciplinary teams will be critical to any potential growth in this area.

The deep brain stimulation (DBS) Think Tank X was held on August 17-19, 2022 in Orlando FL. The session organizers and moderators were all women with the theme women in neuromodulation. Dr. Helen Mayberg from Mt. Sinai, NY was the keynote speaker. She discussed milestones and her experiences in developing depression DBS. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging DBS technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank X speakers was that DBS has continued to expand in scope however several indications have reached the "trough of disillusionment." DBS for depression was considered as "re-emerging" and approaching a slope of enlightenment. DBS for depression will soon re-enter clinical trials. The group estimated that globally more than 244,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. This year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia, and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, closed loop DBS, DBS tele-health, neuroethics, lesion therapy, interventional psychiatry, and adaptive DBS.

The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for treating Parkinsons disease has led to its application to several other disorders, including treatment-resistant depression. Results with DBS for treatment-resistant depression have been heterogeneous, with inconsistencies largely driven by incomplete understanding of the brain networks regulating mood, especially on an individual basis. We report results from the first subject treated with DBS for treatment-resistant depression using an approach that incorporates intracranial recordings to personalize understanding of network behavior and its response to stimulation. These recordings enabled calculation of individually optimized DBS stimulation parameters using a novel inverse solution approach. In the ensuing double-blind, randomized phase incorporating these bespoke parameter sets, DBS led to remission of symptoms and dramatic improvement in quality of life. Results from this initial case demonstrate the feasibility of this personalized platform, which may be used to improve surgical neuromodulation for a vast array of neurologic and psychiatric disorders.

Objective.Therapeutic efficacy of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in both established and emerging indications, is highly dependent on accurate lead placement and optimized clinical programming. The latter relies on clinicians experience to search among available sets of stimulation parameters and can be limited by the time constraints of clinical practice. Recent innovations in device technology have expanded the number of possible electrode configurations and parameter sets available to clinicians, amplifying the challenge of time constraints. We hypothesize that patient specific neuroimaging data can effectively assist the clinical programming using automated algorithms.Approach.This paper introduces the DBS Illumina 3D algorithm as a tool which uses patient-specific imaging to find stimulation settings that optimizes activating a target area while minimizing the stimulation of areas outside the target that could result in unknown or undesired side effects. This approach utilizes preoperative neuroimaging data paired with the postoperative reconstruction of the lead trajectory to search the available stimulation space and identify optimized stimulation parameters. We describe the application of this algorithm in three patients with treatment-resistant depression who underwent bilateral implantation of DBS in subcallosal cingulate cortex and ventral capsule/ventral striatum using tractography optimized targeting with an imaging defined target previously described.Main results.Compared to the stimulation settings selected by the clinicians (informed by anatomy), stimulation settings produced by the algorithm that achieved similar or greater target coverage, produced a significantly smaller stimulation area that spilled outside the target (P= 0.002).Significance. The DBS Illumina 3D algorithm is seamlessly integrated with the clinician programmer software and effectively and rapidly assists clinicians with the analysis of image based anatomy, and provides a starting point to search the highly complex stimulation parameter space and arrive at the stimulation settings that optimize activating a target area.

BackgroundThe efficacy of psychiatric DBS is thought to be driven by the connectivity of stimulation targets with mood-relevant fronto-temporal networks, which is typically evaluated using diffusion-weighted tractography.ObjectiveLeverage intracranial electrophysiology recordings to better predict the circuit-wide effects of neuromodulation to white matter targets. We hypothesize strong convergence between tractography-predicted structural connectivity and stimulation-induced electrophysiological responses.MethodsEvoked potentials were elicited by single-pulse stimulation to two common DBS targets for treatment-resistant depression - the subcallosal cingulate (SCC) and ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VCVS) - in two patients undergoing DBS with stereo-electroencephalographic (sEEG) monitoring. Evoked potentials were compared with predicted structural connectivity between DBS leads and sEEG contacts using probabilistic, patient-specific diffusion-weighted tractography.ResultsEvoked potentials and tractography showed strong convergence in both patients in orbitofrontal, ventromedial prefrontal, and lateral prefrontal cortices for both SCC and VCVS stimulation targets. Low convergence was found in anterior cingulate (ACC), where tractography predicted structural connectivity from SCC targets but produced no evoked potentials during SCC stimulation. Further, tractography predicted no connectivity to ACC from VCVS targets, but VCVS stimulation produced robust evoked potentials.ConclusionThe two connectivity methods showed significant convergence, but important differences emerged with respect to the ability of tractography to predict electrophysiological connectivity between SCC and VCVS to regions of the mood-related network. This multimodal approach raises intriguing implications for the use of tractography in surgical targeting and provides new data to enhance our understanding of the network-wide effects of neuromodulation.

