AzTrials
AzTrials

Alzheimer DiseaseStimoLaMenteNCT04866979

Applying Non-invasive Brain Stimulation in Alzheimer's Rehabilitation

A study testing Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS), Intermittent TBS (iTBS) and Cognitive training (CT). in people with Alzheimer Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment, run by Università degli Studi di Trento at 1 site in Italy.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Presently, few studies have evaluated the clinical impact of rTMS in Alzheimer's disease. Though some studies have demonstrated an improvement, there have been conflicting results, as others do not seem to demonstrate beneficial effects. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 50 to 85 years
Conditions the study is for
Alzheimer Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment
What is being tested?
Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS), Intermittent TBS (iTBS) and Cognitive training (CT).
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
200 participants
Where
1 siteItaly
Study dates
6 Apr 2021to 31 Jan 2024
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 50 to 85 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • General Inclusion Criteria (must be met for both AD and MCI group):
  • right-handed
  • normal or corrected to normal vision through lenses
  • meet inclusion criteria related to TMS
  • Be able to provide information regarding their cognitive and functional skills, or have a caregiver available who is able to provide the patient information necessary for participation in the study and who is present when signing the patient's informed consent.
  • AD Patient Inclusion Criteria:
Show all 12Show fewer
  • Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≥ 16;
  • Stable intake of cholinesterase inhibitors for at least 3 months before the start of the protocol
  • MCI Patient Inclusion Criteria:
  • Diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment
  • Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≥ 24;
  • Patients will be selected through clinical evaluation (battery of neuropsychological tests at the Neurocognitive Rehabilitation Center (CeRiN) and, in accordance with the APSS, a CSF and PET examination will be performed as well as a further finalized neuropsychological evaluation for research.

Who cannot join

  • Patients who are unable to perform the tasks required by the experimental procedure;
  • History and / or evidence of any other central nervous system disorder that could be interpreted as a cause of dementia such as structural or developmental abnormality, epilepsy, infectious disease, degenerative or inflammatory/demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system such as Parkinson's disease or Fronto-temporal dementia
  • History of significant psychiatric disease which, in the investigator's judgment, could interfere with study participation
  • History of alcohol or other substance abuse, according to DSM-V criteria, or recent or previous history of drug abuse if this could be a contributing factor to dementia
  • Ongoing treatments with drugs that contain / intake of the following substances: imipramine, amitriptyline, doxepin, nortriptyline, maprotiline, chlorpromazine, clozapine, foscarnet, ganciclovir, ritonavir, amphetamines, cocaine, (MDMA, ecstasy), phencyclidine (PCP, angel dust), gamma-hydroxybutyrate acid (GHB), theophylline
  • Presence of cardiac pacemakers, electronic prostheses, bio-stimulators, metal inserts or electrodes implanted in the brain or skull or spine.
Show all 10Show fewer
  • Absolute exclusion criteria (Criteria for TMS), which in detail are:
  • presence of cardiac pace-makers, artificial heart valves and / or bio-stimulators
  • presence of hearing aids located in the middle ear;
  • presence of metal inserts on the head and shoulders;

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Carlo Miniussi, PhD contact

0464 808694

carlo.miniussi@unitn.it

Italy1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Centro Interdipartimentale Mente/Cervello - CIMeC

    Rovereto, Trento, 38068

    Alessandra Dodich, 0464 808162, alessandra.dodich@unitn.it

    Recruiting

Other trials in Italy

About this study

Official title: StimoLaMente - La Stimolazione Cerebrale Non Invasiva Applicata Alla Riabilitazione Della Malattia di Alzheimer/ StimoLaMente - Applying Non-invasive Brain Stimulation in Alzheimer's Rehabilitation

Presently, few studies have evaluated the clinical impact of rTMS in Alzheimer's disease. Though some studies have demonstrated an improvement, there have been conflicting results, as others do not seem to demonstrate beneficial effects. Furthermore, it is the combined application of rTMS with cognitive training that could represent a real turning point in interventions aiming to slow down cognitive decline resulting from AD. Research has shown that the best way to promote the strengthening of a network is to stimulate the area while simultaneously activating the network (i.e. through cognitive training) which supports the specific function of interest.

