The placebo effect on resting tremor in Parkinson's disease: an electrophysiological study

Non-Invasive Transcutaneous Afferent Patterned Stimulation Therapy Offers Action Tremor Relief in Parkinson's Disease

Background

Many patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience action tremor (including postural and kinetic tremors) that impair activities of daily living. Transcutaneous afferent patterned stimulation (TAPS) is a non-invasive neuromodulation therapy that modulates tremorgenic activity at the ventral intermediate nucleus (VIM). Most TAPS evidence evaluated relief of action tremor associated with essential tremor (ET). This study evaluated whether TAPS results in similar relief of action tremor associated with PD.

Methods

Forty PD patients with action tremors were enrolled in a prospective, single-arm, open-label study with four weeks of unsupervised at-home TAPS sessions in the dominant hand twice daily in between supervised TAPS sessions at two telemedicine appointments. The primary endpoint was change in tremor power as measured by the on-board accelerometer before and immediately after a stimulation session. Additional study endpoints included change in Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III (MDS-UPDRS), change in Bain and Findley Activities of Daily Living (BF-ADL) scale, and clinician and patient global impressions of improvement (CGI-I and PGI-I).

Results

TAPS reduced tremor power by 64% (54%-79%) (median (interquartile range), p < 0.001), with 79% of patients experiencing at least 50% reduction. When comparing pre-stimulation scores at visit 1 to post-stimulation scores at visit 2, TAPS improved per-task MDS-UPDRS III ratings of postural and kinetic tremors (0.6 ± 0.5, t(34) = 7.05, p < 0.001) and per-task patient-ratings of BF-ADL ADL upper limb motion ratings (0.5 ± 0.5, t(34) = 5.69, p < 0.001). Clinicians reported improvement in 78-83% of patients and 75-80% of patients reported improvement. Adverse events, most commonly skin reaction at the stimulation site, occurred in 18% of patients.

Conclusion

Objective, clinician-rated, and patient-rated assessments demonstrated that TAPS provided clinically meaningful relief of action tremor in patients with PD.

Cerebellar repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation versus propranolol for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Propranolol, a nonselective beta-adrenergic blocker, has long been used as one of the standard treatments for essential tremor (ET). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has also been used for a long time as a substitution therapy for ET patients.

OBJECTIVE

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the antitremor effect of 1-Hz (low-frequency) cerebellar rTMS and compare it to the use of propranolol in ET patients.

METHODS

In this single-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot study, a total of 38 patients with ET were randomized into two groups. One group (n = 20) received 1200 pulses of 1-Hz rTMS at an intensity of 90% of the resting motor threshold to the bilateral cerebellar region for 10 days. Another group (n = 18) received oral propranolol for 30 days. The initial dose was 30 mg/day, which was increased to 60 mg/day after 5 days, then to 90 mg/day on the 11th day, and continued thereafter for 20 days. The Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) clinical scale was assessed at baseline and at days 5, 10, and 30 to evaluate tremor severity, specific motor tasks, and functional disability.

RESULTS

Low-frequency rTMS of the cerebellum significantly improved tremor severity, specific motor tasks (writing, spiral drawing, and pouring), and FTM total scores on days 10 and 30. Nevertheless, we found no significant difference in functional disability at any point in time (p > .05). There were no statistically significant differences in FTM Part A, Part B, Part C scores and total scores of patients in propranolol group on days 5 and 10 compared with before treatment (p > .05). However, FTM total scores and FTM Part A, Part B, and Part C scores were significantly improved for patients when the dose of propranolol was 90 mg/day on day 30. Our study showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the total FTM scores and FTM Part A, Part B, and Part C scores between rTMS and propranolol on days 5, 10, and 30 (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that both cerebellar low-frequency rTMS and propranolol could be effective treatment options for patients with ET, but it is not clear which method is more effective.

A review on pathology, mechanism, and therapy for cerebellum and tremor in Parkinson's disease

Tremor is one of the core symptoms of Parkinson’s disease (PD), but its mechanism is poorly understood. The cerebellum is a growing focus in PD-related researches and is reported to play an important role in tremor in PD. The cerebellum may participate in the modulation of tremor amplitude via cerebello-thalamo-cortical circuits. The cerebellar excitatory projections to the ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus may be enhanced due to PD-related changes, including dopaminergic/non-dopaminergic system abnormality, white matter damage, and deep nuclei impairment, which may contribute to dysregulation and resistance to levodopa of tremor. This review summarized the pathological, structural, and functional changes of the cerebellum in PD and discussed the role of the cerebellum in PD-related tremor, aiming to provide an overview of the cerebellum-related mechanism of tremor in PD.

