Nigel I Kennedy1, Won Hee Lee1, Sophia Frangou2. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA. Electronic address: sophia.frangou@mssm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have shown promise in the treatment of schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the efficacy of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCT) of tDCS and rTMS for the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia and identify significant moderators relating to patient-related features and stimulation parameters. METHODS: Systemic review and meta-analyses of the relevant literature published until February 1st, 2017 to assess treatment efficacy and quantify the contribution of potential moderator variables. RESULTS: We identified 7 RCTs on tDCS (involving 105 participants) and 30 RCTs on rTMS (involving 768 participants). Compared to sham, tDCS improved all symptom dimensions but the effect reached significance for negative symptoms (Hedge's g = -0.63, p = 0.02). Efficacy for positive but not negative symptoms was linearly associated with cumulative tDCS stimulation. Compared to sham, rTMS improved hallucinations (Hedge's g = -0.51, p < 0.001) and negative symptoms (Hedge's g = -0.49, p = 0.01) but was associated with modest, non-significant worsening of positive symptoms (Hedge's g = 0.28, p = 0.13). Higher pulse frequency (>10 Hz), motor threshold intensity of 110%, left prefrontal cortical treatment site and trial duration over 3 weeks were associated with improvement in negative symptoms and worsening in positive symptoms (all p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The symptom dimensions in schizophrenia may respond differently to brain stimulation interventions in a way that may reflect the interaction between disease- and treatment-related mechanisms. Our findings underscore the need for further research into patient selection prior to treatment assignment and greater refinement of stimulation protocols.
BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have shown promise in the treatment of schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the efficacy of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCT) of tDCS and rTMS for the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia and identify significant moderators relating to patient-related features and stimulation parameters. METHODS: Systemic review and meta-analyses of the relevant literature published until February 1st, 2017 to assess treatment efficacy and quantify the contribution of potential moderator variables. RESULTS: We identified 7 RCTs on tDCS (involving 105 participants) and 30 RCTs on rTMS (involving 768 participants). Compared to sham, tDCS improved all symptom dimensions but the effect reached significance for negative symptoms (Hedge's g = -0.63, p = 0.02). Efficacy for positive but not negative symptoms was linearly associated with cumulative tDCS stimulation. Compared to sham, rTMS improved hallucinations (Hedge's g = -0.51, p < 0.001) and negative symptoms (Hedge's g = -0.49, p = 0.01) but was associated with modest, non-significant worsening of positive symptoms (Hedge's g = 0.28, p = 0.13). Higher pulse frequency (>10 Hz), motor threshold intensity of 110%, left prefrontal cortical treatment site and trial duration over 3 weeks were associated with improvement in negative symptoms and worsening in positive symptoms (all p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The symptom dimensions in schizophrenia may respond differently to brain stimulation interventions in a way that may reflect the interaction between disease- and treatment-related mechanisms. Our findings underscore the need for further research into patient selection prior to treatment assignment and greater refinement of stimulation protocols.
Authors: Leandro da Costa Lane Valiengo; Stephan Goerigk; Pedro Caldana Gordon; Frank Padberg; Mauricio Henriques Serpa; Stephanie Koebe; Leonardo Afonso Dos Santos; Roger Alberto Marcos Lovera; Juliana Barbosa de Carvalho; Martinus van de Bilt; Acioly L T Lacerda; Helio Elkis; Wagner Farid Gattaz; Andre R Brunoni Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Mario Maj; Jim van Os; Marc De Hert; Wolfgang Gaebel; Silvana Galderisi; Michael F Green; Sinan Guloksuz; Philip D Harvey; Peter B Jones; Dolores Malaspina; Patrick McGorry; Jouko Miettunen; Robin M Murray; Keith H Nuechterlein; Victor Peralta; Graham Thornicroft; Ruud van Winkel; Joseph Ventura Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Mei Hong Xiu; Heng Yong Guan; Jian Min Zhao; Ke Qiang Wang; Yan Fen Pan; Xiu Ru Su; Yu Hong Wang; Jin Ming Guo; Long Jiang; Hong Yu Liu; Shi Guang Sun; Hao Ran Wu; Han Song Geng; Xiao Wen Liu; Hui Jing Yu; Bao Chun Wei; Xi Po Li; Tammy Trinh; Shu Ping Tan; Xiang Yang Zhang Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 9.306