PPANCT07511179
Personalized Closed-Loop Brain Stimulation for Patients With Primary Progressive Aphasia
A study testing Active tES and Cognitive Interventions in people with PPA, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This research study investigates the feasibility and efficacy of a personalized, closed-loop electroencephalogram-transcranial electrical stimulation (EEG-tES) intervention for individuals with Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA), addressing the inconsistent results of generic brain stimulation protocols. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 to 85 years
- Conditions the study is for
- PPA
- What is being tested?
- Active tES and Cognitive Interventions
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 10 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Nov 2026to Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 45 to 85 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Must be between 45-85 years of age.
- Must be right-handed.
- Must be proficient in English.
- Must have a minimum of high-school education.
- Must be diagnosed as lvPPA with AD biomarkers. Other possible diagnosis for the 'aphasic AD' variant would be MCI or 'possible AD' according to 2011 guidelines with AD biomarkers (CSF or positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid-beta or fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) with uni-hemispheric atrophy).
- Participants will be diagnosed from PPA and early dementias clinics at Johns Hopkins University or other specialized centers in US using current consensus criteria. Diagnosis will be based on neuropsychological testing, language testing (most commonly the Western Aphasia Battery), MRI and clinical assessment. The investigators will also use two new variant classification tests the investigators have developed at the lab which discriminate PPA variants with great accuracy (above 80%): a spelling test and a speech production test (i.e., Cookie Theft picture description task).
Who cannot join
- People with previous neurological disease including vascular dementia (e.g., stroke, developmental dyslexia, dysgraphia or attentional deficit).
- People with hearing loss (> 25 decibel, using audiometric hearing screen).
- People with uncorrected visual acuity loss.
- People with advanced dementia or severe language impairments (MMSE <15, or Montreal Cognitive Assessment <10, or language Frontotemporal Dementia-specific Clinical Dementia Rating (FTD-CDR) =3).
- Left-handed individuals.
- People with pre-existing psychiatric disorders such as behavioral disturbances, severe depression, or schizophrenia that do not allow these people to comply or follow the study schedule and requirements such as repeated evaluation and therapy.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States1 site
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287
Kyrana Tsapkini, PhD, 410-736-2940, tsapkini@jhmi.edu
About this study
This research study investigates the feasibility and efficacy of a personalized, closed-loop electroencephalogram-transcranial electrical stimulation (EEG-tES) intervention for individuals with Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA), addressing the inconsistent results of generic brain stimulation protocols. By integrating artificial intelligence (AI)-derived insights with real-time data, the study aims to customize transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) parameters, including electrode placement, intensity, and frequency to target the specific brain regions responsible for abnormal signaling in each participant. Over the intervention period paired with computerized cognitive training, the project will evaluate improvements in learning, memory, and functional connectivity, while simultaneously identifying clinical and physiological predictors to determine the viability of transitioning this low-cost, non-invasive technology into a remotely supervised, home-based therapy setting. The study duration will be a total of 6-8 weeks.
- Conditions
- PPA
- Being tested
- Active tES, Cognitive Interventions
- Keywords
- PPA, EEG, tES, Personalized treatment, Closed-loop
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Active tESDevice
This three-week, closed-loop program integrates personalized tES with computerized cognitive training to drive neuroplasticity. Following baseline electroencephalogram (EEG) mapping, participants undergo daily 30-minute sessions consisting of four "loops." Each loop begins with an AI-analyzed EEG to calibrate stimulation parameters, followed by 5-minute stimulation periods.