Leveraging firsthand experience, BRAIN-funded investigators conducting intracranial human neuroscience research propose two fundamental ethical commitments: (1) maintaining the integrity of clinical care and (2) ensuring voluntariness. Principles, practices, and uncertainties related to these commitments are offered for future investigation.

DBS Think Tank IX was held on August 25-27, 2021 in Orlando FL with US based participants largely in person and overseas participants joining by video conferencing technology. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging deep brain stimulation (DBS) technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank IX speakers was that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. After collectively sharing our experiences, it was estimated that globally more than 230,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. As such, this year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, neuroethics, interventional psychiatry, adaptive DBS, neuromodulation for pain, network neuromodulation for epilepsy and neuromodulation for traumatic brain injury.

The subcallosal cingulate (SCC) area is a putative hub in the brain network underlying depression. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) targeting a particular subregion of SCC, identified as the intersection of forceps minor (FM), uncinate fasciculus (UCF), cingulum and fronto-striatal fiber bundles, may be critical to a therapeutic response in patients with severe, treatment-resistant forms of major depressive disorder (MDD). The pattern and variability of the white matter anatomy and organization within SCC has not been extensively characterized across individuals. The goal of this study is to investigate the variability of white matter bundles within the SCC that structurally connect this region with critical nodes in the depression network. Structural and diffusion data from 100 healthy subjects from the Human Connectome Project database were analyzed. Anatomically defined SCC regions were used as seeds to perform probabilistic tractography and to estimate the connectivity from the SCC to subject-specific target areas believed to be involved in the pathology of MDD including ventral striatum (VS), UCF, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). Four distinct areas of connectivity were identified within SCC across subjects: (a) postero-lateral SCC connectivity to medial temporal regions via UCF, (b) postero-medial connectivity to VS, (c) superior-medial connectivity to ACC via cingulum bundle, and (d) antero-lateral connectivity to mPFC regions via forceps minor. Assuming white matter connectivity is critical to therapeutic response, the improved anatomic understanding of SCC as well as an appreciation of the intersubject variability are critical to developing optimized therapeutic targeting for SCC DBS.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.644593.].

We estimate that 208,000 deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices have been implanted to address neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders worldwide. DBS Think Tank presenters pooled data and determined that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 providing a space where clinicians, engineers, researchers from industry and academia discuss current and emerging DBS technologies and logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The emphasis is on cutting edge research and collaboration aimed to advance the DBS field. The Eighth Annual DBS Think Tank was held virtually on September 1 and 2, 2020 (Zoom Video Communications) due to restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The meeting focused on advances in: (1) optogenetics as a tool for comprehending neurobiology of diseases and on optogenetically-inspired DBS, (2) cutting edge of emerging DBS technologies, (3) ethical issues affecting DBS research and access to care, (4) neuromodulatory approaches for depression, (5) advancing novel hardware, software and imaging methodologies, (6) use of neurophysiological signals in adaptive neurostimulation, and (7) use of more advanced technologies to improve DBS clinical outcomes. There were 178 attendees who participated in a DBS Think Tank survey, which revealed the expansion of DBS into several indications such as obesity, post-traumatic stress disorder, addiction and Alzheimer's disease. This proceedings summarizes the advances discussed at the Eighth Annual DBS Think Tank.

