Stress priming transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) enhances updating of emotional content in working memory.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting the prefrontal cortex has emerged as a valuable tool in psychiatric research. Understanding the impact of affective states, such as stress at the time of stimulation, on the efficacy of prefrontal tDCS is crucial for advancing tDCS interventions. Stress-primed tDCS, wherein stress is used as a priming agent, has the potential to modulate neural plasticity and enhance cognitive functions, particularly in emotional working memory. However, prior research using stress-primed tDCS focused solely on non-emotional working memory performance, yielding mixed results. In this sham-controlled study, we addressed this gap by investigating the effects of stress-primed bifrontal tDCS (active versus sham) on both non-emotional and emotional working memory performance. The study was conducted in 146 healthy individuals who were randomly assigned to four experimental groups. The Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) or a control variant of the test was used to induce a stress versus control state. The results showed that stress priming significantly enhanced the effects of tDCS on the updating of emotional content in working memory, as evidenced by improved accuracy. Notably, no significant effects of stress priming were found for non-emotional working memory performance. These findings highlight the importance of an individual's prior affective state in shaping their response to tDCS, especially in the context of emotional working memory.

Efficacy and acceptability of noninvasive brain stimulation for treating posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Despite its high lifetime prevalence rate and the elevated disability caused by posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), treatments exhibit modest efficacy. In consideration of the abnormal connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and amygdala in PTSD, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modalities for PTSD management have been undertaken. However, previous RCTs have reported inconsistent results. The current network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of various NIBS protocols in PTSD management. METHODS: We systematically searched ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant RCTs. The targeted RCTs was those comparing the efficacy of NIBS interventions, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcutaneous cervical vagal nerve stimulation, in patients with PTSD. The NMA was conducted using a frequentist model. The primary outcomes were changes in the overall severity of PTSD and acceptability (to be specific, rates of dropouts for any reason). RESULTS: We identified 14 RCTs that enrolled 686 participants. The NMA demonstrated that among the investigated NIBS types, high-frequency rTMS over bilateral DLPFCs was associated with the greatest reduction in overall PTSD severity. Further, in comparison with the sham controls, excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with/without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms, including depression and anxiety symptoms, and overall PTSD severity. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA demonstrated that excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with or without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023391562.

Dose-dependent response of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on the heart rate variability: An electric field modeling study.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) modulates the autonomic nervous system by activating deeper brain areas via top-down pathway. However, effects on the nervous system are heterogeneous and may depend on the amount of current that penetrates. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the variable effects of tDCS on heart rate variability (HRV), a measure of the functional state of the autonomic nervous system. Using three prefrontal tDCS protocols (1.5, 3 mA and sham), we associated the simulated individual electric field (E-field) magnitude in brain regions of interest with the HRV effects. This was a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled and within-subject trial, in which healthy young-adult participants received tDCS sessions separated by 2 weeks. The brain regions of interest were the dorsolateral PFC (DLPFC), anterior cingulate cortex, insula and amygdala. Overall, 37 participants were investigated, corresponding to a total of 111 tDCS sessions. The findings suggested that HRV, measured by root mean squared of successive differences (RMSSD) and high-frequency HRV (HF-HRV), were significantly increased by the 3.0 mA tDCS when compared to sham and 1.5 mA. No difference was found between sham and 1.5 mA. E-field analysis showed that all brain regions of interest were associated with the HRV outcomes. However, this significance was associated with the protocol intensity, rather than inter-individual brain structural variability. To conclude, our results suggest a dose-dependent effect of tDCS for HRV. Therefore, further research is warranted to investigate the optimal current dose to modulate HRV.

Worldwide Prevalence and Disability From Mental Disorders Across Childhood and Adolescence: Evidence From the Global Burden of Disease Study.

