Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease with Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Cognitive Training: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background and Purpose

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been examined as a potential treatment for many neurological disorders. High-frequency rTMS in particular improves cognitive functions such as verbal fluency and memory. This study explored the effect of rTMS combined with cognitive training (rTMS-COG) on patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Methods

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed with 27 AD patients (18 and 8 in the treatment and sham groups, respectively, and 1 drop-out). The participants were categorized into mild [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score=21-26] and moderate (MMSE score=18-20) AD groups. The rTMS protocols were configured for six cortical areas (both dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal somatosensory associated cortices and Broca's and Wernicke's areas; 10 Hz, 90-110% intensity, and 5 days/week for 6 weeks). Neuropsychological assessments were performed using the AD Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), and MMSE before, immediately after, and 6 weeks after the end of rTMS-COG treatment.

Results

Data from 26 AD patients were analyzed in this study. There was no significant interactive effect of time between the groups. The ADAS-cog score in the treatment group was significantly improved compared to the sham group (4.28 and 5.39 in the treatment group vs. 1.75 and 2.88 in the sham group at immediately and 6 weeks after treatment, respectively). The MMSE and CGIC scores were also improved in the treatment group. Based on subgroup analysis, the effect of rTMS-COG was superior for the mild group compared to the total patients, especially in the domains of memory and language.

Conclusions

The present results suggest that rTMS-COG represents a useful adjuvant therapy with cholinesterase inhibitors, particularly during the mild stage of AD. The effect of rTMS-COG was remarkable in the memory and language domains, which are severely affected by AD.

Related collections

Most cited references 27

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer's disease.

Jacqueline S Birks (2016)

Since the introduction of the first cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) in 1997, most clinicians and probably most patients would consider the cholinergic drugs, donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, to be the first line pharmacotherapy for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.The drugs have slightly different pharmacological properties, but they all work by inhibiting the breakdown of acetylcholine, an important neurotransmitter associated with memory, by blocking the enzyme acetylcholinesterase. The most that these drugs could achieve is to modify the manifestations of Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane reviews of each ChEI for Alzheimer's disease have been completed (Birks 2005, Birks 2005b and Loy 2005). Despite the evidence from the clinical studies and the intervening clinical experience the debate on whether ChEIs are effective continues. To assess the effects of donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine in people with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register was searched using the terms 'donepezil', 'E2020' , 'Aricept' , galanthamin* galantamin* reminyl, rivastigmine, exelon, "ENA 713" and ENA-713 on 12 June 2005. This Register contains up-to-date records of all major health care databases and many ongoing trial databases. All unconfounded, blinded, randomized trials in which treatment with a ChEI was compared with placebo or another ChEI for patients with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Data were extracted by one reviewer (JSB), pooled where appropriate and possible, and the pooled treatment effects, or the risks and benefits of treatment estimated. The results of 13 randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trials demonstrate that treatment for periods of 6 months and one year, with donepezil, galantamine or rivastigmine at the recommended dose for people with mild, moderate or severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease produced improvements in cognitive function, on average -2.7 points (95%CI -3.0 to -2.3), in the midrange of the 70 point ADAS-Cog Scale. Study clinicians blind to other measures rated global clinical state more positively in treated patients. Benefits of treatment were also seen on measures of activities of daily living and behaviour. None of these treatment effects are large. There is nothing to suggest the effects are less for patients with severe dementia or mild dementia, although there is very little evidence for other than mild to moderate dementia.More patients leave ChEI treatment groups, approximately 29 %, on account of adverse events than leave the placebo groups (18%). There is evidence of more adverse events in total in the patients treated with a ChEI than with placebo. Although many types of adverse event were reported, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, were significantly more frequent in the ChEI groups than in placebo. There are four studies, all supported by one of the pharmaceutical companies, in which two ChEIs were compared, two studies of donepezil compared with galantamine, and two of donepezil compared with rivastigmine. In three studies the patients were not blinded to treatment, only the fourth, DON vs RIV/Bullock is double blind. Two of the studies provide little evidence, they are of 12 weeks duration, which is barely long enough to complete the drug titration. There is no evidence from DON vs GAL/Wilcock of a treatment difference between donepezil and galantamine at 52 weeks for cognition, activities of daily living, the numbers who leave the trial before the end of treatment, the number who suffer any adverse event, or any specific adverse event. There is no evidence from DON vs RIV/Bullock of a difference between donepezil and rivastigmine for cognitive function, activities of daily living and behavioural disturbance at two years. Fewer patients suffer adverse events on donepezil than rivastigmine. The three cholinesterase inhibitors are efficacious for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. It is not possible to identify those who will respond to treatment prior to treatment. There is no evidence that treatment with a ChEI is not cost effective. Despite the slight variations in the mode of action of the three cholinesterase inhibitors there is no evidence of any differences between them with respect to efficacy. There appears to be less adverse effects associated with donepezil compared with rivastigmine. It may be that galantamine and rivastigmine match donepezil in tolerability if a careful and gradual titration routine over more than three months is used. Titration with donepezil is more straightforward and the lower dose may be worth consideration.