Recently, there have been new protocols from animal model research showing that "bursts" of repetitive stimulation at a high theta frequency induce synaptic plasticity in a much shorter time period than required by standard rTMS protocols. This type of rTMS stimulation, theta-burst stimulation (TBS), is therefore even more compelling as a therapeutic intervention given that it includes the benefits previously ascribed to other rTMS protocols, but requires less administration time. Furthermore, studies conducted using both types of stimulation suggest that TBS protocols are capable of producing long term effects on cortical excitability that exceed the efficacy of those using standard rTMS protocols.

This project offers patients the possibility of accessing an innovative non-invasive, and non-pharmacological treatment. The goal is to evaluate the clinical efficacy TBS in patients diagnosed with mild cognitive decline (MCI) and AD, verifying if TBS in conjunction with cognitive training produces results better than those obtainable with only one of the two methodologies alone. Patients will be evaluated throughout the full scope of the treatment period, through clinical assessments and neuropsychological evaluations. We will examine neuroplastic changes by investigating the neural correlates underlying improvements using the multimodal imaging technique: TMS-EEG co-registration. A secondary objective will be to define the most effective stimulation protocol, verifying if TBS applied continuously (cTBS) or intermittently (iTBS) produces better behavioral outcomes. The results will be crucial to gain a better understanding of the mechanisms through which brain stimulation contributes to the promotion of neuroplasticity, and the efficacy of TBS combined with cognitive training.

Read the detailed description

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The materials and methods of investigation proposed will be the following:

  • Administration of rTMS in theta burst mode (TBS - intermittent and continuous)
  • Administration of computerized cognitive training
  • Administration of a battery of neuropsychological tests
  • Administration of questionnaires and scales
  • Recording of the electroencephalogram (EEG)
  • Combination of EEG recording with single-pulse TMS administration (TMS-EEG)

Different TBS stimulation protocols will be applied:

  1. Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS): this protocol consists in the administration of 600 pulses divided into blocks of 3 pulses at 50 Hz which are applied at 5 Hz (every 200 ms), alternating 2 s of stimulation with 8 s of pause.
  2. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS): this protocol consists in the administration of 600 pulses divided into blocks of 3 pulses at 50 Hz that are applied at 5 Hz (every 200 ms).

In both stimulation protocols, the stimulation intensity will be equal to 80% of the motor threshold value at rest. As for the protocols that involve the application of sham/placebo stimulation, the rTMS will be administered by applying to the coil a piece of wood or plastic of about 30 mm in thickness, a distance that ensures that the magnetic pulse does not reach the cortex, and built so as to appear as an integral part of the apparatus. All stimulation parameters adopted in this study are in accordance with the safety guidelines for the application of rTMS.

Cognitive rehabilitation protocol For patients assigned to the protocol including the application of cognitive training (TBS + CT; CT), the training will be administered immediately following the application of rTMS (both in the real intermittent or continuous condition, and placebo) and will last 25 minutes. Cognitive training will be administered through dedicated software that uses an individualized adaptive methodology based on the participant's performance.

The rehabilitation of memory functions, associated with the stimulation of the left DLPFC, will be focused on learning face-name associations. The face-name association training involves an acquisition phase in which patients are shown faces with an associated name and are asked to memorize these associations. The reproduction phase follows the training phase, in which the patient's task will consist in finding the face that corresponds to the associated name. Based on the patient's performance, the level of difficulty is modulated by increasing or decreasing the number of associations to be memorized and possibly, for higher difficulty levels, by adding other information to be memorized (for example, a profession).

Neuropsychological and psychological evaluation All patients will undergo a neuropsychological assessment before the start of treatment (t0), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2), and after 3 (t3) and 5 months (t4) from the start of treatment (Figure 1).

The evaluation of the patients after some time (follow-up) from the end of the treatment will allow for the verification of long-term effects.

A possible "practice effect" resulting from the repeated and quick administration of neuropsychological tests is expected and will be considered in the data analysis, as in all experimental protocols of this type. The practice effect is a factor common to all experimental groups and does not affect the evaluation of the efficacy of the treatment, the primary objective of the study.