Cognitive InterventionsBehavioural
In between tES treatment loops, the participants will be asked to complete cognitive exercises. By pairing real-time brain modulation with targeted executive function exercises, the intervention aims to improve language skills and clinical outcomes through precise, data-driven cortical targeting.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Personalized closed-loop tES treatment + Cognitive Interventions | Experimental | Participants will receive personalized, closed-loop active tES for 3 weeks. Active tES will be administered for 20 minutes. Cognitive training exercises will be administered concurrently with the tES and will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. Receives: Device: Active tES; Behavioral: Cognitive Interventions |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically related - trained word-lists
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically related - trained word-lists
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically unrelated - trained word-lists
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words as in Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically unrelated - trained word-lists
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory recall accuracy based the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically related - untrained word-lists
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically related - untrained word-lists
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically unrelated - untrained word-lists
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically unrelated - untrained word-lists
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Secondary outcomes (21)
Change in Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) score
RAVLT is a well-established verbal memory test. RAVLT includes a 5-trial presentation of a 15-word list (List A), a single presentation of an interference list (List B)(Trial 6), two post-interference recall trials (one immediate - Trial 7, one delayed - Trial 8) and recognition of the target words in the orthographic modality with distractors (Trial 9). Scoring includes the percent score of Trial 1, Trial 5, Trial 8 and Trial 9 as well as the sum of Trial 1 through 5, and the difference between Trial 5 and Trial 1 computed as the percent difference between the scores before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)
MMSE is a well-established cognitive assessment test. It examines functions including registration (repeating named prompts), attention and calculation, recall, language, ability to follow simple commands and orientation. The total raw score is out of 30 points. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in Mnemonic Similarity Task (MST) score
MST is a well-established test in order to assess high interference memory and general recognition memory via pattern separation. It involves differentiating between previously learned images and novel images. For the MST tasks, the Pattern Separation (PS) score will be calculated using two measures: a) the rate of similar items correctly identified minus the rate of similar items misidentified as new (S|S-S|N); b) the rate of similar items correctly identified minus the rate of similar items misidentified as old (S|S-O|S). The number of correct responses for each category of items (i.e., old, similar, new) and the type of errors (i.e., identifications of new items as similar; identification of similar items as old) will also be tracked. Change in outcome in percent difference will be computed between the scores before intervention and each time point after. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in word repetition score
Temple Assessment of Language and Short-Term Memory in Aphasia (TALSA) tasks include word repetition, with sets of 1-6 words. Scoring will be based on percent of words correctly repeated. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in non-word repetition score
TALSA tasks include non-word repetition, with sets of 1-6 non-words. Scoring will be based on percent of non-words correctly repeated. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in sentence repetition score
Sentence repetition tasks come from the TALSA, with scoring based on percent of words in sentences correctly repeated. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming Boston Naming Test score
Accuracy in oral picture naming (30-item Boston Naming Test). The Boston Naming Test is a widely used picture naming test that detects lexical retrieval deficits in the oral modality. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming Philadelphia Naming Test score
Accuracy in oral picture naming (Philadelphia Naming Test). The Philadelphia Naming Test is an extensive picture naming test that comprises 275 items from a wide range of frequencies and other psycholinguistic characteristics. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in written naming as assessed by Boston Naming Test
Accuracy in written picture naming (30-item Boston Naming Test). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in written naming as assessed by Philadelphia Naming Test
Accuracy in written picture naming (Philadelphia Naming Test). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming of action as assessed by Hopkins Assessment of Naming Actions (HANA)
Accuracy in oral naming of actions. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in syntactic comprehension as assessed by Subject-relative, Object-relative, Active, Passive (S.O.A.P.) Syntactic Battery
The 40-item Subject-relative, Object-relative, Active, Passive (S.O.A.P.) Syntactic Battery of various sub-tests will be used to assess argument structure comprehension and production. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between baseline and each time point. Increase in score is considered benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in verbal fluency task score
Verbal fluency tasks (semantic and letter fluency) involve generating as many words as possible in one minute. Scoring will be based on number of words generated per minute. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct and compute change in outcome between baseline and each time point. Increase in score is considered benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spelling as assessed by the Johns Hopkins Dysgraphia battery
