Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Although relatively costly and non-scalable, non-invasive neuromodulation interventions are treatment alternatives for neuropsychiatric disorders. The recent developments of highly-deployable transcranial electric stimulation (tES) systems, combined with mobile-Health technologies, could be incorporated in digital trials to overcome methodological barriers and increase equity of access. The study aims are to discuss the implementation of tES digital trials by performing a systematic scoping review and strategic process mapping, evaluate methodological aspects of tES digital trial designs, and provide Delphi-based recommendations for implementing digital trials using tES. METHODS:We convened 61 highly-productive specialists and contacted 8 tES companies to assess 71 issues related to tES digitalization readiness, and processes, barriers, advantages, and opportunities for implementing tES digital trials. Delphi-based recommendations (>60% agreement) were provided. RESULTS:The main strengths/opportunities of tES were: (i) non-pharmacological nature (92% of agreement), safety of these techniques (80%), affordability (88%), and potential scalability (78%). As for weaknesses/threats, we listed insufficient supervision (76%) and unclear regulatory status (69%). Many issues related to methodological biases did not reach consensus. Device appraisal showed moderate digitalization readiness, with high safety and potential for trial implementation, but low connectivity. CONCLUSIONS:Panelists recognized the potential of tES for scalability, generalizability, and leverage of digital trials processes; with no consensus about aspects regarding methodological biases. SIGNIFICANCE/CONCLUSIONS:We further propose and discuss a conceptual framework for exploiting shared aspects between mobile-Health tES technologies with digital trials methodology to drive future efforts for digitizing tES trials.

BACKGROUND:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe and well-tolerated noninvasive technique used for cortical excitability modulation. tDCS has been extensively investigated for its clinical applications; however further understanding of its underlying in-vivo physiological mechanisms remains a fundamental focus of current research. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:) using simultaneous MRI in healthy adults to provide a reference frame for its neurobiological mechanisms. METHODS:at three time points: pre-, during- and post- 15 minutes of 2.0 mA tDCS on left anodal dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. RESULTS:significantly increased by 5.9 % during-tDCS (175.68 ± 30.78 µmol/100g/min) compared to pre-tDCS (165.84 ± 25.32 µmol/100g/min; p = 0.0015), maintaining increased levels in post-tDCS (176.86 ± 28.58 µmol/100g/min). CONCLUSIONS:changes due to tDCS in healthy adults that may be incorporated in clinical studies to evaluate its therapeutic potential.

Background: Remotely-supervised transcranial direct current stimulation (RS-tDCS) is a telerehabilitation protocol that provides access to tDCS treatment to participants with aphasia in their homes using real-time monitoring via videoconference and overcomes barriers associated with in-person tDCS treatment of neurological disease. Aims: Two feasibility studies for participants with aphasia are presented herein that investigate (1) RS-tDCS procedural implementation, acceptability, and demand, and (2) acceptability of ten repeated consecutive RS-tDCS sessions. Methods & Procedures: Thirteen participants with aphasia were enrolled in Study 1: (1) seven participants with stroke-induced latent aphasia, (2) four participants with stroke-induced clinically diagnosed aphasia, and (3) two participants with logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA). Four supervisors (1 certified speech-language pathologist [SLP], 3 graduate SLPs-in-training) were trained to supervise RS-tDCS and also provided survey responses. All participants participated in RS-tDCS training and a virtual simulation of home delivery. Two participants with stroke-induced aphasia (1 latent aphasia, 1 clinically diagnosed aphasia) were enrolled in 10 consecutive sessions of RS-tDCS alongside computerized treatment in their home for Study 2. Outcomes & Results: This work provides preliminary evidence for the feasibility of RS-tDCS for people with stable and progressive aphasia of varying severity and typology and includes both participant and clinician perspectives. Importantly, no major barriers to use of RS-tDCS were revealed for people with aphasia, though eHelpers were required for two participants. Conclusions: This work confirms that remotely supervised at-home tDCS studies can be used to enable much-needed efficacy trials, with sufficient sample size, power, and dosing considerations, that will determine the clinical efficacy of tDCS as a treatment adjuvant to aphasia treatment.

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, races across academia and industry have been initiated to identify and develop disease modifying or preventative therapeutic strategies has been initiated. The primary focus has been on pharmacological treatment of the immune and respiratory system and the development of a vaccine. The hyperinflammatory state ("cytokine storm") observed in many cases of COVID-19 indicates a prognostically negative disease progression that may lead to respiratory distress, multiple organ failure, shock, and death. Many critically ill patients continue to be at risk for significant, long-lasting morbidity or mortality. The human immune and respiratory systems are heavily regulated by the central nervous system, and intervention in the signaling of these neural pathways may permit targeted therapeutic control of excessive inflammation and pulmonary bronchoconstriction. Several technologies, both invasive and non-invasive, are available and approved for clinical use, but have not been extensively studied in treatment of the cytokine storm in COVID-19 patients. This manuscript provides an overview of the role of the nervous system in inflammation and respiration, the current understanding of neuromodulatory techniques from preclinical and clinical studies and provides a rationale for testing non-invasive neuromodulation to modulate acute systemic inflammation and respiratory dysfunction caused by SARS-CoV-2 and potentially other pathogens. The authors of this manuscript have co-founded the International Consortium on Neuromodulation for COVID-19 to advocate for and support studies of these technologies in the current coronavirus pandemic.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe and well-tolerated noninvasive method for stimulating the brain that is rapidly developing into a treatment method for various neurological and psychiatric conditions. In particular, there is growing evidence of a therapeutic role for tDCS in ameliorating or delaying the cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD). We provide a brief overview of the current development and application status of tDCS as a nonpharmacological therapeutic method for AD and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), summarize the levels of evidence, and identify the improvements needed for clinical applications. We also suggest future directions for large-scale controlled clinical trials of tDCS in AD and MCI, and emphasize the necessity of identifying the mechanistic targets to facilitate clinical applications.

