EpilepsyNCT02268591
Transcranial Stimulation During Sleep to Improve Cognition in Epilepsy
A study testing Transcranial Stimulator in people with Epilepsy, run by NYU Langone Health.
Trial summary
Aim 1: Determine whether sleep enhances learning across a range of cognitive domains in healthy subjects. Aim 2: Determine whether low-frequency transcranial stimulation (TCS) delivered during slow wave sleep (SWS), compared to sham stimulation, enhances learning outcomes as indexed by a complete neuropsychological… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Epilepsy
- What is being tested?
- Transcranial Stimulator
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 28 May 2013to 27 May 2014
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age between 18-70 years
- Must score 22 or more on the MoCA.
- Must be able to provide informed consent.
- Must be fluent in English.
- Diagnosis of focal epilepsy
Who cannot join
- Patient has a progressive or unstable neurological or systemic disease
- Patient has a history of severe traumatic brain injury or prior brain surgery with skull defect
- Contraindictations to TCS, including metal in the head or implanted brain medical devices
- Pregnancy
- Any implanted electrical medical device, including pacers and implanted cardiac defibrillators
- History of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, other psychosis, rapid-cycling bipolar illness, alcohol/drug abuse within the past year
Show all 13Show fewer
- History of dementia
- History of known sleep disorder
- Additional Exclusion Criteria
- Ictal Focus over the F3 or F4 field
- Clinical or electrographic evidence of frequent nocturnal seizures, as determined with recent (<2 year) ambulatory EEG.
- Generalized epilepsy
- Epilepsy subjects will be identified and consented from the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center. In addition to the inclusion and exclusion criteria above, epilepsy subjects must meet the following criteria:
About this study
Aim 1: Determine whether sleep enhances learning across a range of cognitive domains in healthy subjects.
Aim 2: Determine whether low-frequency transcranial stimulation (TCS) delivered during slow wave sleep (SWS), compared to sham stimulation, enhances learning outcomes as indexed by a complete neuropsychological battery of tests in epilepsy patients and healthy control subjects.
Read more
Aim 3: Determine whether low-frequency TCS delivered during SWS, compared to sham stimulation, enhances sleep architecture associated with enhanced memory consolidation (ie. increased coherence of slow wave activity and increased frequency of sleep spindles).
Aim 4. Determine whether low-frequency TCS during sleep results in a more distributed memory representation, as suggested by increased hippocampal-perirhinal connectivity on fMRI in human subjects.
Aim 5. Determine whether the frequency of interictal activity during sleep in epilepsy subjects is associated with the degree of cognitive benefit conferred by SWS.
These studies will provide critical pilot data on whether non-invasive brain stimulation protocols previously tested in healthy subjects can be extended to epilepsy patients for potentially therapeutic cognitive benefits.
Read the detailed description
Epilepsy and cognitive dysfunction Recent investigations suggest that more than 60% of patients with epilepsy suffer cognitive impairment, such as memory, attentional and executive dysfunction (Elger et al., 2004, Lin et al., 2012). The severity and profile of cognitive impairment are heterogeneous and depend on the epilepsy syndrome, age of onset, seizure control, frequency of interictal activity, structural brain abnormalities, and antiepileptic medication use (Elger et al., 2004, Helmstaedter and Witt, 2012, Zeman et al., 2012).
Impairment in declarative memory is the most common cognitive complaint in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and other localization-related epilepsies (Oyegbile et al., 2004, Hoppe et al., 2007, Helmstaedter and Witt, 2012). Three types of memory deficits associated with epilepsy have been described: transient epileptic amnesia, accelerated long-term forgetting and remote memory loss (Butler and Zeman, 2008, Zeman et al., 2012). In particular, accelerated long-term forgetting - defined as a difficulty in retaining memories that were initially able to be acquired - has been recently reported to be more prevalent than previously recognized (Witt et al., 2012).
