Long-Term Antidepressant Treatment with Moclobemide for Aphasia in Acute Stroke Patients: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Dementia after Ischemic Stroke, from Molecular Biomarkers to Therapeutic Options

Ischemic stroke is a leading cause of disability worldwide. While much of post-stroke recovery is focused on physical rehabilitation, post-stroke dementia (PSD) is also a significant contributor to poor functional outcomes. Predictive tools to identify stroke survivors at risk for the development of PSD are limited to brief screening cognitive tests. Emerging biochemical, genetic, and neuroimaging biomarkers are being investigated in an effort to unveil better indicators of PSD. Additionally, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, NMDA receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor agonists, antidepressants, and cognitive rehabilitation are current therapeutic options for PSD. Focusing on the chronic sequelae of stroke that impair neuroplasticity highlights the need for continued investigative trials to better assess functional outcomes in treatments targeted for PSD.

A systematic-search-and-review of registered pharmacological therapies investigated to improve neuro-recovery after a stroke

Background

Stroke burden is largely due to long-term impairments requiring prolonged care with loss of productivity. We aimed to identify and assess studies of different registered pharmacological therapies as treatments to improve post-stroke impairments and/or disabilities.

Methods

We performed a systematic-search-and-review of treatments that have been investigated as recovery-enhancing or recovery-promoting therapies in adult patients with stroke. The treatment must have received registration or market authorization in any country regardless of primary indication. Outcomes included in the review were neurological impairments and functional/disability assessments. "The best available studies" based on study design, study size, and/or date of publication were selected and graded for level of evidence (LOE) by consensus.

Results

Our systematic search yielded 7,801 citations, and we reviewed 665 full-text papers. Fifty-eight publications were selected as "the best studies" across 25 pharmacological classes: 31 on ischemic stroke, 21 on ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, 4 on intracerebral hemorrhage, and 2 on subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Twenty-six were systematic reviews/meta-analyses, 29 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and three were cohort studies. Only nimodipine for SAH had LOE A of benefit (systematic review and network meta-analysis). Many studies, some of which showed treatment effects, were assessed as LOE C-LD, mainly due to small sample sizes or poor quality. Seven interventions had LOE B-R (systematic review/meta-analysis or RCT) of treatment effects.

Conclusion

Only one commercially available treatment has LOE A for routine use in stroke. Further studies of putative neuroprotective drugs as adjunctive treatment to revascularization procedures and more confirmatory trials on recovery-promoting therapies will enhance the certainty of their benefit. The decision on their use must be guided by the clinical profile, neurological impairments, and target outcomes based on the available evidence.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=376973, PROSPERO, CRD42022376973.

Pharmacological, non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological interventions, and their combination, for treating depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important morbidity associated with stroke that impacts on recovery, yet is often undetected or inadequately treated.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of pharmacological intervention, non-invasive brain stimulation, psychological therapy, or combinations of these to treat depression after stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

