Reliability and validity of TMS-EEG biomarkers
Authors:
Sara Parmigiani,
Jessica M. Ross,
Christopher Cline,
Christopher B. Minasi,
Juha Gogulski,
Corey J Keller
Abstract:
Noninvasive brain stimulation and neuroimaging have revolutionized human neuroscience, with a multitude of applications including diagnostic subtyping, treatment optimization, and relapse prediction. It is therefore particularly relevant to identify robust and clinically valuable brain biomarkers linking symptoms to their underlying neural mechanisms. Brain biomarkers must be reproducible (i.e., h…
▽ More
Noninvasive brain stimulation and neuroimaging have revolutionized human neuroscience, with a multitude of applications including diagnostic subtyping, treatment optimization, and relapse prediction. It is therefore particularly relevant to identify robust and clinically valuable brain biomarkers linking symptoms to their underlying neural mechanisms. Brain biomarkers must be reproducible (i.e., have internal reliability) across similar experiments within a laboratory and be generalizable (i.e., have external reliability) across experimental setups, laboratories, brain regions, and disease states. However, reliability (internal and external) is not alone sufficient; biomarkers also must have validity. Validity describes closeness to a true measure of the underlying neural signal or disease state. We propose that these two metrics, reliability and validity, should be evaluated and optimized before any biomarker is used to inform treatment decisions. Here, we discuss these metrics with respect to causal brain connectivity biomarkers from coupling transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with electroencephalography (EEG). We discuss controversies around TMS-EEG stemming from the multiple large off-target components (noise) and relatively weak genuine brain responses (signal), as is unfortunately often the case with human neuroscience. We review the current state of TMS-EEG recordings, which consist of a mix of reliable noise and unreliable signal. We describe methods for evaluating TMS-EEG biomarkers, including how to assess internal and external reliability across facilities, cognitive states, brain networks, and disorders, and how to validate these biomarkers using invasive neural recordings or treatment response. We provide recommendations to increase reliability and validity, discuss lessons learned, and suggest future directions for the field.
△ Less
Submitted 18 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
Personalized rTMS for Depression: A Review
Authors:
Juha Gogulski,
Jessica M. Ross,
Austin Talbot,
Christopher Cline,
Francesco L Donati,
Saachi Munot,
Naryeong Kim,
Ciara Gibbs,
Nikita Bastin,
Jessica Yang,
Christopher B. Minasi,
Manjima Sarkar,
Jade Truong,
Corey J Keller
Abstract:
Personalized treatments are gaining momentum across all fields of medicine. Precision medicine can be applied to neuromodulatory techniques, where focused brain stimulation treatments such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) are used to modulate brain circuits and alleviate clinical symptoms. rTMS is well-tolerated and clinically effective for treatment-resistant depression (TRD…
▽ More
Personalized treatments are gaining momentum across all fields of medicine. Precision medicine can be applied to neuromodulatory techniques, where focused brain stimulation treatments such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) are used to modulate brain circuits and alleviate clinical symptoms. rTMS is well-tolerated and clinically effective for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and other neuropsychiatric disorders. However, despite its wide stimulation parameter space (location, angle, pattern, frequency, and intensity can be adjusted), rTMS is currently applied in a one-size-fits-all manner, potentially contributing to its suboptimal clinical response (~50%). In this review, we examine components of rTMS that can be optimized to account for inter-individual variability in neural function and anatomy. We discuss current treatment options for TRD, the neural mechanisms thought to underlie treatment, differences in FDA-cleared devices, targeting strategies, stimulation parameter selection, and adaptive closed-loop rTMS to improve treatment outcomes. We suggest that better understanding of the wide and modifiable parameter space of rTMS will greatly improve clinical outcome.
△ Less
Submitted 26 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