Accuracy in spelling will be analyzed using the Johns Hopkins Dysgraphia battery. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correct using a spelling scoring system accounting for additions, substitutions, and deletions, and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in digit span forward score
Digit span forward involves the recall of a series of single digits (sets of 1-8 digits) in the same order the digits were presented. Scoring will be based on the number of consecutive digits correctly recalled. The investigators will compute the change in outcome between the time point before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in digit span backward score
Digit span backward involves the recall of a series of single digits (sets of 1-8 digits) in the reverse order than the digits were presented. Scoring will be based on the number of consecutive digits correctly recalled. The investigators will compute the change in outcome between the time point before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spatial span forward score
Spatial span forward involves the recall of a series of positions on a board (sets of 1-9) in the same order the digits were presented. Scoring will be based on the number of consecutive positions correctly recalled. The investigators will compute the change in outcome between the time point before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spatial span backward score
Spatial span backward involves the recall of a series of positions (sets of 1-8) in the reverse order than the digits were presented. Scoring will be based on the number of consecutive positions correctly recalled. The investigators will compute the change in outcome between the time point before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in semantic content of connected speech (Cookie Theft)
Using the Cookie Theft image from the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE) investigators will obtain representative language samples as participants describe the image. The investigators will combine the raw score of all items (semantics) correct from the image and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in semantic content of connected speech (Circus)
Using the Circus image from the Apraxia Battery for Adults (ABA) investigators will obtain representative language samples as participants describe the images. The investigators will combine the raw score of all items (semantics) correct from the image and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%), computing change in outcome in percent difference between before intervention and each time point after. Increase in score is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in attention and manipulation of information scores
Using the Trail Making Test (TMT) parts A and B, which include the sequential connection of letters/numbers in order to complete a trail, the investigators will obtain the time required by the participants to finish the tasks. Decrease in the time is considered a benefit.
Measured: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Apr 2026
- Study startNov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PPAStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Johns Hopkins UniversityThe 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
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 10 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Mackler-Goding Foundation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Kyrana Tsapkini, PhD, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07511179
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB00557243
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 30 Mar 2026
- Last updated
- 27 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Personalized Closed-Loop Brain Stimulation for Patients With Primary Progressive Aphasia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07511179
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IRB00557243
- Conditions
- PPA
- Keywords
- PPA, EEG, tES, Personalized treatment, Closed-loop
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 10 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Mackler-Goding Foundation
- Study start
- Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Apr 2026 (actual)
- 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.
This research study investigates the feasibility and efficacy of a personalized, closed-loop electroencephalogram-transcranial electrical stimulation (EEG-tES) intervention for individuals with Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA), addressing the inconsistent results of generic brain stimulation protocols. By integrating artificial intelligence (AI)-derived insights with real-time data, the study aims to customize transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) parameters, including electrode placement, intensity, and frequency to target the specific brain regions responsible for abnormal signaling in each participant. Over the intervention period paired with computerized cognitive training, the project will evaluate improvements in learning, memory, and functional connectivity, while simultaneously identifying clinical and physiological predictors to determine the viability of transitioning this low-cost, non-invasive technology into a remotely supervised, home-based therapy setting. The study duration will be a total of 6-8 weeks.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Personalized closed-loop tES treatment + Cognitive Interventions | Experimental | Device: Active tES, Behavioral: Cognitive InterventionsParticipants will receive personalized, closed-loop active tES for 3 weeks. Active tES will be administered for 20 minutes. Cognitive training exercises will be administered concurrently with the tES and will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Must be between 45-85 years of age.
- Must be right-handed.
- Must be proficient in English.
- Must have a minimum of high-school education.
- Must be diagnosed as lvPPA with AD biomarkers. Other possible diagnosis for the 'aphasic AD' variant would be MCI or 'possible AD' according to 2011 guidelines with AD biomarkers (CSF or positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid-beta or fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) with uni-hemispheric atrophy).
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- People with previous neurological disease including vascular dementia (e.g., stroke, developmental dyslexia, dysgraphia or attentional deficit).
- People with hearing loss (> 25 decibel, using audiometric hearing screen).
- People with uncorrected visual acuity loss.
