Machine learning and individual variability in electric field characteristics predict tDCS treatment response

被引:50
|
作者
Albizu, Alejandro [1 ,2 ]
Fang, Ruogu [1 ,3 ]
Indahlastari, Aprinda [1 ,4 ]
O'Shea, Andrew [1 ,4 ]
Stolte, Skylar E. [3 ]
See, Kyle B. [3 ]
Boutzoukas, Emanuel M. [1 ,4 ]
Kraft, Jessica N. [1 ,2 ]
Nissim, Nicole R. [1 ,2 ]
Woods, Adam J. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Ctr Cognit Aging & Memory, McKnight Brain Inst, Gainesville, FL USA
[2] Univ Florida, Coll Med, Dept Neurosci, Gainesville, FL 32610 USA
[3] Univ Florida, J Crayton Pruitt Family Dept Biomed Engn, Herbert Wertheim Coll Engn, Gainesville, FL USA
[4] Univ Florida, Dept Clin & Hlth Psychol, Coll Publ Hlth & Hlth Profess, Gainesville, FL USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Transcranial direct current stimulation; tDCS; Cognitive aging; Finite element modeling; Machine learning; Treatment response;
D O I
10.1016/j.brs.2020.10.001
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is widely investigated as a therapeutic tool to enhance cognitive function in older adults with and without neurodegenerative disease. Prior research demonstrates that electric current delivery to the brain can vary significantly across individuals. Quantification of this variability could enable person-specific optimization of tDCS outcomes. This pilot study used machine learning and MRI-derived electric field models to predict working memory improvements as a proof of concept for precision cognitive intervention. Methods: Fourteen healthy older adults received 20 minutes of 2 mA tDCS stimulation (F3/F4) during a two-week cognitive training intervention. Participants performed an N-back working memory task pre-/ post-intervention. MRI-derived current models were passed through a linear Support Vector Machine (SVM) learning algorithm to characterize crucial tDCS current components (intensity and direction) that induced working memory improvements in tDCS responders versus non-responders. Main results: SVM models of tDCS current components had 86% overall accuracy in classifying treatment responders vs. non-responders, with current intensity producing the best overall model differentiating changes in working memory performance. Median current intensity and direction in brain regions near the electrodes were positively related to intervention responses (r = 0.811, p < 0.001 and r = 0.774, p = 0.001). Conclusions: This study provides the first evidence that pattern recognition analyses of MRI-derived tDCS current models can provide individual prognostic classification of tDCS treatment response with 86% accuracy. Individual differences in current intensity and direction play important roles in determining treatment response to tDCS. These findings provide important insights into mechanisms of tDCS response as well as proof of concept for future precision dosing models of tDCS intervention. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1753 / 1764
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Integrating electric field modeling and pre-tDCS behavioral performance to predict the individual tDCS effect on visual crowding
    Chen, Luyao
    Chen, Guanpeng
    Gong, Xizi
    Fang, Fang
    JOURNAL OF NEURAL ENGINEERING, 2023, 20 (05)
  • [2] TDCS Inter-individual variability in Electric Field Distribution for chronic stroke: A simulation study
    Ti, Chun Hang Eden
    Yuan, Kai
    Tong, Raymond Kai-yu
    2021 10TH INTERNATIONAL IEEE/EMBS CONFERENCE ON NEURAL ENGINEERING (NER), 2021, : 1048 - 1051
  • [3] Machine Learning Techniques to Predict SIBO Treatment Response
    Waghela, Rajdeepsingh
    Saleh, Adam A.
    Amini, Shayan
    Quigley, Eamonn M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2023, 118 (10): : S1331 - S1331
  • [4] Clinical patterns differentially predict response to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and escitalopram in major depression: A machine learning analysis of the ELECT-TDCS study
    Kambeitz, Joseph
    Goerigk, Stephan
    Gattaz, Wagner
    Falkai, Peter
    Bensenor, Isabela M.
    Lotufo, Paulo A.
    Buehner, Markus
    Koutsouleris, Nikolaos
    Padberg, Frank
    Brunoni, Andre R.
    JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS, 2020, 265 : 460 - 467
  • [5] A Machine Learning Approach Using Effective Connectivity to Predict Response to Clozapine Treatment
    Ciprian, Claudio
    Masychev, Kirill
    Ravan, Maryam
    Reilly, James P.
    Maccrimmon, Duncan
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL SYSTEMS AND REHABILITATION ENGINEERING, 2020, 28 (12) : 2598 - 2607
  • [6] COMPARING TWO MACHINE LEARNING APPROACHES TO PREDICT TREATMENT RESPONSE PATTERNS IN EATING DISORDER TREATMENT
    Espel-Huynh, Hallie
    Thomas, J. Graham
    Zhang, Fengqing
    Boswell, James F.
    Juarascio, Adrienne
    Lowe, Michael
    ANNALS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE, 2019, 53 : S540 - S540
  • [7] Dose-controlled tDCS reduces electric field intensity variability at a cortical target site
    Evans, Carys
    Bachmann, Clarissa
    Lee, Jenny S. A.
    Gregoriou, Evridiki
    Ward, Nick
    Bestmann, Sven
    BRAIN STIMULATION, 2020, 13 (01) : 125 - 136
  • [8] Applying ensemble machine learning models to predict individual response to a digitally delivered worry postponement intervention
    Gyorda, Joseph A.
    Nemesure, Matthew D.
    Price, George
    Jacobson, Nicholas C.
    JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS, 2023, 320 : 201 - 210
  • [9] COMBINING CLINICAL AND GENETIC VARIABLES TO PREDICT ANTIDEPRESSANT TREATMENT RESPONSE: A MACHINE LEARNING APPROACH
    Iniesta, Raquel
    Hodgson, Karen
    Malki, Karim
    Maier, Wolfgang
    Rietschel, Marcella
    Mors, Ole
    Hauser, Joanna
    Henigsberg, Neven
    Dernovsek, Mojca-zvezdana
    Souery, Daniel
    Stahl, Daniel
    Farmer, Anne
    Lewis, Cathryn
    McGuffin, Peter
    Uher, Rudolf
    EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2017, 27 : S353 - S354
  • [10] Development of Machine Learning Based Models to Predict Treatment Response to Spinal Cord Stimulation
    Hadanny, Amir
    Pilitsis, Julie G.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 68 : 87 - 88