Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| K99DC023302 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) | NIH |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This project aims to tailor repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) target to the clinical profile of post-stroke aphasia, specifically focusing on lexicosemantic impairments, to enhance recovery. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) will provide critical insights into the effects of facilitatory versus inhibitory stimulation on interhemispheric balance. Additionally, this study will generate new data on how lesion localization and brain connectivity influence individual responses to rTMS, explaining variability in treatment efficacy.
Background and aims In the United States, 18 to 66% of individuals who experience a stroke will suffer from language impairment, referred to as aphasia. Aphasia profoundly impacts quality of life by restricting participation in social, familial, and professional spheres. While the gold standard for aphasia rehabilitation is Speech and Language Therapy (SLT), it often does not lead to complete recovery. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) or Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) are non-invasive brain stimulation techniques that could enhance post-stroke aphasia recovery. Most rTMS and tDCS studies in post-stroke aphasia following left hemispheric strokes have applied inhibitory stimulation targeting the right Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG) or facilitatory stimulation targeting the left IFG (i.e., Broca's area and its right homologue).
Aim 1: Focusing solely on the IFG for all participants with post-stroke aphasia may be inefficient, as the language system is widespread and complex, and involves large, interconnected networks also linked to non-linguistic cognitive functions such as working memory or executive functions. Previous research indicated that individuals with different language impairments may have varied recovery paths, and using the same cortical target for non-invasive brain stimulation might be ineffective or even impair recovery. Interestingly, rTMS targeting the motor cortex of the lips in people with phonological impairments improved accuracy and decreased phonological errors in a Picture Naming Task. This improvement likely resulted from rTMS modulating not only the targeted motor cortex but also the connected dorsal phonological stream via intra- and interhemispheric connections. Building on this principle, a pilot study was conducted using inhibitory rTMS targeting the right Anterior Temporal Lobe (ATL) in people with post-stroke aphasia suffering from lexicosemantic impairments, with improvement in Picture Naming for all participants. Lexicosemantic difficulties manifest as anomia and/or semantic errors (e.g., saying tea instead of coffee) and can result from deficits in lexical access or within the semantic system itself. Lexicosemantic processes involve a complex brain network. According to the hub-and-spokes theory, the ATL serves as a central amodal semantic hub that integrates information from various modalities. Other theories emphasize its multimodal and potentially lexical sensibility. This study hypothesizes that rTMS targeting the ATL will modulate the ventral stream of language, resulting in improvements in people with lexicosemantic impairments. This RCT aims to combine ATL stimulation with Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) rehabilitation, which strengthens lexicosemantic links. This approach was expected to enhance the effect of rTMS on lexicosemantic processes.
Aim 2 and 3.3: Furthermore, the facilitation of the left hemisphere and the inhibition of the right undamaged hemisphere are based on the theory of transcallosal interhemispheric imbalance, where brain lesion leads to hyperactivation of the undamaged hemisphere and hypoactivation of the damaged hemisphere. The undamaged right hemisphere could play a maladaptive role in post-stroke aphasia recovery. However, the role of right hemisphere activation in post-stroke aphasia recovery remains unclear, as it may support recovery in certain participants during both the subacute and chronic phases. More research is needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms of facilitatory and inhibitory stimulation targeting respectively the undamaged and damaged hemispheres.
Aim 3: While non-invasive brain stimulation has been shown to be effective in post-stroke aphasia, certain people with post-stroke aphasia respond better than others. The previous sections highlighted the impact cortical target and stimulation parameters, but recent studies have also proposed that participant's aphasia type or lesion localization may influence their response. Further research, particularly using rTMS, is needed to clarify how lesion localization and disconnections contribute to recovery, as these factors may explain chronic post-stroke language impairments and predict rTMS efficacy. Since the ATL serves as a central hub in the ventral lexicosemantic stream, and rTMS modulates other brain areas through both inter- and intra-hemispheric connectivity, the hypothesis was as follow: a preserved connectivity between the ATL and the posterior temporal lobe will be a strong predictor of rTMS effectiveness.