- People with advanced dementia or severe language impairments (MMSE <15, or Montreal Cognitive Assessment <10, or language Frontotemporal Dementia-specific Clinical Dementia Rating (FTD-CDR) =3).
- Left-handed individuals.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Active tESThis three-week, closed-loop program integrates personalized tES with computerized cognitive training to drive neuroplasticity. Following baseline electroencephalogram (EEG) mapping, participants undergo daily 30-minute sessions consisting of four "loops." Each loop begins with an AI-analyzed EEG to calibrate stimulation parameters, followed by 5-minute stimulation periods. | Device | Personalized closed-loop tES treatment + Cognitive Interventions |
| Cognitive InterventionsIn between tES treatment loops, the participants will be asked to complete cognitive exercises. By pairing real-time brain modulation with targeted executive function exercises, the intervention aims to improve language skills and clinical outcomes through precise, data-driven cortical targeting. | Behavioural | Personalized closed-loop tES treatment + Cognitive Interventions |
Primary outcome
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically related - trained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically related - trained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically unrelated - trained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words as in Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically unrelated - trained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each trained word-list (practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory recall accuracy based the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically related - untrained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically related - untrained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically related words (e.g., birds). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically unrelated - untrained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to learn each list. The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled by summing all scores from Trial 1 to Trial 5 and transforming to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
Change in auditory delayed recall accuracy of semantically unrelated - untrained word-lists
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Each untrained word-list (not practiced during the intervention period) will consist of 12 semantically unrelated words (as in RAVLT). Word lists will be constructed using psycholinguistic databases. There will be 5 Trials to recall each list, and then participants will be asked to recall that list 20 minutes later (delayed recall). The investigators will compute the raw score of items correctly recalled (delayed recall) and transform to percent correct (range: 0-100%) at each time point of the study. Increase in scores is considered a benefit.
21 secondary outcomes
Change in Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in Mnemonic Similarity Task (MST) score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in word repetition score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in non-word repetition score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in sentence repetition score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming Boston Naming Test score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming Philadelphia Naming Test score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in written naming as assessed by Boston Naming Test
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in written naming as assessed by Philadelphia Naming Test
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in oral naming of action as assessed by Hopkins Assessment of Naming Actions (HANA)
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in syntactic comprehension as assessed by Subject-relative, Object-relative, Active, Passive (S.O.A.P.) Syntactic Battery
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in verbal fluency task score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spelling as assessed by the Johns Hopkins Dysgraphia battery
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in digit span forward score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in digit span backward score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spatial span forward score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in spatial span backward score
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in semantic content of connected speech (Cookie Theft)
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in semantic content of connected speech (Circus)
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Change in attention and manipulation of information scores
Time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for PPA
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Nizubaglustat (AZ-3102) in Late-infantile and Juvenile Forms of Niemann-Pick Type C Disease, GM1 Gangliosidosis or GM2 Gangliosidosis
Niemann-Pick Type C Disease, GM1 Gangliosidosis
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
Alzheimer's Tau Platform: Regimen A - AADvac1
Preclinical Alzheimer's Disease, Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease
RecruitingObservational study
Speech and Language Interventions for Italian People With PPA
Primary Progressive Aphasia(PPA)
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation of Biochemical Markers and Clinical Investigation of Niemann-Pick Disease, Type C
Niemann-Pick Disease, Type C
RecruitingObservational study
Investigating Complex Neurodegenerative Disorders Related to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Dementia
Frontotemporal Dementia, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
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.
Kyrana Tsapkini, PhD principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Active tES and Cognitive Interventions in people with PPA, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.
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 6 inclusion and 6 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Oct 2026. 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 United States. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Each site lists its own contact: choose the nearest one under Trial locations. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in auditory recall accuracy based on the sum of words recalled in Trials 1-5 of semantically related - trained word-lists (time frame: Before intervention, immediately after intervention and 1 month post intervention). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. 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 27 Oct 2026.