The EEG will be acquired from 64 sintered Ag / AgCl electrodes placed on the scalp in accordance with the international 10-20 system through an EEG acquisition system compatible with TMS. The EEG signal will be acquired with a high-pass filter at 0.01 Hz, a low-pass filter at 1000 Hz and with a sampling frequency of 5000 Hz. The impedance of the electrodes will be kept below 5 kΩ. The TMS-EEG co-registration will consist in the administration of 120 pulses on the target area stimulated in the application phase of the protocol (right DLPFC or left DLPFC) at an intensity equal to 110% of the motor threshold at rest with a random frequency between 0.2- 0.4 Hz. The analysis of the data recorded by the combination of TMS-EEG will allow an in-depth evaluation of the modulations of cortical activity induced by the different treatment protocols and, in particular, will allow the investigation of cortical excitability and inhibition, connectivity cortico-cortical and the intrinsic ability of the stimulated areas to generate oscillatory activity. This method will be able to provide a unique measure of local cortical activity and effective cortical-cortical connectivity .

The characterization and organization of brain networks will be investigated using graph theory.

Statistical Analysis:

The variables that will be considered for the analysis of clinical, neuropsychological and neurophysiological data are: a) treatment effect over time (t0, t1, t2, t3, t4); b) type of treatment protocol (combination of TBS and cognitive training, isolated application of TBS, isolated application of cognitive training); c) type of stimulation protocol (cTBS, iTBS) and d) clinical group (AD or MCI). The experimental design will be both "within subjects" within each variable of interest (for example, investigating the difference between t1 and baseline to evaluate the effect of intensive treatment), and "between subjects" regarding the data between the different treatment protocols (for example, investigating the difference between combination of TBS and cognitive training and isolated application of TBS, to evaluate which protocol produces the greatest benefits), between different stimulation protocols (for example, investigating the difference between cTBS and iTBS to evaluate which protocol produces greater benefits) and between clinical conditions (to assess whether the same treatment leads to differences in the achieved benefit between the two groups of patients, AD and MCI).

Calculation of sample size:

The primary outcome for the calculation of the sample size was defined as the effect of the cTBS protocol and the iTBS protocol (both in combination with cognitive training) compared to the treatment involving the combination of cognitive training with TBS placebo, and the one which involves only the TBS protocols applied in isolation, on the MMSE score achieved at the end of the treatment. Based on the results of a previous rTMS study on a sample of AD patients (Ahmed et al. 2012), we estimate that at the end of our treatment there will be an improvement in the MMSE score of at least 3 points (SD of change = 2.95) for protocols that involve the combination of cognitive training and real TBS, and of 0.2 points (SD of change = 2.7) for the treatment that involves the combination of cognitive training and placebo TBS.Considering an alpha value of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, we estimate that the number of patients to be recruited should be 16 patients per group, increased to 20 per group to take into account a possible dropout rate of 20%.

Techniques provided for data processing Behavioral and neurophysiological data will be analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc comparisons (t-test, contrast analysis).

Statistical processing software Data processing will be performed with BrainVision Analyzer, SPSS and/or Statistica software.

Ethical Considerations and Assessment of the Risk/Benefit Ratio:

Expected benefits Based on the assumptions of the present project, patients who will receive the treatment that involves the combined application of rTMS and cognitive training should show a clinical response, based on the primary endpoints reported above, better than the patients assigned to the protocols in which rTMS and cognitive training are applied in isolation. The research also provides indirect scientific / cognitive benefits, in terms of advancing knowledge on the development of treatments with proven efficacy and on the mechanisms underlying Alzheimer's dementia.

Potential Risks:

The risks are represented by the use of electro-medical equipment, however, all of which have EC authorization for use with patients. For this protocol, all appropriate safety measures will be put in place for studies with brain stimulation as indicated by the international scientific community. Although, following the international guidelines for the safe administration of TMS no adverse events are expected, it should be noted that the environment in which the research will take place and the personnel involved are able to cope with any side effects of stimulation. The stimulation parameters chosen take into account the clinical goals and safety of the participants. With regard to EEG procedures, redness of the skin immediately under the electrodes is possible, following abrasion from the application of the electroconductive gel.

All the procedures foreseen by the research will be carried out paying particular attention to the patient involved, adopting all the necessary measures so that no critical issues related to stress or fatigue arise.