Study Intervention Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) the inhibitory continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (cTBS) targeting the right ATL, (2) the facilitatory intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) targeting the left ATL, or (3) the sham control TMS group, with sham stimulation targeting either the left or right ATL in half of the participants. The intervention will consist of two weeks of stimulation according to group assignment, five times per week (10 sessions total), followed by 30 minutes of Speech-Language Therapy using the Semantic Feature Analysis method.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inhibitory rTMS | Experimental | Participants will receive inhibitory continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (cTBS) targeting the right ATL 5 times a week for 2 weeks. Each stimulation session will be followed by 30-min of Speech and Language Therapy using the Semantic Feature Analysis protocol. |
|
| Facilitatory rTMS | Experimental | Participants will receive facilitatory intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) targeting the left ATL 5 times a week for 2 weeks. Each stimulation session will be followed by 30-min of Speech and Language Therapy using the Semantic Feature Analysis protocol. |
|
| Sham rTMS | Sham Comparator | Participants will receive sham stimulation targeting either the left or right ATL with allocation balanced across participants, 5 times a week for 2 weeks. Each stimulation session will be followed by 30-min of Speech and Language Therapy using the Semantic Feature Analysis protocol. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| continuous Theta Burst Stimulation | Device | We will use continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (600 pulses, burst frequency at 5 Hz, burst of three pulses at 50Hz) targeting the right ATL |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Picture Naming task accuracy | The primary outcome is improvement in accuracy of the a Picture Naming task. Participants will complete a Picture Naming tasks based on the Older Adult Naming Test. Participants will name items from pictures as quickly and accurately as possible. Items will include mid-frequency words and 10 pictures of middle-to-late age-of-acquisition words (mean = 10.01 years, SD = 1.16). | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Picture Naming Reaction time | Reaction times will also be recorded for the picture naming task using E-Prime software (version 3.0). A decrease in reaction time for the picture naming task will be considered as an improvement. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sophie Arheix-Parras, PhD | Contact | 803-467-8018 | sophie.arheix-parras@sc.edu |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McCausland Center | Recruiting | Columbia | South Carolina | 29203 | United States |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30208415 | Background | Quique YM, Evans WS, Dickey MW. Acquisition and Generalization Responses in Aphasia Naming Treatment: A Meta-Analysis of Semantic Feature Analysis Outcomes. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019 Mar 11;28(1S):230-246. doi: 10.1044/2018_AJSLP-17-0155. | |
| 33862065 | Background | Arheix-Parras S, Barrios C, Python G, Cogne M, Sibon I, Engelhardt M, Dehail P, Cassoudesalle H, Moucheboeuf G, Glize B. A systematic review of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in aphasia rehabilitation: Leads for future studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021 Aug;127:212-241. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.04.008. Epub 2021 Apr 20. |
Not provided
Not provided
The expected data types include:
Data will be made available upon publication of the respective study. Data will remain accessible for at least 10 years post-publication.
Interested research will be able to access the following data : - De-identified behavioral data (reaction time, accuracy, transcription) at be shared publicly using OSF
Not provided
Not provided
We will conduct a superiority randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three parallel groups: (1) inhibitory continuous Theta Burst Stimulation (cTBS) targeting the right ATL; (2) the facilitatory intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) targeting the left ATL; (3) sham stimulation, targeting either the left or right ATL with allocation balanced across participants. In all three groups, participants will receive rTMS five times per week for two consecutive weeks (10 sessions in total). Each rTMS session will be immediately followed by Speech and Language Therapy (SLT) using the Semantic Feature Analysis (SFA) protocol. Assessments will be conducted at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at one-month follow-up. Participants will also undergo fMRI scanning at S1 and S2.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation | Device | We will use intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (600 pulses, burst frequency at 5 Hz, burst of three pulses at 50Hz, interval intertrain of 8 sec, 10 pulses in train) targeting the left ATL |
|
|
| Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sham | Device | We will use sham stimulation using the same coil but flipped over, with the left ATL targeted in half of the participant and the right ATL in the other half. The placebo coil will replicate the auditory sensations produced by active stimulation. In addition, we will use electrical stimulation of the scalp (via electrodes placed over specific muscles) in the Sham group to mimic the sensory effects of active stimulation. Participants will have no prior rTMS experience before inclusion in the protocol. |
|
| Semantic Feature Analysis | Behavioral | Participants will receive 30 minutes of Semantic Feature Analysis therapy administered by a Speech and Language Pathologist. On a computer screen, participants will see an image of an object and will be cued to retrieve the object's name by describing various features of the object, including its physical properties, typical location, personal associations, category, use and actions involving the object (Quique et al., 2019). |