This is a living systematic review. We search for new evidence every two months and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review. We searched the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Stroke, and Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, two clinical trials registers, reference lists and conference proceedings (February 2022). We contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 3) psychological therapy with usual care or attention control; 4) pharmacological intervention and psychological therapy with pharmacological intervention and usual care or attention control; 5) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 8) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo and non-invasive brain stimulation; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation and usual care or attention control, with the intention of treating depression after stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I² statistic and certainty of the evidence according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 65 trials (72 comparisons) with 5831 participants. Data were available for: 1) 20 comparisons; 2) nine comparisons; 3) 25 comparisons; 4) three comparisons; 5) 14 comparisons; and 6) one comparison. We found no trials for comparisons 7 to 9. Comparison 1: Pharmacological interventions Very low-certainty evidence from eight trials suggests pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88; P = 0.002; 8 RCTs; 1025 participants) at end of treatment and very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.70; P = 0.0002; 6 RCTs; 511 participants) compared to placebo. More adverse events related to the central nervous system (CNS) (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.15; P = 0.008; 5 RCTs; 488 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and gastrointestinal system (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.19; P = 0.002; 4 RCTs; 473 participants; very low-certainty evidence) were noted in the pharmacological intervention than in the placebo group. Comparison 2: Non-invasive brain stimulation Very low-certainty evidence from two trials show that non-invasive brain stimulation had little to no effect on the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.14; P = 0.14; 2 RCTs; 130 participants) and the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52, 1.37; P = 0.49; 2 RCTs; 130 participants) compared to sham stimulation. Non-invasive brain stimulation resulted in no deaths. Comparison 3: Psychological therapy Very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that psychological therapy decreased the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression at end of treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; P = 0.01; 521 participants) compared to usual care/attention control. No trials of psychological therapy reported on the outcome inadequate response to treatment. No differences in the number of deaths or adverse events were found in the psychological therapy group compared to the usual care/attention control group. Comparison 4: Pharmacological interventions with psychological therapy No trials of this combination reported on the primary outcomes. Combination therapy resulted in no deaths. Comparison 5: Pharmacological interventions with non-invasive brain stimulation Non-invasive brain stimulation with pharmacological intervention reduced the number of people meeting study criteria for depression at end of treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; P = 0.002; 3 RCTs; 392 participants; low-certainty evidence) but not the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.30; P = 0.75; 3 RCTs; 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to pharmacological therapy alone. Very low-certainty evidence from five trials suggest no difference in deaths between this combination therapy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.16; P = 0.93; 487 participants) compared to pharmacological therapy intervention and sham stimulation or usual care. Comparison 6: Non-invasive brain stimulation with psychological therapy No trials of this combination reported on the primary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low-certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological, psychological and combination therapies can reduce the prevalence of depression while non-invasive brain stimulation had little to no effect on the prevalence of depression. Pharmacological intervention was associated with adverse events related to the CNS and the gastrointestinal tract. More research is required before recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments.

Supporting Post-Stroke Language and Cognition with Pharmacotherapy: Tools for Each Phase of Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is enormous enthusiasm for the possibility of pharmacotherapies to treat language deficits that can arise after stroke. Speech language therapy remains the most frequently utilized and most strongly evidenced treatment, but the numerous barriers to patients receiving the therapy necessary to recover have motivated the creation of a relatively modest, yet highly cited, body of evidence to support the use of pharmacotherapy to treat post-stroke aphasia directly or to augment traditional post-stroke aphasia treatment. In this review, we survey the use of pharmacotherapy to preserve and support language and cognition in the context of stroke across phases of care, discuss key ongoing clinical trials, and identify targets that may become emerging interventions in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent trials have shifted focus from short periods of drug therapy supporting therapy in the chronic phase to longer terms approaching pharmacological maintenance beginning more acutely. Recent innovations in hyperacute stroke care, such as tenecteplase, and acute initiation of neuroprotective agents and serotonin reuptake inhibitors are important areas of ongoing research that complement the ongoing search for effective adjuvants to later therapy. Currently there are no drugs approved in the United States for the treatment of aphasia. Nevertheless, pharmacological intervention may provide a benefit to all phases of stroke care.

Better language through chemistry: Augmenting speech-language therapy with pharmacotherapy in the treatment of aphasia

Speech and language therapy is the standard treatment of aphasia. However, many individuals have barriers in seeking this measure of extensive rehabilitation treatment. Investigating ways to augment therapy is key to improving poststroke language outcomes for all patients with aphasia, and pharmacotherapies provide one such potential solution. Although no medications are currently approved for the treatment of aphasia by the United States Food and Drug Administration, numerous candidate mechanisms for pharmaceutical manipulation continue to be identified based on our evolving understanding of the neurometabolic experience of stroke recovery across molecular, cellular, and functional levels of inquiry. This chapter will review evidence for catecholaminergic, glutamatergic, cholinergic, and serotonergic drug therapies and discuss future directions for both candidate drug selection and pharmacotherapy practice in people with aphasia.