The Seventh Annual Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) Think Tank held on September 8th of 2019 addressed the most current: (1) use and utility of complex neurophysiological signals for development of adaptive neurostimulation to improve clinical outcomes; (2) Advancements in recent neuromodulation techniques to treat neuropsychiatric disorders; (3) New developments in optogenetics and DBS; (4) The use of augmented Virtual reality (VR) and neuromodulation; (5) commercially available technologies; and (6) ethical issues arising in and from research and use of DBS. These advances serve as both "markers of progress" and challenges and opportunities for ongoing address, engagement, and deliberation as we move to improve the functional capabilities and translational value of DBS. It is in this light that these proceedings are presented to inform the field and initiate ongoing discourse. As consistent with the intent, and spirit of this, and prior DBS Think Tanks, the overarching goal is to continue to develop multidisciplinary collaborations to rapidly advance the field and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

ImportanceDeveloping more and better diagnostic and therapeutic tools for central nervous system disorders is an ethical imperative. Human research with neural devices is important to this effort and a critical focus of the National Institutes of Health Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Despite regulations and standard practices for conducting ethical research, researchers and others seek more guidance on how to ethically conduct neural device studies. This article draws on, reviews, specifies, and interprets existing ethical frameworks, literature, and subject matter expertise to address 3 specific ethical challenges in neural devices research: analysis of risk, informed consent, and posttrial responsibilities to research participants.ObservationsResearch with humans proceeds after careful assessment of the risks and benefits. In assessing whether risks are justified by potential benefits in both invasive and noninvasive neural device research, the following categories of potential risks should be considered: those related to surgery, hardware, stimulation, research itself, privacy and security, and financial burdens. All 3 of the standard pillars of informed consent-disclosure, capacity, and voluntariness-raise challenges in neural device research. Among these challenges are the need to plan for appropriate disclosure of information about atypical and emerging risks of neural devices, a structured evaluation of capacity when that is in doubt, and preventing patients from feeling unduly pressured to participate. Researchers and funders should anticipate participants' posttrial needs linked to study participation and take reasonable steps to facilitate continued access to neural devices that benefit participants. Possible mechanisms for doing so are explored here. Depending on the study, researchers and funders may have further posttrial responsibilities.Conclusions and relevanceThis ethical analysis and points to consider may assist researchers, institutional review boards, funders, and others engaged in human neural device research.

IMPORTANCE: Developing more and better diagnostic and therapeutic tools for central nervous system disorders is an ethical imperative. Human research with neural devices is important to this effort and a critical focus of the National Institutes of Health Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Despite regulations and standard practices for conducting ethical research, researchers and others seek more guidance on how to ethically conduct neural device studies. This article draws on, reviews, specifies, and interprets existing ethical frameworks, literature, and subject matter expertise to address 3 specific ethical challenges in neural devices research: analysis of risk, informed consent, and posttrial responsibilities to research participants. OBSERVATIONS: Research with humans proceeds after careful assessment of the risks and benefits. In assessing whether risks are justified by potential benefits in both invasive and noninvasive neural device research, the following categories of potential risks should be considered: those related to surgery, hardware, stimulation, research itself, privacy and security, and financial burdens. All 3 of the standard pillars of informed consent-disclosure, capacity, and voluntariness-raise challenges in neural device research. Among these challenges are the need to plan for appropriate disclosure of information about atypical and emerging risks of neural devices, a structured evaluation of capacity when that is in doubt, and preventing patients from feeling unduly pressured to participate. Researchers and funders should anticipate participants posttrial needs linked to study participation and take reasonable steps to facilitate continued access to neural devices that benefit participants. Possible mechanisms for doing so are explored here. Depending on the study, researchers and funders may have further posttrial responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This ethical analysis and points to consider may assist researchers, institutional review boards, funders, and others engaged in human neural device research.

