Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Castellers de la Vila de Grà cia | UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The goal of this observational study is to develop a machine learning model to predict the outcome of a transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) treatment in patients suffering from neuropathic pain derived from a spinal cord injury. The main question it aims to answer is:
• Can electroencephalography (EEG) and clinical assessment data predict the success of tDCS treatment in neuropathic pain patients?
Participants will:
This project aims to develop an artificial intelligence model to predict the response to a neuromodulation treatment (transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, tDCS) for neuropathic pain (NP) following spinal cord injury (SCI), based on electroencephalographic (EEG) signals and clinical assessments. The project consists of two stages:
Stage 1 involves an open trial where participants with SCI and NP will receive neuromodulation treatment at our center, with data collected before and after treatment.
Pre-Treatment Evaluation:
Neuromodulation Treatment:
Post-Treatment Evaluation:
• Conducted through interviews and the same validated questionnaires used in the pre-treatment assessment.
As part of the intervention, participants will undergo EEG recording to study the brain's bioelectrical activity non-invasively. Active surface electrodes with electrode gel will be used to enhance skin conductivity. EEG recordings will be conducted at rest, with participants looking at a blank wall in a soundproof room, for 5 minutes with eyes open and 5 minutes with eyes closed.
Stage 2 involves developing a predictive model to classify patients based on their response to the neuromodulation treatment. The model will use metrics derived from pre-treatment EEG recordings and clinical assessments conducted before and after the treatment, with the goal of predicting which patients will respond favorably to tDCS.
EEG preprocessing will be performed by means of the Python programming language, using a custom-made preprocessing pipeline based on the MNE-Python library including: selective outlier channel and segment elimination, frequency filters, supervised auto-labeled independent component analysis for the elimination of muscular and ocular activity, and detection of bridged electrodes.
The EEG recordings will be analyzed using metrics derived from the frequency, complexity and connectivity of the EEG signal. These metrics were selected due to their demonstrated potential in related publications, which highlight the capability of these features to capture differences between groups, either between treatment responders and non-responders, or between healthy subjects and those suffering from NP, among others. Based on these EEG features and other features derived from patient questionnaires, a feature selection process based on metric independence and relevance in previous literature will be carried out in order to maximize model generalizability.
A machine learning (ML) model, with the main candidate model being a support vector machine (SVM), will be used in order to classify between responders and non-responders. The model will be validated by means of k-fold cross-validation. Given satisfactory results, an undersampling of EEG channels (adhering to typical 10:20 setups) will be used to evaluate whether an EEG with less electrodes can yield similar predictive results, thus reducing the need for EEG systems with a high electrode count.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| NP Subjects | Subjects suffering from NP pain after an SCI. Will receive a tDCS treatment. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| transcranial Direct Current Stimulation | Device | The treatment follows an approved neuromodulation protocol at our center (approved on Nov. 4 2021, valid until Nov. 4 2024). tDCS will be administered with a battery-powered DC stimulator (Sooma tDCS, Helsinki, Finland), using saline-saturated circular electrodes with a diameter of 6 cm². The anode will be positioned over C3 to stimulate the primary motor cortex (M1), and the cathode over the contralateral supraorbital area (FP2). For asymmetric pain, stimulation targets the M1 contralateral to the more painful side, and for symmetric pain, the dominant hemisphere (C3) is stimulated. The maximum current is 2 mA (current density: 0.06 mA/cm²). Each session lasts 30 minutes, conducted daily for two weeks (Monday to Friday), totaling 10 sessions. All stimulation parameters adhere to general safety guidelines for transcranial electrical stimulation (Bikson et al., 2016). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Patient Improvement as assessed by a composite score | Composite Score Breakdown: Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) Items:
Criteria:
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Items:
Criteria:
Summary: A subject is considered a responder if BOTH of these conditions are met:
| After tDCS treatment (compared to score before tDCS treatment) |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) suffering from neuropathic pain (NP).