Importance: The period from childhood to early adulthood involves increased susceptibility to the onset of mental disorders, with implications for policy making that may be better appreciated by disaggregated analyses of narrow age groups. Objective: To estimate the global prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs) associated with mental disorders and substance use disorders (SUDs) across 4 age groups using data from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data from the 2019 GBD study were used for analysis of mental disorders and SUDs. Results were stratified by age group (age 5 to 9, 10 to 14, 15 to 19, and 20 to 24 years) and sex. Data for the 2019 GBD study were collected up to 2018, and data were analyzed for this article from April 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: Age 5 to 9 years, 10 to 14 years, 15 to 19 years, and 20 to 24 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence rates with 95% uncertainty intervals (95% UIs) and number of YLDs. Results: Globally in 2019, 293 million of 2516 million individuals aged 5 to 24 years had at least 1 mental disorder, and 31 million had an SUD. The mean prevalence was 11.63% for mental disorders and 1.22% for SUDs. For the narrower age groups, the prevalence of mental disorders was 6.80% (95% UI, 5.58-8.03) for those aged 5 to 9 years, 12.40% (95% UI, 10.62-14.59) for those aged 10 to 14 years, 13.96% (95% UI, 12.36-15.78) for those aged 15 to 19 years, and 13.63% (95% UI, 11.90-15.53) for those aged 20 to 24 years. The prevalence of each individual disorder also varied by age groups; sex-specific patterns varied to some extent by age. Mental disorders accounted for 31.14 million of 153.59 million YLDs (20.27% of YLDs from all causes). SUDs accounted for 4.30 million YLDs (2.80% of YLDs from all causes). Over the entire life course, 24.85% of all YLDs attributable to mental disorders were recorded before age 25 years. Conclusions and Relevance: An analytical framework that relies on stratified age groups should be adopted for examination of mental disorders and SUDs from childhood to early adulthood. Given the implications of the early onset and lifetime burden of mental disorders and SUDs, age-disaggregated data are essential for the understanding of vulnerability and effective prevention and intervention initiatives.

The association of total pulses with the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant major depression: A dose-response meta-analysis.

AIM: This study aimed to examine dose-effects of total pulses on improvement of depressive symptoms in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) receiving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the left dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were systematically searched. We included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCT) that used rTMS over left DLPFC in patients with TRD. Excluded studies were non-TRD, non-RCTs, or combined other brain stimulation interventions. The outcome of interest was the difference between rTMS arms and sham controls in improvement of depressive symptoms in a dose-response manner. A random-effects meta-analysis and dose-response meta-analysis(DRMA) was used to examine antidepressant efficacy of rTMS and association with total pulses. RESULTS: We found that rTMS over left DLPFC is superior to sham controls (reported as standardized mean difference[SMD] with 95% confidence interval: 0.77; 0.56-0.98). The best-fitting model of DRMA was bell-shaped (estimated using restricted cubic spline model; R2 =0.42), indicating that higher doses (>26,660 total pulses) were not associated with increased improvement of depressive symptoms. Stimulation frequency(R2 =0.53) and age(R2 =0.51) were significant moderators for the dose-response curve. Furthermore, 15-20 Hz rTMS was superior to 10 Hz rTMS (0.61, 0.15-1.10) when combining all doses. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest higher doses(total pulses) of rTMS were not always associated with increased improvement of depressive symptoms in patients with TRD, and that the dose-response relationship was moderated by stimulation frequency and age. These associations emphasize the importance of determining dosing parameters to achieve maximum efficacy.