Risk/Benefit Ratio:

It is believed that in the proposed study program, the risk/benefit ratio is in favor of benefit, in terms of increased knowledge and expected direct benefit for the participants. According to the classification of a consensus paper, this protocol is part of class 2 studies, which identify studies with indirect benefits and moderate risks: these are studies with patients where the clinical benefit is speculative, but from which important data could come for the development of effective treatments.

Ethical Considerations:

At the end of the study, patients will not be informed of the treatment protocol to which they have been assigned but will be informed about the overall results of the study, receiving a report containing a summary of the results achieved by the project.

Informed Consent:

Participation in the study is on a voluntary basis: each subject will obtain explicit information regarding the nature of the project and will have to sign a written consent before they can be included. Participants can withdraw their consent to participate at any time, without any consequences.

Data storage and processing:

The data will be protected and anonymized according to the procedures in force. All data regarding identification will be encrypted within the database and the subjects will be identified only with a code. However, the nature of the study makes it necessary to preserve the data regarding the identification of the participants because the project provides for follow-up evaluations. Access to the database containing the collected data and the results will be restricted to the researchers involved with the project. Sensitive data and all paper data will be kept under lock and key at the various facilities. The research manager will also be responsible for the appropriate conservation of these data. As this study involves experimental data, the experimental data will later be published and shared with national and international scientific communities.

Being tested
Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS), Intermittent TBS (iTBS), Cognitive training (CT)., Sham Stimulation (shamTBS)
Keywords
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Theta Burst Stimulation, Alzheimer Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Memory, TMS-EEG, Electroencephelography
Medical subject headings
Alzheimer Disease, Cognitive Dysfunction

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS)Device

    Application of cTBS. cTBS will be applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (left DLPFC). The coil will be placed at the EEG 10-20 International System position of the F3 electrode. Stimulation parameters will be TBS delivery of 600 pulses divided into blocks of 3 pulses at 50 Hz, which are applied at 5 Hz (every 200 ms), with a stimulation intensity equal to 80% of the motor threshold value at rest.

  • Intermittent TBS (iTBS)Device

    Application of iTBS. iTBS will be applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (left DLPFC). The coil will be placed at the EEG 10-20 International System position of the F3 electrode. Stimulation parameters will be TBS delivery of of 600 pulses divided into blocks of 3 pulses at 50 Hz, which are applied at 5 Hz (every 200 ms), alternating 2 seconds of stimulation with a pause of 8 seconds, with a stimulation intensity equal to 80% of the motor threshold value at rest.

  • Cognitive training (CT).Behavioural

    Cognitive training (memory rehabilitation via RehaCom computer software) of 25 min. The training will be focused on memory rehabilitation, implementing a face-name association paradigm. The software uses an individualized adaptive methodology based on the participant's performance.

  • Sham Stimulation (shamTBS)Device

    Sham rTMS (TBS) will be administered by applying a 30mm thick piece of wood or plastic to a real TMS coil during "stimulation", and this additional element will be constructed in such a way that it appears to be an integral part of the apparatus such that the patient remains unaware that they are not receiving stimulation (Rossi et al., 2007 ).This 30mm distance is adequate to ensure that the magnetic pulse does not reach the cortex.

Study groups in NCT04866979
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Combination of continuous TBS plus cognitive training (cTBS + CT)ExperimentalContinuous mode of TBS applied in conjunction with cognitive training that will commence directly after the stimulation protocol has been completed.
Receives: Device: Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS); Behavioral: Cognitive training (CT).
Combination of intermittent TBS plus cognitive training (iTBS + CT)ExperimentalIntermittent mode of TBS applied in conjunction with cognitive training that will commence directly after the stimulation protocol has been completed.
Receives: Device: Intermittent TBS (iTBS); Behavioral: Cognitive training (CT).
Continuous TBS only (cTBS)ExperimentalTBS in continuous mode application, only (without cognitive training).
Receives: Device: Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS)
Intermittent TBS only (iTBS)ExperimentalTBS in intermittent mode application, only (without cognitive training).
Receives: Device: Intermittent TBS (iTBS)
Cognitive training only (with sham TBS) (CT).Active comparatorTBS Sham will be implemented using the same set-up as a true TBS protocol but with "sham stimulation". Directly following sham stimulation (as in the true combination of stimulation + cognitive training protocols), patients will undergo 25 minutes of cognitive training.
Receives: Behavioral: Cognitive training (CT).; Device: Sham Stimulation (shamTBS)