Depression in Poststroke Aphasia

Purpose The aim of this tutorial is to provide speech-language pathologists with foundational knowledge of poststroke depression comorbidly occurring with aphasia. Given the negative effect of depression on functional outcomes and mortality, it is crucial that speech-language pathologists possess this knowledge in order to better advocate for and treat their patients. Method and Results Three areas of complementary expertise (speech-language pathology, psychology, and neurology) collaborated on this tutorial to address the following areas: (a) provide terminology associated with depression and related mood disorders, (b) describe the potential underlying pathophysiology of depression in the general population, (c) provide an overview of our existing understanding of comorbid poststroke depression and aphasia, and (d) summarize current assessment methods and interventions for poststroke depression in adults with aphasia. Conclusion Given the compounding impact aphasia and depression have on rehabilitation outcomes, it is imperative that speech-language pathologists understand terminology, assessment, and treatment practices for depression.

Pharmacological, psychological and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for preventing depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important consequence of stroke that influences recovery yet often is not detected, or is inadequately treated. This is an update and expansion of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, or combinations of these interventions reduce the incidence of diagnosable depression after stroke. Secondary objectives are to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation or combinations of these interventions reduce levels of depressive symptoms and dependency, and improve physical functioning after stroke. We also aim to determine the safety of, and adherence to, the interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Register of Cochrane Stroke and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis (last searched August 2018). In addition, we searched the following databases; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2018), Embase (1980 to August 2018), PsycINFO (1967 to August 2018), CINAHL (1982 to August 2018) and three Web of Science indexes (2002 to August 2018). We also searched reference lists, clinical trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); to August 2018 and ClinicalTrials.gov; to August 2018), conference proceedings; we also contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control; 3) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 4) a pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with a pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control; 5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; 8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy, with the intention of preventing depression after stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I² statistic and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs (21 interventions), with 1771 participants in the review. Data were available for 12 pharmacological trials (14 interventions) and seven psychological trials. There were no trials of non-invasive brain stimulation compared with sham stimulation or usual care, a combination of pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy, or a combination of non-invasive brain stimulation and a pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care to prevent depression after stroke. Treatment effects were observed on the primary outcome of meeting the study criteria for depression at the end of treatment: there is very low-certainty evidence from eight trials (nine interventions) that pharmacological interventions decrease the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68; 734 participants) compared to placebo. There is very low-certainty evidence from two trials that psychological interventions reduce the proportion of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, 607 participants) compared to usual care and/or attention control. Eight trials (nine interventions) found no difference in death and other adverse events between pharmacological intervention and placebo groups (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.91; 496 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence. Five trials found no difference in psychological intervention and usual care and/or attention control groups for death and other adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.91; 975 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that pharmacological interventions and psychological therapy may prevent depression and improve mood after stroke. However, there is very low certainty in these conclusions because of the very low-certainty evidence. More trials are required before reliable recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments after stroke.