Home-Use Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for the Treatment of a Major Depressive Episode: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is moderately effective for depression when applied by trained staff. It is not known whether self-applied tDCS, combined or not with a digital psychological intervention, is also effective. Objective: To determine whether fully unsupervised home-use tDCS, combined with a digital psychological intervention or digital placebo, is effective for a major depressive episode. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a double-blinded, sham-controlled, randomized clinical trial with 3 arms: (1) home-use tDCS plus a digital psychological intervention (double active); (2) home-use tDCS plus digital placebo (tDCS only), and (3) sham home-use tDCS plus digital placebo (double sham). The study was conducted between April 2021 and October 2022 at participants' homes and at Instituto de Psiquiatria do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. Included participants were aged 18 to 59 years with major depression and a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, 17-item version (HDRS-17), score above 16, a minimum of 8 years of education, and access to a smartphone and internet at home. Exclusion criteria were other psychiatric disorders, except for anxiety; neurologic or clinical disorders; and tDCS contraindications. Interventions: tDCS was administered in 2-mA, 30-minute prefrontal sessions for 15 consecutive weekdays (1-mA, 90-second duration for sham) and twice-weekly sessions for 3 weeks. The digital intervention consisted of 46 sessions based on behavioral therapy. Digital placebo was internet browsing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in HDRS-17 score at week 6. Results: Of 837 volunteers screened, 210 participants were enrolled (180 [86%] female; mean [SD] age, 38.9 [9.3] years) and allocated to double active (n = 64), tDCS only (n = 73), or double sham (n = 73). Of the 210 participants enrolled, 199 finished the trial. Linear mixed-effects models did not reveal statistically significant group differences in treatment by time interactions for HDRS-17 scores, and the estimated effect sizes between groups were as follows: double active vs tDCS only (Cohen d, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.48 to 0.58; P = .86), double active vs double sham (Cohen d, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.73 to 0.34; P = .47), and tDCS only vs double sham (Cohen d, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.76 to 0.27; P = .35). Skin redness and heat or burning sensations were more frequent in the double active and tDCS only groups. One nonfatal suicide attempt occurred in the tDCS only group. Conclusions and Relevance: Unsupervised home-use tDCS combined with a digital psychological intervention or digital placebo was not found to be superior to sham for treatment of a major depressive episode in this trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04889976.

Incidence of Suicidal Ideation in a Civil Servants Cohort During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil: Insights from the ELSA-Brasil Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the incidence of suicidal ideation and its associated risk factors in the São Paulo state of ELSA-Brasil cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: During a pre-pandemic ELSA-Brasil onsite assessment in 2016-2018 (wave 3) and a pandemic online assessment in May-July 2020 (wave COVID), we assessed suicidal ideation using the Clinical Interview Scheduled-Revised (CIS-R). Single and multi predictor logistic regressions were performed using sociodemographic characteristics, household finance impact during pandemic, presence of previous chronic diseases, alcohol abuse, adverse childhood experiences (ACE), living alone, and previous CMD as predictors. Suicidal ideation incidence was used as outcome. RESULTS: Out of 4191 participants of wave 3, 2117 (50.5%) answered wave COVID. There was a threefold increase in suicide ideation, from 34 (1.8%) to 104 (5.6%).In multiple predictor models, we found that previous CMD (OR 7.17; 95% CI 4.43 - 11.58) and ACE (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.09 - 2.72) increased the odds of incident suicidal ideation. The sociodemographic predictors female sex, younger age and low income were significant risk factors only in the single predictor model. Conclusions These findings underscore the importance of monitoring and supporting individuals who suffered ACE and have a history of mental health disorders. This is especially critical in times of heightened societal stress, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of monitoring and supporting individuals who suffered ACE and have a history of mental health disorders. This is especially critical in times of heightened societal stress, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparing different non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for bipolar depression treatment: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a promising treatment for bipolar depression. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials on NIBS for treating bipolar depression (INPLASY No: 202340019). Eighteen articles (N = 617) were eligible for network meta-analysis. Effect sizes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over F3 plus cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over F4 (a-tDCS-F3 +c-tDCS-F4; SMD = -1.18, 95%CIs = -1.66 to -0.69, N = 77), high-definition tDCS over F3 (HD-tDCS-F3; -1.17, -2.00 to -0.35, 25), high frequency deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-dTMS; -0.81, -1.62 to -0.001, 25), and high frequency repetitive TMS over F3 plus low frequency repetitive TMS over F4 (HF-rTMS-F3 +LF-rTMS-F4; -0.77, -1.43 to -0.11, 38) significantly improved depressive symptoms compared to sham controls. Only a-tDCS-F3 +c-tDCS-F4 (OR = 4.53, 95%CIs = 1.51-13.65) and HF-rTMS-F3 +LF-rTMS-F4 (4.69, 1.02-21.56) showed higher response rates. No active NIBS interventions exhibited significant differences in dropout or side effect rates, compared with sham controls.