Current therapeutic approaches include management of antiepileptic drugs, monitoring for side- effects, and decreasing seizure and interictal frequency. However, even when optimized, treatments have shown only limited effectiveness and do not modulate the underlying pathophysiology (Meador, 2011, Lin et al., 2012). Indeed, despite the prevalence of cognitive comorbidity among epilepsy patients, no effective therapies exist.
Sleep-related memory consolidation There are two major steps in learning: 1) attending to and encoding the information and 2) stabilizing or consolidating the transiently coded information (Squire, 1992). These steps involve different physiological mechanisms, different brain states and different types of interactions among hippocampal-neocortical circuits. Acquiring new information can be affected in either the acquisition or consolidation phase. Therefore, strategies to enhance memory formation can target either of these steps.
Sleep, increasingly recognized for its critical role in memory consolidation, provides an intriguing opportunity for therapeutic intervention. Memory consolidation, the second stage in the learning process, is the activity of transforming short-term memory traces into stable long-term representations (Dudai, 2012). One of the predominant views is that consolidation occurs via hippocampal-neocortical interaction during the brain's 'offline' state of sleep (Buzsaki, 1989; Diekelmann and Born, 2010). The key electrophysiological pattern responsible for this interaction is the hippocampal sharp wave ripple (SPW-R), during which the spatio-temporal patterns of neuronal firing associated with preceded learning are replayed in compressed time scales (O'Neill et al., 2010). Learning affects both the incidence and neuronal contents of SPW-Rs in subsequent sleep. Conversely, modification of SPW-Rs by various means affects the consolidation process. For example, selective elimination of SPW-Rs in rodents impairs learning as dramatically as surgical removal of the hippocampus, even though such experimental manipulation leaves other aspects of post-learning sleep unaltered (Girardeau et al., 2009). In addition to SPW-Rs, two other SWS-related oscillations have been implicated in memory consolidation: the amplitude and coherence of slow oscillations and sleep spindle density are increased when SWS is preceded by hippocampally-dependent declarative memory tasks (Gais et al., 2002, Molle et al., 2004) or procedural skill learning (Huber et al., 2004). SPW-Rs are modulated by sleep spindles (12-16 Hz), which are in turn orchestrated by slow (0.5-1.5 Hz) and ultraslow (0.1 Hz) oscillations (Steriade 1993, Sirota 2003, Isomura 2006, Molle 2006, Sullivan 2011). Such cross-frequency coupling suggests that a complex and distributed neuronal system coordinates neocortical-entorhinal cortex (EC)-hippocampal activity.
Recently, it has been demonstrated that low frequency (0.01 - 0.1 Hz) blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) fMRI correlations can be enhanced during post-encoding waking rest periods relative to baseline rest periods with the inclusion of some forms of learning 7-11. Furthermore, we have demonstrated, across participants, that the magnitude of changes in hippocampal-cortical resting connectivity is related to subsequent associative memory performance 10.
These spatial and temporal relationships provide a remarkable opportunity to influence hippocampal activity, and thereby memory consolidation, by affecting neocortical slow oscillations and/or thalamocortical sleep spindles (Ozen et al., 2010). Specifically, cortical rhythms can be biased by non-invasive stimulation or behavioral interventions, thereby potentially enhancing or interfering with learning.
Indeed, several studies have demonstrated that SWS-related electrical patterns can be enhanced in healthy subjects by non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as TCS, applied during early sleep (Marshall et al., 2004, Marshall et al., 2006, Massimini et al., 2007). Specifically, low delta frequency (0.75 Hz) TCS during early SWS sleep increased endogenous oscillations and post-sleep gain of word-pair association memory, a hippocampal-dependent declarative memory task (Marshall et al., 2006, Marshall et al., 2011). Modulation of SWS, via TCS, may enhance learning outcomes across a range of cognitive domains for patients with epilepsy and other neurologic disorders.