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) comprises noninvasive neuromodulation techniques that deliver low-amplitude electrical currents to targeted brain regions with the goal of modifying neural activities. Expanding evidence from the past decade, specifically using transcranial direct current simulation and transcranial alternating current stimulation, presents promising applications of tES as a treatment for psychiatric disorders. In this review, the authors discuss the basic technical aspects and mechanisms of action of tES in the context of clinical research and practice and review available evidence for its clinical use, efficacy, and safety. They also review recent advancements in use of tES for the treatment of depressive disorders, schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Findings largely support growing evidence for the safety and efficacy of tES in the treatment of patients with resistance to existing treatment options, particularly demonstrating promising treatment outcomes for depressive disorders. Future directions of tES research for optimal application in clinical settings are discussed, including the growing home-based, patient-friendly methods and the potential pairing with existing pharmacological or psychotherapeutic treatments for enhanced outcomes. Finally, neuroimaging advancements may provide more specific mapping of brain networks, aiming at more precise tES therapeutic targeting in the treatment of psychiatric disorders.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The ability to deploy transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at home is a key usability advantage to support scaling for pivotal clinical trials. We have established a home-based tDCS protocol for use in clinical trials termed remotely supervised (RS)-tDCS. OBJECTIVE:To report the tolerability and feasibility of tDCS sessions completed to date using RS-tDCS in clinical trials. METHODS:We analyzed tolerability (i.e., adverse events, AEs) reported in six Class I/II/III trials using RS-tDCS to study symptom outcomes over 10 to 60 daily applications. Across the six clinical trials, 308 participants (18-78 years old) completed an average of 23 sessions for a total of 6779 RS-tDCS administrations. The majority of participants were diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, and open-label trials included those diagnosed with a range of other conditions (e.g., Parkinson's disease, post-stroke aphasia, traumatic brain injury, cerebellar ataxia), with minimum-to-severe neurologic disability. Clinical trial feasibility (i.e., treatment fidelity and blinding integrity) was examined using two Class I randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS:No serious AEs occurred. Across administrations, three sessions (0.04%) were aborted due to discomfort, but no participant discontinued due to tolerability. The AEs most commonly reported by participants were tingling (68%), itching (41%) and warmth sensation (42%) at the electrode site, and these were equally reported in active and sham tDCS conditions. The two Class I RCTs resulted in rapid enrollment, high fidelity to treatment completion, and blinding integrity. CONCLUSIONS:At-home RS-tDCS is tolerable, including when used over extended periods of time. Home-based RS-tDCS is feasible and can enable Class I tDCS clinical trial designs.

BACKGROUND:The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity with disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains unclear, with some studies demonstrating increased risks of infection with B-cell-depleting (anti-CD20) therapies and severity, while others fail to observe an association. Most existing studies are limited by a reliance on 'numerator' data (i.e., COVID-19 cases) only. OBJECTIVE:To assess the risks of COVID-19 by DMT, this study aimed to assess both 'numerator' (patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection) and 'denominator' data (all patients treated with DMTs of interest) to determine if any DMTs impart an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or disease severity. METHODS:We systematically reviewed charts and queried patients during clinic encounters in the NYU MS Comprehensive Care Center (MSCCC) for evidence of COVID-19 in all patients who were on the most commonly used DMTs in our clinic (sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1P) modulators (fingolimod/siponimod), rituximab, ocrelizumab, fumarates (dimethyl fumarate/diroximel fumarate), and natalizumab). COVID-19 status was determined by clinical symptoms (CDC case definition) and laboratory testing where available (SARS-CoV-2 PCR, SARS-CoV-2 IgG). Multivariable analyses were conducted to determine predictors of infection and severe disease (hospitalization or death) using SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals per DMT group and all individuals on a given DMT as denominator. RESULTS:We identified 1,439 MS patients on DMTs of interest, of which 230 had lab-confirmed (n = 173; 75.2%) or suspected (n = 57; 24.8%) COVID-19. Infection was most frequent in those on rituximab (35/138; 25.4%), followed by fumarates (39/217; 18.0%), S1P modulators (43/250; 17.2%), natalizumab (36/245; 14.7%), and ocrelizumab (77/589; 13.1%). There were 14 hospitalizations and 2 deaths. No DMT was found to be significantly associated with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Rituximab was a predictor of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 6.7; 95% CI 1.1-41.7) but did not reach statistical significance when the entire patient population on DMT was used (OR 2.8; 95% CI 0.6-12.2). No other DMT was associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS:Analysis of COVID-19 risk among all patients on the commonly used DMTs did not demonstrate increased risk of infection with any DMT. Rituximab was associated with increased risk for severe disease.