Juliana Corlier1, Linda L Carpenter2, Andrew C Wilson3, Eric Tirrell2, A Polly Gobin2, Brian Kavanaugh4, Andrew F Leuchter3. 1. TMS Clinical and Research Program, Neuromodulation Division, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: corlier@ucla.edu. 2. Butler Hospital Mood Disorders Research Program and Neuromodulation Research Facility, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. 3. TMS Clinical and Research Program, Neuromodulation Division, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. E. P. Bradley Hospital, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The individual α frequency (IAF) has been associated with the outcome of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), but the association has been inconsistent. HYPOTHESIS: Proximity of IAF to the stimulation frequency, rather than the value of IAF per se, is associated with outcome for patients receiving 10 Hz rTMS. METHODS: We examined the relationships between IAF, rTMS stimulation frequency, and treatment outcome in 147 patients. All patients initially received 10 Hz rTMS unilateral treatment delivered to left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (10UL), with subsets of patients changed to unilateral 5 Hz to left DLPFC (5UL) or sequential bilateral (SB) stimulation (10 Hz/1Hz) to left and right DLPFC based upon worsening symptoms with or intolerance of 10UL. Outcome was percent change in total score on the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (IDS-SR) scale from pre-treatment baseline to the 30th treatment. IAF values and absolute difference between IAF and 10 Hz (|IAF-10Hz|) were examined in relation to outcome for the overall sample and for each stimulation group separately. RESULTS: There was no correlation between IAF value, or |IAF-10Hz| and outcome in the overall sample. ANCOVA showed a significant interaction between IAF measures and treatment type. Post-hoc analyses revealed that IAF and |IAF-10Hz| were both significantly associated with degree of improvement (IDS-SR % change) for patients who received 10UL (P < 0.01) but not 5UL or SB stimulation. There was a trend-level difference in IAF between responders and non-responders only within the 10 Hz group, but not within the other treatment groups (n.s.). For the 10UL group, membership in the highest IAF quartile was associated with significantly greater clinical improvement than membership in the lowest IAF quartile (p = 0.0034). CONCLUSIONS: IAF measures were associated with clinical outcome of patients treated with 10UL but not 5UL or SB rTMS treatment. This suggests that interactions between endogenous frequencies and treatment outcome may be related to the selected stimulation parameters and/or physiologic and clinical characteristics of patients who benefit from those parameters.
BACKGROUND: The individual α frequency (IAF) has been associated with the outcome of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), but the association has been inconsistent. HYPOTHESIS: Proximity of IAF to the stimulation frequency, rather than the value of IAF per se, is associated with outcome for patients receiving 10 Hz rTMS. METHODS: We examined the relationships between IAF, rTMS stimulation frequency, and treatment outcome in 147 patients. All patients initially received 10 Hz rTMS unilateral treatment delivered to left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (10UL), with subsets of patients changed to unilateral 5 Hz to left DLPFC (5UL) or sequential bilateral (SB) stimulation (10 Hz/1Hz) to left and right DLPFC based upon worsening symptoms with or intolerance of 10UL. Outcome was percent change in total score on the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (IDS-SR) scale from pre-treatment baseline to the 30th treatment. IAF values and absolute difference between IAF and 10 Hz (|IAF-10Hz|) were examined in relation to outcome for the overall sample and for each stimulation group separately. RESULTS: There was no correlation between IAF value, or |IAF-10Hz| and outcome in the overall sample. ANCOVA showed a significant interaction between IAF measures and treatment type. Post-hoc analyses revealed that IAF and |IAF-10Hz| were both significantly associated with degree of improvement (IDS-SR % change) for patients who received 10UL (P < 0.01) but not 5UL or SB stimulation. There was a trend-level difference in IAF between responders and non-responders only within the 10 Hz group, but not within the other treatment groups (n.s.). For the 10UL group, membership in the highest IAF quartile was associated with significantly greater clinical improvement than membership in the lowest IAF quartile (p = 0.0034). CONCLUSIONS: IAF measures were associated with clinical outcome of patients treated with 10UL but not 5UL or SB rTMS treatment. This suggests that interactions between endogenous frequencies and treatment outcome may be related to the selected stimulation parameters and/or physiologic and clinical characteristics of patients who benefit from those parameters.
Authors: Michael C Gold; Shiwen Yuan; Eric Tirrell; E Frances Kronenberg; Jee Won D Kang; Lauren Hindley; Mohamed Sherif; Joshua C Brown; Linda L Carpenter Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2022-01-17 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Michael K Leuchter; Benjamin M Rosenberg; Giuditta Schapira; Nicole R Wong; Andrew F Leuchter; Anastasia L McGlade; David E Krantz; Nathaniel D Ginder; Jonathan C Lee; Scott A Wilke; Reza Tadayonnejad; Jennifer Levitt; Katharine G Marder; Michelle G Craske; Marco Iacoboni Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 4.157