TCS: Background and safety issues. TCS is a method of noninvasive brain stimulation which delivers low amplitude current through scalp electrodes. Current parameters may be altered to deliver current in a unidirectional [ie. transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS)], alternating [ie. transcranial alternating current stimulation (TACS)], or random manner [ie. transcranial random noise stimulation (TRNS)], to affect endogenous brain oscillations in different directions. Decades of research in both humans and animal models have shown that TCS can modulate brain activity - both to enhance and reduce cortical excitability (reviewed in Priori, 2003). Advantages of TCS include low cost, ease of administration, safety profile, and its noninvasive and painless nature.
TCS is based on the application of a weak direct current to the scalp. Low amplitude (<2 mA) currents are applied via the scalp electrodes and penetrate the skull to enter the brain. Although there is substantial shunting of current in the scalp, sufficient current penetrates the brain to modify the trans-membrane neuronal potential as shown by two recent modeling studies (Miranda et al., 2006, Wagner et al., 2007), and thus, influence the level of excitability and modulate the firing rate of individual neurons. When TCS is applied for a sufficient duration, cortical function can be altered beyond the stimulation period (Nitsche and Paulus, 2001) and the direction of the cortical excitability changes depends on current orientation.
Several well-conducted animal studies on the effects of TCS dating back to the 1950s and 60s demonstrate its ability to modulate brain function. These studies demonstrated that polarizing currents applied to the surface of the brain result in a modulation of the cortical activity. Surface anodal polarization of the cortex increases spontaneous unit discharges (Burns, 1954, Creutzfeldt et al., 1962) and initiates paroxysmal activity (Goldring and O'Leary, 1951), whereas cathodal polarization generally depresses these events. Low-level surface polarization was also shown to facilitate the acquisition of learned motor responses and to induce prolonged changes in patterns of evoked cortical unit discharges (Bindman et al., 1964). Furthermore, Purpura et al. (1965), studying pyramidal tract cells from cats, showed that prolonged periods of polarization may produce progressive membrane and post-synaptic potential changes as well as after-effects (Purpura and McMurtry, 1965). More recently, extracellular and intracellular studies in rats have shown that TCS can reliably entrain neurons in widespread cortical areas, including the hippocampus (Ozen et al, 2010).
TCS offers several advantages as compared with other techniques of noninvasive brain stimulation, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). These include: (1) small size of the electrodes and stimulator, thus allowing portable use, (2) simple and non-expensive technique that can easily be translated for use in clinical practice, (3) durable effects - the modulatory effects of TCS last longer as compared to rTMS [e.g., 13 minutes of TDCS can change brain excitability for up to 2 hours (Nitsche and Paulus, 2001)], (4) more easily blinded in the setting of clinical trials (Gandiga et al., 2006), and (5) well-established safety profile (Liebetanz et al., 2009).
- Conditions
- Epilepsy
- Being tested
- Transcranial Stimulator
- Medical subject headings
- Epilepsy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Transcranial StimulatorDevice
Also called TCS
A non invasive brain stimulation which delivers low amplitude current through scalp electrodes by a Transcranial Stimulator
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Transcranial Stimulator | Active comparator | We will apply oscillating current at a slow frequency of 0.5-1.5 Hz during early sleep, which is rich in slow waves [ie non-REM sleep]. The peak intensity of stimulation which allows for optimal phase entrainment will be determined in pilot studies. However, peak stimulation intensities will not exceed 2 mA (as discussed above). The current will be applied over the left and right prefrontal cortex (F3, F4), corresponding to the predominant region of slow oscillations, during the onset of deep sleep to the first REM episode (early non-REM-rich sleep). Receives: Device: Transcranial Stimulator |
| Sham Stimulation | No intervention | The EEG and stimulation electrodes will be placed as in the stimulation sessions, but stimulation will not be administered. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes in Memory function assessment
RAVLT, Yellow Cab Navigation Task, Working Memory tasks, Procedural Memory tasks, Insight based tasks.