Functional neurological disorder: Extending the diagnosis to other disorders, and proposing an alternate disease term—Attentionally-modifiable disorder

BACKGROUND: The term “functional neurological disorder,” or “FND,” applies to disorders whose occurrence of neurological symptoms fluctuate with the patient’s attention to them. However, many other disorders that are not called “FND” nonetheless can also follow this pattern. Consequently, guidelines are unclear for diagnosing “FND.” OBJECTIVE: To review the neurological conditions that follow this pattern, but which have not so far been termed “FND,” to understand their overlap with conditions that have been termed “FND,” and to discuss the rationale for why FND has not been diagnosed for them. METHOD: A systematic review of the PubMed literature registry using the terms “fluctuation,” “inconsistency,” or “attention” did not yield much in the way of these candidate disorders. Consequently, this review instead relied on the author’s personal library of peer-reviewed studies of disorders that have resembled FND but which were not termed this way, due to his longstanding interest in this problem. Consequently, this approach was not systematic and was subjective regarding disease inclusion. RESULTS: This review identified numerous, diverse conditions that generally involve fluctuating neurological symptoms that can vary with the person’s attention to them, but which have not been called “FND.” The literature was unclear for reasons for not referring to “FND” in these instances. CONCLUSION: Most likely because of historical biases, the use of the term “FND” has been unnecessarily restricted. Because at its core FND is an attentionally-influenced disorder that can respond well to behavioral treatments, the field of neurological rehabilitation could benefit by extending the range of conditions that could be considered as “FND” and referred for similar behavioral treatments. Because the term “FND” has been viewed unfavorably by some patients and clinical practitioners and whose treatment is not implied, the alternative term attentionally-modifiable disorder is proposed.

Deep-Brain Stimulation for Essential Tremor and Other Tremor Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Current Targets and Clinical Outcomes

Tremor is a prevalent symptom associated with multiple conditions, including essential tremor (ET), Parkinson's disease (PD), multiple sclerosis (MS), stroke and trauma. The surgical management of tremor evolved from stereotactic lesions to deep-brain stimulation (DBS), which allowed safe and reversible interference with specific neural networks. This paper reviews the current literature on DBS for tremor, starting with a detailed discussion of current tremor targets (ventral intermediate nucleus of the thalamus (Vim), prelemniscal radiations (Raprl), caudal zona incerta (Zi), thalamus (Vo) and subthalamic nucleus (STN)) and continuing with a discussion of results obtained when performing DBS in the various aforementioned tremor syndromes. Future directions for DBS research are then briefly discussed.

Cerebellar repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for essential tremor: A double-blind, sham-controlled, crossover, add-on clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There is controversial evidence about the effect of cerebellar low-frequency stimulation in patients with essential tremor (ET).

OBJECTIVES

In this study we assessed safety and effectiveness of 1 Hz (low-frequency) cerebellar repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on tremor severity in patients with essential tremor in a sham-controlled crossover trial.

METHODS

A total of 23 patients assigned into two groups to receive either sham (n = 10) or rTMS (n = 13) treatment, with crossing over after a two-month washout period. Intervention consisted of 900 pulses of 1 Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold or the same protocol of sham stimulation over each cerebellar hemisphere for 5 consecutive days. Tremor severity was assessed by Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) scale at baseline and at days 5, 12 and 30 after intervention. The FTM consists of 3 subscales including tremor severity rating, performance of motor tasks, and functional disability. Carry-over and treatment effects were analyzed using independent samples t-test.

RESULTS

There was no significant improvement in the total FTM scores in rTMS compared to the sham stimulation on day 5 (p = 0.132), day 12 (p = 0.574), or day 30 (p = 0.382). Similarly, FTM subscales, including tremor severity rating, motor tasks, and functional disability did not improve significantly after rTMS treatment. Mild headache and local pain were the most frequent adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Although cerebellar rTMS seems to have acceptable safety when used in ET patients, this study could not prove any efficacy for it in reduction of tremor in these patients. Larger studies are needed to evaluate efficacy of this therapeutic intervention and to provide evidence about the optimal stimulation parameters.