The annual deep brain stimulation (DBS) Think Tank aims to create an opportunity for a multidisciplinary discussion in the field of neuromodulation to examine developments, opportunities and challenges in the field. The proceedings of the Sixth Annual Think Tank recapitulate progress in applications of neurotechnology, neurophysiology, and emerging techniques for the treatment of a range of psychiatric and neurological conditions including Parkinsons disease, essential tremor, Tourette syndrome, epilepsy, cognitive disorders, and addiction. Each section of this overview provides insight about the understanding of neuromodulation for specific disease and discusses current challenges and future directions. This years report addresses key issues in implementing advanced neurophysiological techniques, evolving use of novel modulation techniques to deliver DBS, ans improved neuroimaging techniques. The proceedings also offer insights into the new era of brain network neuromodulation and connectomic DBS to define and target dysfunctional brain networks. The proceedings also focused on innovations in applications and understanding of adaptive DBS (closed-loop systems), the use and applications of optogenetics in the field of neurostimulation and the need to develop databases for DBS indications. Finally, updates on neuroethical, legal, social, and policy issues relevant to DBS research are discussed.

Chronically implantable neurostimulation devices are becoming a clinically viable option for treating patients with neurological disease and psychiatric disorders. Neurostimulation offers the ability to probe and manipulate distributed networks of interacting brain areas in dysfunctional circuits. Here, we use tools from network control theory to examine the dynamic reconfiguration of functionally interacting neuronal ensembles during targeted neurostimulation of cortical and subcortical brain structures. By integrating multimodal intracranial recordings and diffusion-weighted imaging from patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, we test hypothesized structural and functional rules that predict altered patterns of synchronized local field potentials. We demonstrate the ability to predictably reconfigure functional interactions depending on stimulation strength and location. Stimulation of areas with structurally weak connections largely modulates the functional hubness of downstream areas and concurrently propels the brain towards more difficult-to-reach dynamical states. By using focal perturbations to bridge large-scale structure, function, and markers of behavior, our findings suggest that stimulation may be tuned to influence different scales of network interactions driving cognition.

Detection of neural signatures related to pathological behavioral states could enable adaptive deep brain stimulation (DBS), a potential strategy for improving efficacy of DBS for neurological and psychiatric disorders. This approach requires identifying neural biomarkers of relevant behavioral states, a task best performed in ecologically valid environments. Here, in human participants with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) implanted with recording-capable DBS devices, we synchronized chronic ventral striatum local field potentials with relevant, disease-specific behaviors. We captured over 1,000 h of local field potentials in the clinic and at home during unstructured activity, as well as during DBS and exposure therapy. The wide range of symptom severity over which the data were captured allowed us to identify candidate neural biomarkers of OCD symptom intensity. This work demonstrates the feasibility and utility of capturing chronic intracranial electrophysiology during daily symptom fluctuations to enable neural biomarker identification, a prerequisite for future development of adaptive DBS for OCD and other psychiatric disorders. The identification of candidate neural biomarkers of obsessive-compulsive disorder symptom intensity in ecologically valid environments., Author(s): Nicole R. Provenza [sup.1] [sup.2] , Sameer A. Sheth [sup.3] , Evan M. Dastin-van Rijn [sup.1] , Raissa K. Mathura [sup.3] , Yaohan Ding [sup.4] , Gregory S. Vogt [...]

ObjectiveRefractory psychiatric disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and there is a great need for new treatments. In the last decade, investigators piloted novel deep brain stimulation (DBS)-based therapies for depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Results from recent pivotal trials of these therapies, however, did not demonstrate the degree of efficacy expected from previous smaller trials. To discuss next steps, neurosurgeons, neurologists, psychiatrists and representatives from industry convened a workshop sponsored by the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery in Chicago, Illinois, in June of 2016.DesignHere we summarise the proceedings of the workshop. Participants discussed a number of issues of importance to the community. First, we discussed how to interpret results from the recent pivotal trials of DBS for OCD and depression. We then reviewed what can be learnt from lesions and closed-loop neurostimulation. Subsequently, representatives from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and industry discussed their views on neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders. In particular, these third parties discussed their criteria for moving forward with new trials. Finally, we discussed the best way of confirming safety and efficacy of these therapies, including registries and clinical trial design. We close by discussing next steps in the journey to new neuromodulatory therapies for these devastating illnesses.ConclusionInterest and motivation remain strong for deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disease. Progress will require coordinated efforts by all stakeholders.