Investigating the variability of prefrontal tDCS effects on working memory: An individual E-field distribution study.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the prefrontal cortex has the potential to enhance working memory by means of a weak direct current applied to the scalp. However, its effects are highly variable and possibly dependent on individual variability in cortical architecture and head anatomy. Unveiling sources of heterogeneity might improve fundamental and clinical application of tDCS in the field. Therefore, we investigated sources of tDCS variability of prefrontal 1.5 mA tDCS, 3 mA tDCS and sham tDCS in 40 participants (67.5% women, mean age 24.7 years) by associating simulated electric field (E-field) magnitude in brain regions of interest (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and subgenual ACC) and working memory performance. Emotional and non-emotional 3-back paradigms were used. In the tDCS protocol analysis, effects were only significant for the 3 mA group, and only for the emotional tasks. In the individual E-field magnitude analysis, faster responses in non-emotional, but not in the emotional task, were associated with stronger E-fields in all brain regions of interest. Concluding, individual E-field distribution might explain part of the variability of prefrontal tDCS effects on working memory performance and in clinical samples. Our results suggest that tDCS effects might be more consistent or improved by applying personalizing current intensity, although this hypothesis should be confirmed by further studies.

Deconstructing depression by machine learning: the POKAL-PSY study.

Unipolar depression is a prevalent and disabling condition, often left untreated. In the outpatient setting, general practitioners fail to recognize depression in about 50% of cases mainly due to somatic comorbidities. Given the significant economic, social, and interpersonal impact of depression and its increasing prevalence, there is a need to improve its diagnosis and treatment in outpatient care. Various efforts have been made to isolate individual biological markers for depression to streamline diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. However, the intricate and dynamic interplay between neuroinflammation, metabolic abnormalities, and relevant neurobiological correlates of depression is not yet fully understood. To address this issue, we propose a naturalistic prospective study involving outpatients with unipolar depression, individuals without depression or comorbidities, and healthy controls. In addition to clinical assessments, cardiovascular parameters, metabolic factors, and inflammatory parameters are collected. For analysis we will use conventional statistics as well as machine learning algorithms. We aim to detect relevant participant subgroups by data-driven cluster algorithms and their impact on the subjects' long-term prognosis. The POKAL-PSY study is a subproject of the research network POKAL (Predictors and Clinical Outcomes in Depressive Disorders; GRK 2621).

An electric field modeling study with meta-analysis to understand the antidepressant effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Objective: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has mixed effects for major depressive disorder (MDD) symptoms, partially owing to large inter-experimental variability in tDCS protocols and their correlated induced electric fields (E-fields). We investigated whether the E-field strength of distinct tDCS parameters was associated with antidepressant effect. Methods: A meta-analysis was performed with placebo-controlled clinical trials of tDCS enrolling MDD patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 10, 2023. Effect sizes of tDCS protocols were correlated with E-field simulations (SimNIBS) of brain regions of interest (bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [DLPFC] and bilateral subgenual anterior cingulate cortex [sgACC]). Moderators of tDCS responses were also investigated. Results: A total of 20 studies were included (21 datasets, 1,008 patients), using 11 distinct tDCS protocols. Results revealed a moderate effect for MDD (g = 0.41, 95%CI 0.18-0.64), while cathode position and treatment strategy were found to be moderators of response. A negative association between effect size and tDCS-induced E-field magnitude was seen, with stronger E-fields in the right frontal and medial parts of the DLPFC (targeted by the cathode) leading to smaller effects. No association was found for the left DLPFC and the bilateral sgACC. An optimized tDCS protocol is proposed. Conclusions: Our results highlight the need for a standardized tDCS protocol in MDD clinical trials. Registration number: PROSPERO CRD42022296246.

Brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression.

Depression is one of the main public health problems in the world, having a high prevalence and being considered the main cause of disability. An important portion of patients does not respond to treatment with the initial trial of conventional antidepressants in the current depressive episode of moderate to severe intensity, which characterizes treatment-resistant depression. In this context, non-invasive neuromodulation procedures use an electric current or magnetic field to modulate the central nervous system, and they represent a new option for patients with treatment-resistant depression.