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dolors Soler Fernandez, PhD | Contact | +34934977700 | 2195 | dsoler@guttmann.com |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Dolors Soler, PhD | Institut Guttmann | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Institut Guttmann | Recruiting | Badalona | Barcelona | 08196 | Spain |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 33449513 | Background | Gewandter JS, McDermott MP, Evans S, Katz NP, Markman JD, Simon LS, Turk DC, Dworkin RH. Composite outcomes for pain clinical trials: considerations for design and interpretation. Pain. 2021 Jul 1;162(7):1899-1905. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002188. No abstract available. | |
| 27372845 | Background | Bikson M, Grossman P, Thomas C, Zannou AL, Jiang J, Adnan T, Mourdoukoutas AP, Kronberg G, Truong D, Boggio P, Brunoni AR, Charvet L, Fregni F, Fritsch B, Gillick B, Hamilton RH, Hampstead BM, Jankord R, Kirton A, Knotkova H, Liebetanz D, Liu A, Loo C, Nitsche MA, Reis J, Richardson JD, Rotenberg A, Turkeltaub PE, Woods AJ. Safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Evidence Based Update 2016. Brain Stimul. 2016 Sep-Oct;9(5):641-661. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.06.004. Epub 2016 Jun 15. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009437 | Neuralgia |
| D013119 | Spinal Cord Injuries |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010523 | Peripheral Nervous System Diseases |
| D009468 | Neuromuscular Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D010146 | Pain |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D065908 | Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation |
| D004569 | Electroencephalography |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D004599 | Electric Stimulation Therapy |
| D013812 | Therapeutics |
| D003295 | Convulsive Therapy |
| D013000 | Psychiatric Somatic Therapies |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
| Electroencephalography | Diagnostic Test | 64-channel active-electrode EEG with impedances kept ~5KOhm |
|
|
| 31899530 | Background | Zhdanov A, Atluri S, Wong W, Vaghei Y, Daskalakis ZJ, Blumberger DM, Frey BN, Giacobbe P, Lam RW, Milev R, Mueller DJ, Turecki G, Parikh SV, Rotzinger S, Soares CN, Brenner CA, Vila-Rodriguez F, McAndrews MP, Kleffner K, Alonso-Prieto E, Arnott SR, Foster JA, Strother SC, Uher R, Kennedy SH, Farzan F. Use of Machine Learning for Predicting Escitalopram Treatment Outcome From Electroencephalography Recordings in Adult Patients With Depression. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jan 3;3(1):e1918377. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18377. |
| 29886266 | Background | Vuckovic A, Gallardo VJF, Jarjees M, Fraser M, Purcell M. Prediction of central neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury based on EEG classifier. Clin Neurophysiol. 2018 Aug;129(8):1605-1617. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2018.04.750. Epub 2018 May 23. |
| 35659993 | Background | Mussigmann T, Bardel B, Lefaucheur JP. Resting-state electroencephalography (EEG) biomarkers of chronic neuropathic pain. A systematic review. Neuroimage. 2022 Sep;258:119351. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119351. Epub 2022 Jun 2. |
| 34425248 | Background | Mari T, Henderson J, Maden M, Nevitt S, Duarte R, Fallon N. Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Machine Learning Algorithms for Classifying Pain Intensity, Phenotype or Treatment Outcomes Using Electroencephalogram Data. J Pain. 2022 Mar;23(3):349-369. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.07.011. Epub 2021 Aug 21. |
| D009461 |
| Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D013118 | Spinal Cord Diseases |
| D002493 | Central Nervous System Diseases |
| D020196 | Trauma, Nervous System |
| D014947 | Wounds and Injuries |
| D004191 | Behavioral Disciplines and Activities |
| D004597 | Electroshock |
| D011580 | Psychological Techniques |
| D003943 | Diagnostic Techniques, Neurological |
| D019937 | Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures |
| D003933 | Diagnosis |
| D004568 | Electrodiagnosis |