Measured: Day 1, 2 & 3
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Oct 2014 (estimated)
- Study start28 May 2013
- Primary completion27 May 2014
- Study completion27 May 2014
Why it stopped: PI left institution and no subjects enrolled.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for EpilepsyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by NYU Langone HealthThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- NYU Langone Health
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Anli Liu, MD, Principal investigator, NYU Langone Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02268591
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- S13-00539
- Status last verified
- Mar 2018
- First submitted
- 2 Oct 2014
- Last updated
- 15 Mar 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Mar 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Transcranial Stimulation During Sleep to Improve Cognition in Epilepsy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02268591
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- S13-00539
- Conditions
- Epilepsy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: PI left institution and no subjects enrolled.
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- NYU Langone HealthUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 28 May 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 27 May 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- 27 May 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Oct 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Aim 1: Determine whether sleep enhances learning across a range of cognitive domains in healthy subjects.
Aim 2: Determine whether low-frequency transcranial stimulation (TCS) delivered during slow wave sleep (SWS), compared to sham stimulation, enhances learning outcomes as indexed by a complete neuropsychological battery of tests in epilepsy patients and healthy control subjects.
Aim 3: Determine whether low-frequency TCS delivered during SWS, compared to sham stimulation, enhances sleep architecture associated with enhanced memory consolidation (ie. increased coherence of slow wave activity and increased frequency of sleep spindles).
Aim 4. Determine whether low-frequency TCS during sleep results in a more distributed memory representation, as suggested by increased hippocampal-perirhinal connectivity on fMRI in human subjects.
Aim 5. Determine whether the frequency of interictal activity during sleep in epilepsy subjects is associated with the degree of cognitive benefit conferred by SWS.
These studies will provide critical pilot data on whether non-invasive brain stimulation protocols previously tested in healthy subjects can be extended to epilepsy patients for potentially therapeutic cognitive benefits.
Detailed description
Epilepsy and cognitive dysfunction Recent investigations suggest that more than 60% of patients with epilepsy suffer cognitive impairment, such as memory, attentional and executive dysfunction (Elger et al., 2004, Lin et al., 2012). The severity and profile of cognitive impairment are heterogeneous and depend on the epilepsy syndrome, age of onset, seizure control, frequency of interictal activity, structural brain abnormalities, and antiepileptic medication use (Elger et al., 2004, Helmstaedter and Witt, 2012, Zeman et al., 2012).
Impairment in declarative memory is the most common cognitive complaint in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and other localization-related epilepsies (Oyegbile et al., 2004, Hoppe et al., 2007, Helmstaedter and Witt, 2012). Three types of memory deficits associated with epilepsy have been described: transient epileptic amnesia, accelerated long-term forgetting and remote memory loss (Butler and Zeman, 2008, Zeman et al., 2012). In particular, accelerated long-term forgetting - defined as a difficulty in retaining memories that were initially able to be acquired - has been recently reported to be more prevalent than previously recognized (Witt et al., 2012).
Current therapeutic approaches include management of antiepileptic drugs, monitoring for side- effects, and decreasing seizure and interictal frequency. However, even when optimized, treatments have shown only limited effectiveness and do not modulate the underlying pathophysiology (Meador, 2011, Lin et al., 2012). Indeed, despite the prevalence of cognitive comorbidity among epilepsy patients, no effective therapies exist.
Sleep-related memory consolidation There are two major steps in learning: 1) attending to and encoding the information and 2) stabilizing or consolidating the transiently coded information (Squire, 1992). These steps involve different physiological mechanisms, different brain states and different types of interactions among hippocampal-neocortical circuits. Acquiring new information can be affected in either the acquisition or consolidation phase. Therefore, strategies to enhance memory formation can target either of these steps.