Treatment resistance in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of prevalence and correlates

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, an electronic search was performed in PubMed and Embase through May 17, 2022. All study designs that assessed a minimum of 20 schizophrenia-spectrum patients and provided data on TRS prevalence or allowed its calculation were included. Estimates were produced using a random-effects model meta-analysis. Results: The TRS prevalence across 50 studies (n = 29,390) was 36.7% (95%CI 33.1-40.5, p < 0.0001). The prevalence ranged from 22% (95%CI 18.4-25.8) in first-episode to 39.5% (95%CI 32.2-47.0) in multiple-episode samples (Q = 18.27, p < 0.0001). Primary treatment resistance, defined as no response from the first episode, was 23.6% (95%CI 20.5-26.8) vs. 9.3% (95%CI 6.8-12.2) for later-onset/secondary (≥ 6 months after initial treatment response). Longer illness duration and recruitment from long-term hospitals or clozapine clinics were associated with higher prevalence estimates. In meta-regression analyses, older age and poor functioning predicted greater TRS. When including only studies with lower bias risk, the TRS prevalence was 28.4%. Conclusion: Different study designs and recruitment strategies accounted for most of the observed heterogeneity in TRS prevalence rates. The results point to early-onset and later-onset TRS as two separate disease pathways requiring clinical attention. Registration number: PROSPERO CRD42018092033.

Treatment resistance in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of prevalence and correlates.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, an electronic search was performed in PubMed and Embase through May 17, 2022. All study designs that assessed a minimum of 20 schizophrenia-spectrum patients and provided data on TRS prevalence or allowed its calculation were included. Estimates were produced using a random-effects model meta-analysis. RESULTS: The TRS prevalence across 50 studies (n = 29,390) was 36.7% (95%CI 33.1-40.5, p < 0.0001). The prevalence ranged from 22% (95%CI 18.4-25.8) in first-episode to 39.5% (95%CI 32.2-47.0) in multiple-episode samples (Q = 18.27, p < 0.0001). Primary treatment resistance, defined as no response from the first episode, was 23.6% (95%CI 20.5-26.8) vs. 9.3% (95%CI 6.8-12.2) for later-onset/secondary (≥ 6 months after initial treatment response). Longer illness duration and recruitment from long-term hospitals or clozapine clinics were associated with higher prevalence estimates. In meta-regression analyses, older age and poor functioning predicted greater TRS. When including only studies with lower bias risk, the TRS prevalence was 28.4%. CONCLUSION: Different study designs and recruitment strategies accounted for most of the observed heterogeneity in TRS prevalence rates. The results point to early-onset and later-onset TRS as two separate disease pathways requiring clinical attention.

Trajectory of changes in depressive symptoms after acute repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects.

BACKGROUND: The follow-up effect after acute repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for major depressive episodes remains unclear. Furthermore, the benefits of maintenance rTMS are poorly understood. AIM: To investigate the trajectory of changes in depressive symptoms after acute rTMS and effects of maintenance rTMS during this period. METHOD: This meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42022374077) searched major databases up to October 1, 2022. Treatment outcome was depressive scores collected at least 3 months after the end of an acute rTMS course for depression. We extracted data at different time points after acute rTMS and categorized by whether maintenance rTMS was performed. A single-stage random-effects dose-response meta-analysis was undertaken to model the nonlinear relationships. Effect sizes were calculated as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: 24 eligible studies comprising 911 total patients-225 of whom received maintenance rTMS-were included. Maintenance rTMS contributed to relative stability in patients' mood symptoms during the first 5 months (SMD [95% CI]: 3rd month, -0.10 [-0.30 to 0.10]; 5th month, 0.00 [-0.55 to 0.55]), with heterogeneity characterized as low to moderate. Further analysis revealed that maintenance rTMS performed monthly or more frequently provided sustained benefits for up to 6-12 months. Conversely, patients without maintenance rTMS had moderate to high heterogeneity, although the change in mean mood symptom scores during the 12-month follow-up was also minor (6th month, 0.03 [-0.51 to 0.56]; 12th month, 0.10 [-0.59 to 0.79]). CONCLUSION: Maintenance rTMS might keep patients' mood relatively stable for up to 5 months after acute rTMS. Monthly or more frequent maintenance rTMS offers greater benefits.