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Face-name associative memory performance - Measure of Memory Recall

    Mean change in performance in ability to correctly memorize face/name paired associations [score range min=7, max=n/a, higher score=better outcome]. Patients will start at level 7, the level at which the training software begins paired face/name associations. The software will not allow the patient to go below level 7, so this is the minimum score (level) threshold for all patients.

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  2. Mini-Mental State Evaluation (MMSE) Score - Non-Trained Measure of Global Function

    Neuropsychological evaluation using mean changes in the Mini-Mental State Evaluation(MMSE) score Score range is from 0-30, with a score of 25 or higher is classed as "normal". If the score is below 25, the result indicates a possible cognitive impairment. A lower score = worse outcome

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

Secondary outcomes (20)
  1. TMS evoked potentials - TEP: Analysis of cortical excitability and inhibition changes induced in the state of excitability/inhibition of brain circuits following the TMS impulse.

    120 pulses will be delivered to the target area (right DLPFC or left DLPFC) at 110% resting motor threshold intensity during EEG registration. This outcome will analyze cortical excitability and inhibition changes induced in the state of excitability/inhibition of brain circuits following the TMS impulse. The amplitude will be used as a marker of cortical excitability.

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  2. Connectivity Index - Connectivity evoked by TMS: cortico-cortical connectivity analysis

    120 pulses will be delivered to the target area (right DLPFC or left DLPFC) at 110% resting motor threshold intensity during EEG registration. This outcome will analyze changes in the latencies and topographical distribution of the TEPs thus providing a connectivity index. This connectivity index will be used to infer the propagation of the activity from the stimulation site to functionally connected areas.

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  3. TMS evoked oscillations: changes induced by TMS and its influence on intrinsic oscillatory activity

    120 pulses will be delivered to the target area (right DLPFC or left DLPFC) at 110% resting motor threshold intensity during EEG registration. This outcome will analyze changes in responses induced by TMS in the frequency domain for the intrinsic capacity of the stimulated area to generate oscillatory activity in specific frequency bands.

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  4. Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices: Evaluation of abstract non-verbal reasoning

    Mean changes in test scores [score range 0-36, higher score=better outcome])

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  5. Digit Span: Evaluation of short and long term memory (verbal)

    Mean changes in test scores [score range 0-9, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  6. Spatial Span: Evaluation of short and long term memory (visuospatial)

    Mean changes in test scores [score range 0-10, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  7. Prose Memory:Evaluation of short and long term memory

    Mean changes in test scores [score range 0-28, higher score=better outcome];

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  8. Free And Cued Selective Reminding Test: Evaluation of short and long term memory

    Mean changes on tests scores [Immediate: score range 0-36; Deferred: score range 0-12, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  9. Deferred re-enactment of the Complex Figure by Rey Osterrieth: Long term memory evaluation

    Mean changes on tests scores [score range 0-36, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  10. Token Test: Evaluation of linguistic production

    Mean changes on tests scores [score range 0-36, higher score = better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  11. Semantic fluency and Phonemic fluency

    Mean changes on tests scores: [score range 0-no limits, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  12. Multiple Features Cancellation task: Evaluation of attention and executive function "MFCT"

    Mean changes in scores on MFCT Time [score range, min= N/A, max= no limit, higher score=worse outcome; Mean changes in scores on MFCT Accuracy [score range min=0, max=20, higher score=better outcome]; Mean changes in scores on MFCT False alarm [score range min: N/A, max= no limit, high score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  13. Trail Making test (for A, B and B-A conditions): Evaluation of attention and executive function

    Mean changes on scores for each condition [score range: min= n/a, max= no limits, higher score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  14. Stroop test Error and Time: Evaluation of attention and executive function

    Mean changes on scores [score ranges min=N/A, max= no limit, higher score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  15. Attentional Matrices: Evaluation of attention and executive function