Pharmacological, psychological, and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for treating depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important morbidity associated with stroke that impacts on recovery yet often undetected or inadequately treated. This is an update and expansion of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and updated in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective • To determine whether pharmacological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, psychological therapy, or combinations of these interventions reduce the prevalence of diagnosable depression after stroke Secondary objectives • To determine whether pharmacological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, psychological therapy, or combinations of these interventions reduce levels of depressive symptoms, improve physical and neurological function and health-related quality of life, and reduce dependency after stroke • To assess the safety of and adherence to such treatments SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Stroke and Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis (last searched August 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 1), in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966 to August 2018), Embase (1980 to August 2018), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Alllied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to August 2018), PsycINFO (1967 to August 2018), and Web of Science (2002 to August 2018). We also searched reference lists, clinical trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) to August 2018; ClinicalTrials.gov to August 2018), and conference proceedings, and we contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing (1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; (2) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; (3) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control; (4) pharmacological intervention and various forms of psychological therapy with pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control; (5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; (6) pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; (7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; (8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and (9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy, with the intention of treating depression after stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I² statistic and certainty of the evidence according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 trials (56 comparisons) with 3342 participants. Data were available for: (1) pharmacological interventions with placebo (with 20 pharmacological comparisons); (2) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care (with eight non-invasive brain stimulation comparisons); (3) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control (with 16 psychological therapy comparisons); (4) pharmacological intervention and various forms of psychological therapy with pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control (with two comparisons); and (5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care (with 10 comparisons). We found no trials for the following comparisons: (6) pharmacological intervention and various forms of psychological therapy interventions versus placebo and psychological therapy; (7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation versus placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; (8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and (9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy. Treatment effects observed: very low-certainty evidence from eight trials suggests that pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people meeting study criteria for depression (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88; 1025 participants) at end of treatment, and very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people with less than 50% reduction in depression scale scores at end of treatment (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; 511 participants) compared to placebo. No trials of non-invasive brain stimulation reported on meeting study criteria for depression at end of treatment. Only one trial of non-invasive brain stimulation reported on the outcome <50% reduction in depression scale scores; thus, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis for this outcome. Very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that psychological therapy decreased the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression at end of treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; 521 participants) compared to usual care/attention control. No trials of combination therapies reported on the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression at end of treatment. Only one trial of combination (non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention) therapy reported <50% reduction in depression scale scores at end of treatment. Thus, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis for this outcome. Five trials reported adverse events related to the central nervous system (CNS) and noted significant harm in the pharmacological interventions group (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.15; 488 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Four trials found significant gastrointestinal adverse events in the pharmacological interventions group (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.19; 473 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to the placebo group. No significant deaths or adverse events were found in the psychological therapy group compared to the usual care/attention control group. Non-invasive brain stimulation interventions and combination therapies resulted in no deaths.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low-certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological or psychological therapies can reduce the prevalence of depression. This very low-certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological therapy, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, and combined interventions can reduce depressive symptoms. Pharmacological intervention was associated with adverse events related to the CNS and the gastrointestinal tract. More research is required before recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments.

Predicting recovery in acute poststroke aphasia

OBJECTIVE

Many stroke patients show remarkable recovery of language after initial severe impairment, but it is difficult to predict which patients will show good recovery. We aimed to identify patient and lesion characteristics that together predict the best naming outcome in 4 studies.

METHODS

We report 2 longitudinal studies that identified 2 variables at onset that were strongly associated with good recovery of naming (the most common residual deficit in aphasia) in the first 6 months after stroke: damage to left posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG) and/or superior longitudinal fasciculus/arcuate fasciculus (SLF/AF), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) use. We then tested these variables in 2 independent cohorts of chronic left hemisphere stroke patients, using chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes and t tests for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

Lesion load in left pSTG and SLF/AF was associated with poorer naming outcome. Preservation of these areas and use of SSRIs were associated with naming recovery, independent of lesion volume, time since stroke, and depression. Patients with damage to these critical areas showed better naming outcome if they took SSRIs for 3 months after stroke. Those with preservation of these critical areas achieved good recovery of naming regardless of SSRI use.

INTERPRETATION

Lesion load in left pSTG and SLF/AF at onset predicts later naming performance. Although based on a small number of patients, our preliminary results suggest outcome might be modulated by SSRIs, but these associations need to be confirmed in a larger randomized controlled trial. Ann Neurol 2018;83:612-622.