Sleep, increasingly recognized for its critical role in memory consolidation, provides an intriguing opportunity for therapeutic intervention. Memory consolidation, the second stage in the learning process, is the activity of transforming short-term memory traces into stable long-term representations (Dudai, 2012). One of the predominant views is that consolidation occurs via hippocampal-neocortical interaction during the brain's 'offline' state of sleep (Buzsaki, 1989; Diekelmann and Born, 2010). The key electrophysiological pattern responsible for this interaction is the hippocampal sharp wave ripple (SPW-R), during which the spatio-temporal patterns of neuronal firing associated with preceded learning are replayed in compressed time scales (O'Neill et al., 2010). Learning affects both the incidence and neuronal contents of SPW-Rs in subsequent sleep. Conversely, modification of SPW-Rs by various means affects the consolidation process. For example, selective elimination of SPW-Rs in rodents impairs learning as dramatically as surgical removal of the hippocampus, even though such experimental manipulation leaves other aspects of post-learning sleep unaltered (Girardeau et al., 2009). In addition to SPW-Rs, two other SWS-related oscillations have been implicated in memory consolidation: the amplitude and coherence of slow oscillations and sleep spindle density are increased when SWS is preceded by hippocampally-dependent declarative memory tasks (Gais et al., 2002, Molle et al., 2004) or procedural skill learning (Huber et al., 2004). SPW-Rs are modulated by sleep spindles (12-16 Hz), which are in turn orchestrated by slow (0.5-1.5 Hz) and ultraslow (0.1 Hz) oscillations (Steriade 1993, Sirota 2003, Isomura 2006, Molle 2006, Sullivan 2011). Such cross-frequency coupling suggests that a complex and distributed neuronal system coordinates neocortical-entorhinal cortex (EC)-hippocampal activity.
Recently, it has been demonstrated that low frequency (0.01 - 0.1 Hz) blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) fMRI correlations can be enhanced during post-encoding waking rest periods relative to baseline rest periods with the inclusion of some forms of learning 7-11. Furthermore, we have demonstrated, across participants, that the magnitude of changes in hippocampal-cortical resting connectivity is related to subsequent associative memory performance 10.
These spatial and temporal relationships provide a remarkable opportunity to influence hippocampal activity, and thereby memory consolidation, by affecting neocortical slow oscillations and/or thalamocortical sleep spindles (Ozen et al., 2010). Specifically, cortical rhythms can be biased by non-invasive stimulation or behavioral interventions, thereby potentially enhancing or interfering with learning.
Indeed, several studies have demonstrated that SWS-related electrical patterns can be enhanced in healthy subjects by non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as TCS, applied during early sleep (Marshall et al., 2004, Marshall et al., 2006, Massimini et al., 2007). Specifically, low delta frequency (0.75 Hz) TCS during early SWS sleep increased endogenous oscillations and post-sleep gain of word-pair association memory, a hippocampal-dependent declarative memory task (Marshall et al., 2006, Marshall et al., 2011). Modulation of SWS, via TCS, may enhance learning outcomes across a range of cognitive domains for patients with epilepsy and other neurologic disorders.
TCS: Background and safety issues. TCS is a method of noninvasive brain stimulation which delivers low amplitude current through scalp electrodes. Current parameters may be altered to deliver current in a unidirectional [ie. transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS)], alternating [ie. transcranial alternating current stimulation (TACS)], or random manner [ie. transcranial random noise stimulation (TRNS)], to affect endogenous brain oscillations in different directions. Decades of research in both humans and animal models have shown that TCS can modulate brain activity - both to enhance and reduce cortical excitability (reviewed in Priori, 2003). Advantages of TCS include low cost, ease of administration, safety profile, and its noninvasive and painless nature.
TCS is based on the application of a weak direct current to the scalp. Low amplitude (<2 mA) currents are applied via the scalp electrodes and penetrate the skull to enter the brain. Although there is substantial shunting of current in the scalp, sufficient current penetrates the brain to modify the trans-membrane neuronal potential as shown by two recent modeling studies (Miranda et al., 2006, Wagner et al., 2007), and thus, influence the level of excitability and modulate the firing rate of individual neurons. When TCS is applied for a sufficient duration, cortical function can be altered beyond the stimulation period (Nitsche and Paulus, 2001) and the direction of the cortical excitability changes depends on current orientation.
