Michael Freedberg1,2, Jack A Reeves1, Andrew C Toader3, Molly S Hermiller4, Eunhee Kim5, Dietrich Haubenberger1, Ying Kuen Cheung6, Joel L Voss4,7,8,9, Eric M Wassermann1. 1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Behavioral Neurology Unit, MD, USA. 2. Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Weill Cornell/Rockefeller/Sloan-Kettering Tri-Institutional MD-PhD Program, New York, NY, USA. 4. Northwestern University Interdepartmental Neuroscience Program, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 5. Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, Merck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. 6. Department of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 7. Ken and Ruth Davee Department of Neurology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 8. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. 9. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can cause potentially useful changes in brain functional connectivity (FC), but the number of treatment sessions required is unknown. We applied the continual reassessment method (CRM), a Bayesian, adaptive, dose-finding procedure to a rTMS paradigm in an attempt to answer this question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample size was predetermined at 15 subjects and the cohort size was set with three individuals (i.e., five total cohorts). In a series of consecutive daily sessions, we delivered rTMS to the left posterior parietal cortex and measured resting-state FC with fMRI in a predefined hippocampal network in the left hemisphere. The session number for each successive cohort was determined by the CRM algorithm. We set a response criterion of a 0.028 change in FC between the hippocampus and the parietal cortex, which was equal to the increase seen in 87.5% of participants in a previous study using five sessions. RESULTS: A ≥criterion change was observed in 9 of 15 participants. The CRM indicated that greater than four sessions are required to produce the criterion change reliably in future studies. CONCLUSIONS: The CRM can be adapted for rTMS dose finding when a reliable outcome measure, such as FC, is available. The minimum effective dose needed to produce a criterion increase in FC in our hippocampal network of interest at 87.5% efficacy was estimated to be greater than four sessions. This study is the first demonstration of a Bayesian, adaptive method to explore a rTMS parameter.
OBJECTIVE: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can cause potentially useful changes in brain functional connectivity (FC), but the number of treatment sessions required is unknown. We applied the continual reassessment method (CRM), a Bayesian, adaptive, dose-finding procedure to a rTMS paradigm in an attempt to answer this question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample size was predetermined at 15 subjects and the cohort size was set with three individuals (i.e., five total cohorts). In a series of consecutive daily sessions, we delivered rTMS to the left posterior parietal cortex and measured resting-state FC with fMRI in a predefined hippocampal network in the left hemisphere. The session number for each successive cohort was determined by the CRM algorithm. We set a response criterion of a 0.028 change in FC between the hippocampus and the parietal cortex, which was equal to the increase seen in 87.5% of participants in a previous study using five sessions. RESULTS: A ≥criterion change was observed in 9 of 15 participants. The CRM indicated that greater than four sessions are required to produce the criterion change reliably in future studies. CONCLUSIONS: The CRM can be adapted for rTMS dose finding when a reliable outcome measure, such as FC, is available. The minimum effective dose needed to produce a criterion increase in FC in our hippocampal network of interest at 87.5% efficacy was estimated to be greater than four sessions. This study is the first demonstration of a Bayesian, adaptive method to explore a rTMS parameter.
Authors: Giacomo Koch; Sonia Bonnì; Maria Concetta Pellicciari; Elias P Casula; Matteo Mancini; Romina Esposito; Viviana Ponzo; Silvia Picazio; Francesco Di Lorenzo; Laura Serra; Caterina Motta; Michele Maiella; Camillo Marra; Mara Cercignani; Alessandro Martorana; Carlo Caltagirone; Marco Bozzali Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Deanna M Barch; Gregory C Burgess; Michael P Harms; Steven E Petersen; Bradley L Schlaggar; Maurizio Corbetta; Matthew F Glasser; Sandra Curtiss; Sachin Dixit; Cindy Feldt; Dan Nolan; Edward Bryant; Tucker Hartley; Owen Footer; James M Bjork; Russ Poldrack; Steve Smith; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Abraham Z Snyder; David C Van Essen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Adam Steel; Sunbin Song; Devin Bageac; Kristine M Knutson; Aysha Keisler; Ziad S Saad; Stephen J Gotts; Eric M Wassermann; Leonora Wilkinson Journal: Cortex Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 4.027
Authors: Michael Freedberg; Catherine A Cunningham; Cynthia M Fioriti; Jorge Murillo; Jack A Reeves; Paul A Taylor; Joelle E Sarlls; Eric M Wassermann Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 6.556