|
|
| Auditory Description Naming accuracy | Participants will complete an Auditory Description Naming based on the Older Adult Naming Test. Participants will name items from verbal descriptions as quickly and accurately as possible. Items will include mid-frequency words supplemented with 10 descriptions of middle to high-frequency abstract words (mean frequency = 3.45, SD = 0.90). | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Auditory Description Naming reaction time | Reaction times will also be recorded using E-Prime software (version 3.0) for the auditory description naming task. A decrease in Reaction Time will be considered as improvement. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Comprehensive Aphasia Test - cognitive screening | Online version of the Comprehensive Aphasia Test (CAT): cognitive screening score (scale /49, higher meaning better outcome) | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Comprehensive Aphasia Test - language score | Online version of the Comprehensive Aphasia Test (CAT): language comprehension (spoken and written words, sentences, and paragraphs) and expressive language (repetition, picture description, reading aloud, writing) (Total scale /402, higher meaning better outcome). | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Comprehensive Aphasia Test - aphasia impact questionnaire | Online version of the Comprehensive Aphasia Test (CAT): Aphasia Impact Questionnaire score (124-item scale; higher scores indicate a greater impact of aphasia on the participant's life, meaning worse outcome). | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Similarity task Accuracy | Participants will be asked whether pairs of items are similar or dissimilar in meaning (for example, coffee and tea are similar in meaning, whereas cat and cup are not). Accuracy will be recorded. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Similarity task - reaction time | We will also measure Reaction time for this task. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Verb naming task accuracy | Verb naming will be assessed using video clips from the T-DAV 20. Only the number of correct answers will be recorded as an outcome measure. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Digit span | Digit span (WAIS-IV) for the working memory and the total score will be reported. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Flanker task | Using an E-Prime script, inhibitory processes will be measured with the Flanker task. Accuracy will be used as the outcome measure. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| Flexibility - Trail Making Test | Flexibility will be measured using the Trail Making Test, and the reaction time difference between Parts B and A will be used as the outcome measure. | Baseline assessment conducted within 7 days prior to intervention Post-intervention assessment conducted within 3 days after the final intervention session Follow-up assessment conducted 1 month after the end of the intervention |
| 12855827 | Background | Hilari K, Byng S, Lamping DL, Smith SC. Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39): evaluation of acceptability, reliability, and validity. Stroke. 2003 Aug;34(8):1944-50. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000081987.46660.ED. Epub 2003 Jul 10. |
| 17456896 | Background | Nippold MA, Mansfield TC, Billow JL. Peer conflict explanations in children, adolescents, and adults: examining the development of complex syntax. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2007 May;16(2):179-88. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2007/022). |
| 33243615 | Background | Rossi S, Antal A, Bestmann S, Bikson M, Brewer C, Brockmoller J, Carpenter LL, Cincotta M, Chen R, Daskalakis JD, Di Lazzaro V, Fox MD, George MS, Gilbert D, Kimiskidis VK, Koch G, Ilmoniemi RJ, Lefaucheur JP, Leocani L, Lisanby SH, Miniussi C, Padberg F, Pascual-Leone A, Paulus W, Peterchev AV, Quartarone A, Rotenberg A, Rothwell J, Rossini PM, Santarnecchi E, Shafi MM, Siebner HR, Ugawa Y, Wassermann EM, Zangen A, Ziemann U, Hallett M; basis of this article began with a Consensus Statement from the IFCN Workshop on "Present, Future of TMS: Safety, Ethical Guidelines", Siena, October 17-20, 2018, updating through April 2020. Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol. 2021 Jan;132(1):269-306. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.003. Epub 2020 Oct 24. |
| 41594838 | Background | Arheix-Parras S, Moore SR, Desai RH. Improving Lexicosemantic Impairments in Post-Stroke Aphasia Using rTMS Targeting the Right Anterior Temporal Lobe. Brain Sci. 2026 Jan 22;16(1):117. doi: 10.3390/brainsci16010117. |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D020521 | Stroke |
| D001037 | Aphasia |
| D003147 | Communication Disorders |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D002561 | Cerebrovascular Disorders |
| D001927 | Brain Diseases |
| D002493 | Central Nervous System Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D014652 | Vascular Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| D013064 | Speech Disorders |
| D007806 | Language Disorders |
| D019954 | Neurobehavioral Manifestations |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D065886 | Neurodevelopmental Disorders |
| D001523 | Mental Disorders |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D050781 | Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation |
| D013070 | Speech Therapy |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D055909 | Magnetic Field Therapy |
| D013812 | Therapeutics |
| D012049 | Rehabilitation of Speech and Language Disorders |
| D012046 | Rehabilitation |
| D000359 | Aftercare |
| D003266 | Continuity of Patient Care |
| D005791 | Patient Care |
Not provided
Not provided