Several well-conducted animal studies on the effects of TCS dating back to the 1950s and 60s demonstrate its ability to modulate brain function. These studies demonstrated that polarizing currents applied to the surface of the brain result in a modulation of the cortical activity. Surface anodal polarization of the cortex increases spontaneous unit discharges (Burns, 1954, Creutzfeldt et al., 1962) and initiates paroxysmal activity (Goldring and O'Leary, 1951), whereas cathodal polarization generally depresses these events. Low-level surface polarization was also shown to facilitate the acquisition of learned motor responses and to induce prolonged changes in patterns of evoked cortical unit discharges (Bindman et al., 1964). Furthermore, Purpura et al. (1965), studying pyramidal tract cells from cats, showed that prolonged periods of polarization may produce progressive membrane and post-synaptic potential changes as well as after-effects (Purpura and McMurtry, 1965). More recently, extracellular and intracellular studies in rats have shown that TCS can reliably entrain neurons in widespread cortical areas, including the hippocampus (Ozen et al, 2010).
TCS offers several advantages as compared with other techniques of noninvasive brain stimulation, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). These include: (1) small size of the electrodes and stimulator, thus allowing portable use, (2) simple and non-expensive technique that can easily be translated for use in clinical practice, (3) durable effects - the modulatory effects of TCS last longer as compared to rTMS [e.g., 13 minutes of TDCS can change brain excitability for up to 2 hours (Nitsche and Paulus, 2001)], (4) more easily blinded in the setting of clinical trials (Gandiga et al., 2006), and (5) well-established safety profile (Liebetanz et al., 2009).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Transcranial Stimulator | Active comparator | Device: Transcranial StimulatorWe will apply oscillating current at a slow frequency of 0.5-1.5 Hz during early sleep, which is rich in slow waves [ie non-REM sleep]. The peak intensity of stimulation which allows for optimal phase entrainment will be determined in pilot studies. However, peak stimulation intensities will not exceed 2 mA (as discussed above). The current will be applied over the left and right prefrontal cortex (F3, F4), corresponding to the predominant region of slow oscillations, during the onset of deep sleep to the first REM episode (early non-REM-rich sleep). |
| Sham Stimulation | No intervention | –The EEG and stimulation electrodes will be placed as in the stimulation sessions, but stimulation will not be administered. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age between 18-70 years
- Must score 22 or more on the MoCA.
- Must be able to provide informed consent.
- Must be fluent in English.
- Diagnosis of focal epilepsy
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Patient has a progressive or unstable neurological or systemic disease
- Patient has a history of severe traumatic brain injury or prior brain surgery with skull defect
- Contraindictations to TCS, including metal in the head or implanted brain medical devices
- Pregnancy
- Any implanted electrical medical device, including pacers and implanted cardiac defibrillators
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Transcranial StimulatorAlso: TCSA non invasive brain stimulation which delivers low amplitude current through scalp electrodes by a Transcranial Stimulator | Device | Transcranial Stimulator |
Primary outcome
Changes in Memory function assessment
Time frame: Day 1, 2 & 3
RAVLT, Yellow Cab Navigation Task, Working Memory tasks, Procedural Memory tasks, Insight based tasks.
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Mar 2018.
Related trials for Epilepsy
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation and Treatment of Neurosurgical Disorders
Neurologic Disorders
RecruitingObservational study
Tumor Related Epilepsy
Epilepsy, Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study to Evaluate XEN1101 as Adjunctive Therapy in Focal Epilepsy
Focal Epilepsy
Enrolling by invitation
Neural Mechanisms for Stopping Ongoing Speech Production (Study 2)
Epilepsy, Speech
Recruiting
Identification of Biomarkers for Vagus Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Refractory Epilepsy
Refractory Epilepsy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Anli Liu, MD principal investigator
NYU Langone Health
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Transcranial Stimulator in people with Epilepsy, run by NYU Langone Health.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 13 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Mar 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes in Memory function assessment (time frame: Day 1, 2 & 3). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Mar 2018; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.