0 comments Cited 317 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Daily left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy for major depressive disorder: a sham-controlled randomized trial.

Mark S. George, Sarah Lisanby, David Avery … (2010)

Daily left prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been studied as a potential treatment for depression, but previous work had mixed outcomes and did not adequately mask sham conditions. To test whether daily left prefrontal rTMS safely and effectively treats major depressive disorder. Prospective, multisite, randomized, active sham-controlled (1:1 randomization), duration-adaptive design with 3 weeks of daily weekday treatment (fixed-dose phase) followed by continued blinded treatment for up to another 3 weeks in improvers. Four US university hospital clinics. Approximately 860 outpatients were screened, yielding 199 antidepressant drug-free patients with unipolar nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. We delivered rTMS to the left prefrontal cortex at 120% motor threshold (10 Hz, 4-second train duration, and 26-second intertrain interval) for 37.5 minutes (3000 pulses per session) using a figure-eight solid-core coil. Sham rTMS used a similar coil with a metal insert blocking the magnetic field and scalp electrodes that delivered matched somatosensory sensations. In the intention-to-treat sample (n = 190), remission rates were compared for the 2 treatment arms using logistic regression and controlling for site, treatment resistance, age, and duration of the current depressive episode. Patients, treaters, and raters were effectively masked. Minimal adverse effects did not differ by treatment arm, with an 88% retention rate (90% sham and 86% active). Primary efficacy analysis revealed a significant effect of treatment on the proportion of remitters (14.1% active rTMS and 5.1% sham) (P = .02). The odds of attaining remission were 4.2 times greater with active rTMS than with sham (95% confidence interval, 1.32-13.24). The number needed to treat was 12. Most remitters had low antidepressant treatment resistance. Almost 30% of patients remitted in the open-label follow-up (30.2% originally active and 29.6% sham). Daily left prefrontal rTMS as monotherapy produced statistically significant and clinically meaningful antidepressant therapeutic effects greater than sham. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00149838.

0 comments Cited 250 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in neurology.

M. Kobayashi, Alvaro Pascual-Leone (2003)

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive tool for the electrical stimulation of neural tissue, including cerebral cortex, spinal roots, and cranial and peripheral nerves. TMS can be applied as single pulses of stimulation, pairs of stimuli separated by variable intervals to the same or different brain areas, or as trains of repetitive stimuli at various frequencies. Single stimuli can depolarise neurons and evoke measurable effects. Trains of stimuli (repetitive TMS) can modify excitability of the cerebral cortex at the stimulated site and also at remote areas along functional anatomical connections. TMS might provide novel insights into the pathophysiology of the neural circuitry underlying neurological and psychiatric disorders, be developed into clinically useful diagnostic and prognostic tests, and have therapeutic uses in various diseases. This potential is supported by the available studies, but more work is needed to establish the role of TMS in clinical neurology.

0 comments Cited 149 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Clin Neurol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Clin Neurol

Journal ID (publisher-id): JCN

Title: Journal of Clinical Neurology (Seoul, Korea)

Publisher: Korean Neurological Association

ISSN (Print): 1738-6586

ISSN (Electronic): 2005-5013

Publication date (Print): January 2016

Publication date (Electronic): 11 September 2015

Volume: 12

Issue: 1

Pages: 57-64

Affiliations

[a ]Department of Neurology, Cognitive Neuroscience Section, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

[b ]Cognitive Neuroscience Section, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

Author notes

Correspondence: Ae Young Lee, MD, PhD. Department of Neurology, Chungnam National Univeristy Hospital, 282 Munhwa-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon 35015, Korea. Tel +82-42-280-7807, Fax +82-42-252-8654, aelee@ 123456cnu.ac.kr

Article

DOI: 10.3988/jcn.2016.12.1.57

PMC ID: 4712287

PubMed ID: 26365021

SO-VID: 02cef565-f013-4281-855b-7cf86dfaa3c9

License:

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

History

Date received : 13 February 2015

Date revision received : 17 June 2015

Date accepted : 19 June 2015

Funding

Funded by: Chungnam National University Hospital;

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 63

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 296

See all reference authors

Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease with Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Combined with Cognitive Training: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Read this article at

Abstract

Background and Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Related collections

Alternative approaches to Alzheimer's Disease

Most cited references 27

Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer's disease.

Daily left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation therapy for major depressive disorder: a sham-controlled randomized trial.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in neurology.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 330

Cited by 63

Most referenced authors 296