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-60, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  16. Copy of Rey's Complex Figure: Evaluation of practical and visual-constructive skills

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-36, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  17. Geriatric Depression Scale, GDS:Evaluation of depressive symptoms in the elderly

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-30, higher score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  18. Questionnaire of Identification of Deficits (QID): Evaluation on quality of life and identification of deficit questionnaire for the patient and caregiver

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-52, higher score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  19. Clinical Insight Rating Scale, (CIRS): Evaluation of awareness of deficits and disease

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-8, higher score=worse outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

  20. Jefferson Scale: Evaluation of the patient's perception of empathy

    Mean changes on scores [score range 0-35, higher score=better outcome]

    Measured: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted30 Apr 2021
  2. Study start6 Apr 2021
  3. Primary completion31 Jan 2024 (estimated)
  4. Study completion31 Jan 2024 (estimated)

Resources

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
Factorial
Model description
200 total patients:100 AD patients,100 MCI patients. Random assignment to 1 of 5 protocols (20 AD patients and 20 MCI patients per protocol). Patients will be balanced using MMSE and age matching to create homogeneous groups. Protocols: 1. Combination of continuous TBS plus cognitive training (cTBS + CT); 2. Combination of intermittent TBS plus cognitive training (iTBS + CT); 3. Continuous TBS only (cTBS); 4. intermittent TBS only (iTBS); 5. Cognitive training only (with placebo TBS) (CT). 2 main treatment phases; 1) intensive phase (2 weeks, applied daily 5 times a week, 10 sessions); 2) maintenance phase, (5 weeks, 2 times a week, 10 sessions). Patients will undergo a clinical, neuropsychological, and neurophysiological evaluation before the start of treatment (baseline, t0=Week1), at the end of the intensive phase (t1= Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2 = Week 8), and after 3 (t3 = Week 12) and 5 months (t4 = Week 20) from the start of treatment.
Masking
Triple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
200 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04866979
Sponsor's protocol ID
UStudidiTrento
Acronym
StimoLaMente
Status last verified
May 2023
First submitted
6 Apr 2021
Last updated
10 May 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: Individual participant data be available (including data dictionaries) after de-identification. The data in particular that will be shared are individual participant data that underlie the results reported in the published article, after de-identification (text, tables, figures, and appendices).

Publications

  • Ahmed MA, Darwish ES, Khedr EM, El Serogy YM, Ali AM. Effects of low versus high frequencies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognitive function and cortical excitability in Alzheimer's dementia. J Neurol. 2012 Jan;259(1):83-92. doi: 10.1007/s00415-011-6128-4. Epub 2011 Jun 14.

    PubMed 21671144
  • Alcala-Lozano R, Morelos-Santana E, Cortes-Sotres JF, Garza-Villarreal EA, Sosa-Ortiz AL, Gonzalez-Olvera JJ. Similar clinical improvement and maintenance after rTMS at 5 Hz using a simple vs. complex protocol in Alzheimer's disease. Brain Stimul. 2018 May-Jun;11(3):625-627. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2017.12.011. Epub 2017 Dec 29.

    PubMed 29326021
  • Barbay S, Plautz EJ, Friel KM, Frost SB, Dancause N, Stowe AM, Nudo RJ. Behavioral and neurophysiological effects of delayed training following a small ischemic infarct in primary motor cortex of squirrel monkeys. Exp Brain Res. 2006 Feb;169(1):106-16. doi: 10.1007/s00221-005-0129-4. Epub 2005 Nov 5.

    PubMed 16273404
  • Bentwich J, Dobronevsky E, Aichenbaum S, Shorer R, Peretz R, Khaigrekht M, Marton RG, Rabey JM. Beneficial effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with cognitive training for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: a proof of concept study. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2011 Mar;118(3):463-71. doi: 10.1007/s00702-010-0578-1. Epub 2011 Jan 19.

    PubMed 21246222
  • Bestmann S, Baudewig J, Siebner HR, Rothwell JC, Frahm J. Functional MRI of the immediate impact of transcranial magnetic stimulation on cortical and subcortical motor circuits. Eur J Neurosci. 2004 Apr;19(7):1950-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2004.03277.x.

