Charlotte L Roelofs1, Noralie Krepel2, Juliana Corlier3, Linda L Carpenter4, Paul B Fitzgerald5, Zafiris J Daskalakis6, Indira Tendolkar7, Andrew Wilson3, Jonathan Downar8, Neil W Bailey9, Daniel M Blumberger6, Fidel Vila-Rodriguez10, Andrew F Leuchter3, Martijn Arns11. 1. Research Institute Brainclinics, Brainclinics Foundation, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 2. Research Institute Brainclinics, Brainclinics Foundation, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Dept. of Cognitive Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 3. TMS Clinical and Research Program, Neuromodulation Division, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA, Dept. of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Butler Hospital Mood Disorders Research Program and Neuromodulation Research Facility, Dept. of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. 5. Epworth Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, Epworth HealthCare and Monash University Department of Psychiatry, Camberwell, VIC, Australia. 6. Dept. of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Temerty Centre for Therapeutic Brain Intervention, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Dept. of Psychiatry, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 8. Dept. of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, Epworth Centre for Innovation in Mental Health, Epworth HealthCare, VIC, Australia. 10. Non-Invasive Neurostimulation Therapies Laboratory, Dept. Psychiatry, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 11. Research Institute Brainclinics, Brainclinics Foundation, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Dept. of Cognitive Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Psychiatry, Location AMC, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: martijn@brainclinics.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to attempt to replicate the finding that the individual alpha frequency (IAF) as well as the absolute difference between IAF and 10 Hz stimulation frequency (IAF-prox) is related to treatment outcome. METHODS: Correlations were performed to investigate the relationship between IAF-prox and percentage symptom improvement in a sample of 153 patients with major depressive disorder treated with 10 Hz (N = 59) to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) or 1 Hz (N = 94) to the right DLPFC repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS). RESULTS: There was a significant negative correlation between IAF-prox and the percentage of symptom improvement only for the 10 Hz group. Curve fitting models revealed that there was a quadratic association between IAF and treatment response in the 10 Hz group, with a peak at 10 Hz IAF. CONCLUSION: The main result of Corlier and colleagues was replicated, and the findings suggest that the distance between 10 Hz stimulation frequency and the IAF may influence clinical outcome in a non-linear manner. SIGNIFICANCE: rTMS is often administered at a frequency of 10 Hz, which is the center of the EEG alpha frequency band. The results can make a significant contribution to optimizing the clinical application of rTMS.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to attempt to replicate the finding that the individual alpha frequency (IAF) as well as the absolute difference between IAF and 10 Hz stimulation frequency (IAF-prox) is related to treatment outcome. METHODS: Correlations were performed to investigate the relationship between IAF-prox and percentage symptom improvement in a sample of 153 patients with major depressive disorder treated with 10 Hz (N = 59) to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) or 1 Hz (N = 94) to the right DLPFC repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS). RESULTS: There was a significant negative correlation between IAF-prox and the percentage of symptom improvement only for the 10 Hz group. Curve fitting models revealed that there was a quadratic association between IAF and treatment response in the 10 Hz group, with a peak at 10 Hz IAF. CONCLUSION: The main result of Corlier and colleagues was replicated, and the findings suggest that the distance between 10 Hz stimulation frequency and the IAF may influence clinical outcome in a non-linear manner. SIGNIFICANCE: rTMS is often administered at a frequency of 10 Hz, which is the center of the EEG alpha frequency band. The results can make a significant contribution to optimizing the clinical application of rTMS.
Authors: Hanneke van Dijk; Guido van Wingen; Damiaan Denys; Sebastian Olbrich; Rosalinde van Ruth; Martijn Arns Journal: Sci Data Date: 2022-06-14 Impact factor: 8.501
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