An update on medications and noninvasive brain stimulation to augment language rehabilitation in post-stroke aphasia

INTRODUCTION

Aphasia is among the most debilitating outcomes of stroke. Aphasia is a language disorder occurring in 10-30% of stroke survivors. Speech and Language Therapy (SLT) is the gold standard, mainstay treatment for aphasia, but gains from SLT may be incomplete. Pharmaceutical and noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques may augment the effectiveness of SLT. Areas covered: Herein reviewed are studies of the safety and efficacy of these adjunctive interventions for aphasia, including randomized placebo-controlled and open-label trials, as well as case series from Pubmed, using search terms 'pharmacological,' 'tDCS' or 'TMS' combined with 'aphasia' and 'stroke.' Expert commentary: Relatively small studies have included participants with a range of aphasia types and severities, using inconsistent interventions and outcome measures. Results to-date have provided promising, but weak to moderate evidence that medications and/or NIBS can augment the effects of SLT for improving language outcomes. We end with recommendations for future approaches to studying these interventions, with multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trials.

Amphetamine and other pharmacological agents in human and animal studies of recovery from stroke

Neuromodulation with pharmacological agents, including drugs of abuse such as amphetamine, when paired with behavioral experience, has been shown to positively modify outcomes in animal models of stroke. A number of clinical studies have tested the efficacy of a variety of drugs to enhance recovery of language deficit post-stroke. The purpose of this paper is to: (1) present pertinent animal studies supporting the use of dextro-amphetamine sulfate (AMPH) to enhance recovery after experimental lesions with emphasis on the importance of learning dependent activity for lasting recovery; (2) briefly review neuropharmacological explorations in the treatment of aphasia; (3) present a pilot study in aphasia exploring a drug combination of AMPH and donepezil hydrochloride paired with behavioral treatment to facilitate recovery; and (4) conclude with comments regarding the role of adjunctive pharmacotherapy in the rehabilitation of aphasia, particularly AMPH.

Psycholinguistics of Aphasia Pharmacotherapy: Asking the Right Questions

BACKGROUND

Among the obstacles to demonstrating efficacy of pharmacological intervention for aphasia is quantifying patients' responses to treatment in a statistically valid and reliable manner. In many of the review papers on this topic (e.g., Berthier et al., 2011; de Boissezon, Peran, de Boysson, & Démonet, 2007; Small & Llano, 2009), detailed discussions of various methodological problems are highlighted, with some suggestions on how these shortcomings should be addressed. Given this deep understanding of caveats associated with the experimental design of aphasia pharmacotherapy studies (e.g., Berthier et al., 2011), investigations continue to produce inconsistent results.

AIM

In this review paper we suggest that inclusion of theory-driven linguistic measures in aphasia pharmacotherapy studies would add an important step toward elucidating precise patterns of improvement in language performance resulting from pharmacotherapeutic intervention.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

We provide a brief review of the clinical approaches currently used in pharmacotherapy studies of aphasia, which often lack psycholinguistic grounding. We then present ways in which psycholinguistic models can complement this approach, offering a rationale for task selection, and as a result, lead to a better understanding of treatment effects. We then follow with an example of how such an integrative approach can be implemented in studies targeting stress reduction in people with aphasia, via beta-blocking agents, as a means to augment language performance, using the psycholinguistic framework of "linguistic anxiety" outlined in Cahana-Amitay et al, 2011 as our guideline.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the incorporation of psycholinguistic models into aphasia pharmacotherapy studies can increase the resolution with which we can identify functional changes.

Pharmacologic approaches to cerebral aging and neuroplasticity: insights from the stroke model

Brain plasticity is an intrinsic characteristic of the nervous system that allows continuous remodeling of brain functions in pathophysiological conditions. Although normal aging is associated with morphological modifications and decline of cerebral functions, brain plasticity is at least partially preserved in elderly individuals. A growing body of evidence supports the notion that cognitive enrichment and aerobic training induce a dynamic reorganization of higher cerebral functions, thereby helping to maintain operational skills in the elderly and reducing the incidence of dementia. The stroke model clearly shows that spontaneous brain plasticity exists after a lesion, even in old patients, and that it can be modulated through external factors like rehabilitation and drugs. Whether drugs can be used with the aim of modulating the effects of physical training or cognitive stimulation in healthy aged people has not been addressed until now. The risk:benefit ratio will be the key question with regard to the ethical aspect of this challenge. We review in this article the main aspects of human brain plasticity as shown in patients with stroke, the drug modulation of brain plasticity and its consequences on recovery, and finally we address the question of the influence of aging on brain plasticity.