Verbal communication about drug dosage balances drug reduction in Parkinson's disease: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidences

INTRODUCTION

Changing drug dosage is common in clinical practice. Recent evidence showed that psychological factors may affect the therapeutic outcome. The aim of this study is to test whether verbal communication about drug dosage changes motor performance and fatigue in Parkinson's Disease (PD) patients.

METHODS

We performed clinical (Unified PD Rating Scale), motor (number of finger flexions and perceived fatigue), and electrophysiological measurements (readiness potential, RP) in PD patients during medication-off and medication-on conditions in three groups. The first group got a full dose of l-dopa and was told it was a full dose. The second group got half dose and was told it was half dose. The third group got half dose, but it was told it was a full standard dose.

RESULTS

We found that overt half dose was less effective than the full dose for clinical improvement, motor performance, and readiness potential. However, if half dose was given along with verbal instructions that it was a full dose, clinical improvement, motor performance and readiness potential were not significantly different from the full dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that verbal communication about dose reduction is as effective as the 50% dose reduction itself, demonstrating that deceptive information about the dose may have an important impact on the therapeutic outcome. Moreover, the supplementary motor area, source of the RP, seems to be involved in this psychological effect.

The effect of 8 weeks of treatment with transcranial pulsed electromagnetic fields on hand tremor and inter-hand coherence in persons with Parkinson's disease

Background

Parkinson’s disease (PD) tremor comprises asymmetric rest and postural tremor with unilateral onset. Tremor intensity can be amplified by stress and reduced by attention, and the medical treatment is complex. Mirror movements and unintentional synchronization of bimanual movements, possibly caused by insufficient inhibition of inter-hemispheric crosstalk, have been reported in PD, indicating a lag of lateralization.

Potential neuroprotective effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF) have been reported in-vitro and in rodents, as have influences of PEMF on human tremor.

The aim was to investigate the effect of 8 weeks daily transcranial PEMF treatment (T-PEMF) of persons with PD on rest and postural hand tremor characteristics and on inter-hand coherence.

Methods

Hand accelerations of 50 PD participants with uni- or bilateral tremor participating in a clinical trial were analysed. A rest and postural tremor task performed during serial subtraction was assessed before and after 8 weeks of T-PEMF (30 min/day, 50 Hz, ±50 V, 3 ms squared pulses) or placebo treatment (sham stimulation 30 min/day). Forty matched healthy persons (no treatment) were included as reference. Intensity and inter-hand coherence related measures were extracted.

Results

The T-PEMF treatment decreased the inter-hand coherence in the PD group with unilateral postural tremor. The PD group with unilateral postural tremor was less clinically affected by the disease than the PD group with bilateral postural tremor. However, no differences between T-PEMF and placebo treatment on either intensity related or coherence related measures were found when all persons with PD were included in the analyses. The peak power decreased and the tremor intensity tended to decrease in both treatment groups.

Conclusions

Eight weeks of T-PEMF treatment decreased inter-hand coherence in the PD group with unilateral postural tremor, while no effects of T-PEMF treatment were found for the entire PD group. The unilateral postural tremor group was less clinically affected than the bilateral postural tremor group, suggesting that early treatment initiation may be beneficial. In theory, a reduced inter-hand coherence could result from a neuronal treatment response increasing inter-hemispheric inhibition. However, this requires further studies to determine. Studies of even longer treatment periods would be of interest.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02125032. Registered 29 April 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02125032?term=NCT02125032&rank=1

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-019-0491-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Modulation of the Motor System by Placebo and Nocebo Effects

There is strong behavioral evidence that placebo and nocebo effects can influence aspects of motor performance like speed, force, and resistance to fatigue in athletes and non-athletes alike. These behavioral studies were essential for extending experimental investigation of the placebo and nocebo effects from the pain to the motor domain and to reveal how verbal suggestions and experiential learning are involved in shaping modulatory systems and related behavioral responses. However, the neural underpinnings of these effects in the motor domain are still largely unknown. Studies in healthy subjects demonstrated that the placebo-induced enhancement of force is associated with increased activity in the corticospinal system and that the placebo-induced reduction of fatigue can be disclosed by recording the readiness potential, an electrophysiological sign of movement preparation. Further evidence derives from studies in patients with Parkinson's disease that have directly demonstrated that placebo-induced improvements in motor symptoms are related to changes in subcortical neural firing activity and dopamine release. Future investigations are needed to better clarify the complex neural architecture underpinning the placebo and nocebo effects in the motor domain.