An electric field modeling study with meta-analysis to understand the antidepressant effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

OBJECTIVE: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has mixed effects for major depressive disorder (MDD) symptoms, partially owing to large inter-experimental variability in tDCS protocols and their correlated induced electric fields (E-fields). We investigated whether the E-field strength of distinct tDCS parameters was associated with antidepressant effect. METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed with placebo-controlled clinical trials of tDCS enrolling MDD patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 10, 2023. Effect sizes of tDCS protocols were correlated with E-field simulations (SimNIBS) of brain regions of interest (bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [DLPFC] and bilateral subgenual anterior cingulate cortex [sgACC]). Moderators of tDCS responses were also investigated. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included (21 datasets, 1,008 patients), using 11 distinct tDCS protocols. Results revealed a moderate effect for MDD (g = 0.41, 95%CI 0.18-0.64), while cathode position and treatment strategy were found to be moderators of response. A negative association between effect size and tDCS-induced E-field magnitude was seen, with stronger E-fields in the right frontal and medial parts of the DLPFC (targeted by the cathode) leading to smaller effects. No association was found for the left DLPFC and the bilateral sgACC. An optimized tDCS protocol is proposed. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the need for a standardized tDCS protocol in MDD clinical trials.

Transcranial direct current stimulation as an additional treatment to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in adults with major depressive disorder in Germany (DepressionDC): a triple-blind, randomised, sham-controlled, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as a feasible treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). However, meta-analytic evidence is heterogenous and data from multicentre trials are scarce. We aimed to assess the efficacy of tDCS versus sham stimulation as an additional treatment to a stable dose of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in adults with MDD. METHODS: The DepressionDC trial was triple-blind, randomised, and sham-controlled and conducted at eight hospitals in Germany. Patients being treated at a participating hospital aged 18-65 years were eligible if they had a diagnosis of MDD, a score of at least 15 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (21-item version), no response to at least one antidepressant trial in their current depressive episode, and treatment with an SSRI at a stable dose for at least 4 weeks before inclusion; the SSRI was continued at the same dose during stimulation. Patients were allocated (1:1) by fixed-blocked randomisation to receive either 30 min of 2 mA bifrontal tDCS every weekday for 4 weeks, then two tDCS sessions per week for 2 weeks, or sham stimulation at the same intervals. Randomisation was stratified by site and baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score (ie, <31 or ≥31). Participants, raters, and operators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was change on the MADRS at week 6, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one treatment session. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02530164). FINDINGS: Between Jan 19, 2016, and June 15, 2020, 3601 individuals were assessed for eligibility. 160 patients were included and randomly assigned to receive either active tDCS (n=83) or sham tDCS (n=77). Six patients withdrew consent and four patients were found to have been wrongly included, so data from 150 patients were analysed (89 [59%] were female and 61 [41%] were male). No intergroup difference was found in mean improvement on the MADRS at week 6 between the active tDCS group (n=77; -8·2, SD 7·2) and the sham tDCS group (n=73; -8·0, 9·3; difference 0·3 [95% CI -2·4 to 2·9]). Significantly more participants had one or more mild adverse events in the active tDCS group (50 [60%] of 83) than in the sham tDCS group (33 [43%] of 77; p=0·028). INTERPRETATION: Active tDCS was not superior to sham stimulation during a 6-week period. Our trial does not support the efficacy of tDCS as an additional treatment to SSRIs in adults with MDD. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Potentially inappropriate medications and cognitive performance: cross-sectional results from the ELSA-Brasil study.

OBJECTIVES: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), especially those with potential effects on the central nervous system, can increase the risk of cognitive impairment. We investigated the association of the use of PIM and PIM that may impair cognition (PIM-Cog) with cognitive performance among older adults. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study with 2,626 participants, PIM and PIM-Cog were defined by the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers criteria. We calculated global cognition and memory, verbal fluency, and Trail Making Test B version (TMT-B) z-scores. Linear regression models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables were used to investigate the association between PIM and cognition. RESULTS: 27% and 7% of the sample (mean age = 65.1 ± 4.1 years old, 54% women, and 61% White) used at least one PIM and PIM-cog, respectively. PIM was associated with poor performance in the TMT-B (ß = -0.17, 95% Cl = -0.29; -0.05, p = 0.007). PIM-Cog was also associated with poor TMT-B performance (ß = -0.08, 95% Cl = -0.15; -0.01, p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: The use of PIM and PIM-Cog was associated with poor executive function among older adults. The review of PIM use and the deprescription of these drugs may be an effective way to improve cognitive function.