Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:and purpose: Fatigue is among the most common persistent symptoms following post-acute sequelae of Sars-COV-2 infection (PASC). The current study investigated the potential therapeutic effects of High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) associated with rehabilitation program for the management of PASC-related fatigue. METHODS:Seventy patients with PASC-related fatigue were randomized to receive 3 mA or sham HD-tDCS targeting the left primary motor cortex (M1) for 30 min paired with a rehabilitation program. Each patient underwent 10 sessions (2 sessions/week) over five weeks. Fatigue was measured as the primary outcome before and after the intervention using the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS). Pain level, anxiety severity and quality of life were secondary outcomes assessed, respectively, through the McGill Questionnaire, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and WHOQOL. RESULTS:Active HD-tDCS resulted in significantly greater reduction in fatigue compared to sham HD-tDCS (mean group MFIS reduction of 22.11 points vs 10.34 points). Distinct effects of HD-tDCS were observed in fatigue domains with greater effect on cognitive (mean group difference 8.29 points; effect size 1.1; 95% CI 3.56-13.01; P < .0001) and psychosocial domains (mean group difference 2.37 points; effect size 1.2; 95% CI 1.34-3.40; P < .0001), with no significant difference between the groups in the physical subscale (mean group difference 0.71 points; effect size 0.1; 95% CI 4.47-5.90; P = .09). Compared to sham, the active HD-tDCS group also had a significant reduction in anxiety (mean group difference 4.88; effect size 0.9; 95% CI 1.93-7.84; P < .0001) and improvement in quality of life (mean group difference 14.80; effect size 0.7; 95% CI 7.87-21.73; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in pain (mean group difference -0.74; no effect size; 95% CI 3.66-5.14; P = .09). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:An intervention with M1 targeted HD-tDCS paired with a rehabilitation program was effective in reducing fatigue and anxiety, while improving quality of life in people with PASC.

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.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Cognitive involvement in pediatric multiple sclerosis (MS) relative to adult MS is less defined. This study advances our understanding by measuring cognitive performances in pediatric MS, adult MS, and pediatric healthy controls. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Consecutive relapsing pediatric MS participants from the United States Network of Pediatric MS Centers were compared with pediatric healthy controls and adults with relapsing MS. Participants were compared on two screening batteries: the Brief International Cognitive Assessment for MS and the Cogstate Brief Battery. Results were transformed to age-normative z scores. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: < 0.001). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Pediatric MS patients do not differ from healthy pediatric controls on cognitive screens but perform better than adults with MS.

Introduction: Treatment of pediatric MS is challenging as most disease-modifying therapies (DMT) lack efficacy data in children, including switching from first-line platform DMT. Objectives/Aims: To assess real-world effectiveness of switching DMT in patients initially treated with platform injectable DMT on disease activity in pediatric MS and CIS.
Method(s): This is a cohort study of children with MS/CIS at 12 clinics in the US Network of Pediatric MS Centers, who received initial therapy with platform injectable (interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate) and switched to the other class of injectable, oral (dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, teriflunomide) or infusion (natalizumab, rituximab, ocrelizumab, alemtuzumab) DMT. Relapse rate after switch to platform injectable, oral or infusion DMT was modeled with negative binomial regression, adjusted for pre-identified confounders (age at onset, disease duration, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index, first event severity and localization, baseline annualized relapse rate (ARR), MRI new T2 lesions, MRI gadolinium-enhancing lesions, EDSS).
Result(s): 212 children switched DMT before 18 years (67% female, 95% MS). Of these, 93 switched from injectable to injectable, 76 injectable to oral and 43 injectable to infusion. Compared to switching to another injectable, switchers to oral or infusion were older at onset (injectable 12.3 years vs oral 13.5, infusion 14.2) and switch date (injectable 14.6 years vs oral 16, infusion 15.7), and switchers to infusion were more likely to have new enhancing lesions prior to switch (injectable 45% vs oral 28%, infusion 67%). Other baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups. In adjusted analysis, compared to switchers from injectable to injectable (ARR 0.59, 95%CI 0.28-1.26), relapse rates were lower for switchers from injectable to oral (ARR 0.22, 95%CI 0.10-0.48; rate ratio 0.38, 95%CI 0.21-0.69) and injectable to infusion (ARR 0.15, 95%CI 0.06-0.35; rate ratio 0.25, 95%CI 0.11-0.53) (p < 0.001). The adjusted number needed to treat to prevent 1 relapse with oral over injectable was 2.70 and infusion over injectable was 2.22.
Conclusion(s): Switching from platform injectable to oral or infusion as opposed to another injectable DMT led to better disease activity control of pediatric MS. Long-term safety data for oral and infusion DMTs are required

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.

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.

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.