    PubMed 15078569
  • Bortoletto M, Veniero D, Thut G, Miniussi C. The contribution of TMS-EEG coregistration in the exploration of the human cortical connectome. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015 Feb;49:114-24. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.12.014. Epub 2014 Dec 22.

    PubMed 25541459
  • Cazzoli D, Muri RM, Schumacher R, von Arx S, Chaves S, Gutbrod K, Bohlhalter S, Bauer D, Vanbellingen T, Bertschi M, Kipfer S, Rosenthal CR, Kennard C, Bassetti CL, Nyffeler T. Theta burst stimulation reduces disability during the activities of daily living in spatial neglect. Brain. 2012 Nov;135(Pt 11):3426-39. doi: 10.1093/brain/aws182. Epub 2012 Jul 24.

    PubMed 22831781
  • Chung SW, Rogasch NC, Hoy KE, Fitzgerald PB. Measuring Brain Stimulation Induced Changes in Cortical Properties Using TMS-EEG. Brain Stimul. 2015 Nov-Dec;8(6):1010-20. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.07.029. Epub 2015 Jul 17.

    PubMed 26275346
  • Cotelli M, Calabria M, Manenti R, Rosini S, Zanetti O, Cappa SF, Miniussi C. Improved language performance in Alzheimer disease following brain stimulation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2011 Jul;82(7):794-7. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2009.197848. Epub 2010 Jun 23.

    PubMed 20574108
  • Delbeuck X, Van der Linden M, Collette F. Alzheimer's disease as a disconnection syndrome? Neuropsychol Rev. 2003 Jun;13(2):79-92. doi: 10.1023/a:1023832305702.

    PubMed 12887040
  • Di Lazzaro V, Pilato F, Dileone M, Profice P, Oliviero A, Mazzone P, Insola A, Ranieri F, Meglio M, Tonali PA, Rothwell JC. The physiological basis of the effects of intermittent theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. J Physiol. 2008 Aug 15;586(16):3871-9. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2008.152736. Epub 2008 Jun 19.

    PubMed 18566003
  • Di Lazzaro V, Dileone M, Pilato F, Capone F, Musumeci G, Ranieri F, Ricci V, Bria P, Di Iorio R, de Waure C, Pasqualetti P, Profice P. Modulation of motor cortex neuronal networks by rTMS: comparison of local and remote effects of six different protocols of stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2011 May;105(5):2150-6. doi: 10.1152/jn.00781.2010. Epub 2011 Feb 23.

    PubMed 21346213
  • Huang YY, Kandel ER. Theta frequency stimulation induces a local form of late phase LTP in the CA1 region of the hippocampus. Learn Mem. 2005 Nov-Dec;12(6):587-93. doi: 10.1101/lm.98905. Epub 2005 Nov 14.

    PubMed 16287724
  • Iezzi E, Suppa A, Conte A, Li Voti P, Bologna M, Berardelli A. Short-term and long-term plasticity interaction in human primary motor cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2011 May;33(10):1908-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011.07674.x. Epub 2011 Apr 14.

    PubMed 21488986
  • Jung NH, Gleich B, Gattinger N, Hoess C, Haug C, Siebner HR, Mall V. Quadri-Pulse Theta Burst Stimulation using Ultra-High Frequency Bursts - A New Protocol to Induce Changes in Cortico-Spinal Excitability in Human Motor Cortex. PLoS One. 2016 Dec 15;11(12):e0168410. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168410. eCollection 2016.

    PubMed 27977758

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Experimental: Continuous TBS (cTBS), Intermittent TBS (iTBS) and Cognitive training (CT). in people with Alzheimer Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment, run by Università degli Studi di Trento at 1 site in Italy.

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 12 inclusion and 10 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 May 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

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?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Carlo Miniussi, PhD (0464 808694, carlo.miniussi@unitn.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Face-name associative memory performance - Measure of Memory Recall (time frame: Prior to treatment (baseline=t0=week 1), at the end of the intensive treatment phase (t1=Week 4), at the end of the maintenance phase (t2=Week 8), 3 months post-treatment (t3=Week 12), & 5 months post treatment (t4=Week 20)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04866979, which also lists 34 linked publications.

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 10 May 2023.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in