Use of antidepressant medications to improve outcomes after stroke

Interest in the use of antidepressants after stroke has been renewed by better knowledge of poststroke depression, but mainly by the capacity of some of them to promote functional recovery of nondepressed subjects. Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator thrombolysis within the first few hours after the stroke is currently the only validated treatment able to improve the spontaneous--and most of the time incomplete--recovery of neurological functions after stroke. However, we have learned from research over the last decade, in part based on the considerable improvement of neuroimaging techniques, that spontaneous recovery of neurological functions is associated with a large intracerebral reorganization of the damaged human brain. The question of whether lesioned-brain plasticity can be modulated by external factors such as pharmacological antidepressant agents is now being addressed with the aim of improving recovery and reducing the final disability of patients. Poststroke depression is known to be frequent and deleterious for patient outcome. We review the interest in the use of antidepressants after stroke in classic but often neglected poststroke depression and we strongly underline the action of some antidepressants in promoting functional recovery of nondepressed patients after stroke.

Expert versus proxy rating of verbal communicative ability of people with aphasia after stroke

In randomized clinical trials of aphasia treatment, a functional outcome measure like the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT), administered by speech-language therapists, is often used. However, the agreement between this expert rating and the judgment of the proxy about the quality of the daily life communication of the person with aphasia is largely unknown. We examined the association between ANELT scores by speech-language therapists and proxy judgments on the Partner Communication Questionnaire both at 3 and 6 months in 39 people with aphasia after stroke. We also determined which factors affected the level of agreement between expert and proxy judgment of the communicative ability at 6 months in 53 people with aphasia. We found moderate agreement (at 3 months r = .662; p = < .0001 and at 6 months r = .565; p = .0001), with proxies rating slightly higher than experts. Less severe aphasia, measured with the Aphasia Severity Rating Scale, was associated with better agreement. In conclusion, although proxies were slightly more positive than experts, we found moderate agreement between expert and proxy rating of verbal communicative ability of people with aphasia after stroke, especially in milder cases.

A randomized controlled trial on very early speech and language therapy in acute stroke patients with aphasia

BACKGROUND

Aphasia affects one third of acute stroke patients. There is a considerable spontaneous recovery in aphasia, but impaired communication ability remains a great problem. Communication difficulties are an impediment to rehabilitation. Early treatment of the language deficits leading to increased communication ability would improve rehabilitation. The aim of this study is to elucidate the efficacy of very early speech and language therapy (SLT) in acute stroke patients with aphasia.

METHODS

A prospective, open, randomized, controlled trial was carried out with blinded endpoint evaluation of SLT, starting within 2 days of stroke onset and lasting for 21 days. 123 consecutive patients with acute, first-ever ischemic stroke and aphasia were randomized. The SLT treatment was Language Enrichment Therapy, and the aphasia tests used were the Norsk grunntest for afasi (NGA) and the Amsterdam-Nijmegen everyday language test (ANELT), both performed by speech pathologists, blinded for randomization.

RESULTS

The primary outcome, as measured by ANELT at day 21, was 1.3 in the actively treated patient group and 1.2 among controls. NGA led to similar results in both groups. Patients with a higher level of education (>12 years) improved more on ANELT by day 21 than those with <12 years of education (3.4 vs. 1.0, respectively). In 34 patients in the treatment group and 19 in the control group improvement was ≥1 on ANELT (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the degree of aphasia at baseline except for fluency, which was higher in the group responding to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Very early intensive SLT with the Language Enrichment Therapy program over 21 days had no effect on the degree of aphasia in unselected acute aphasic stroke patients. In aphasic patients with more fluency, SLT resulted in a significant improvement as compared to controls. A higher educational level of >12 years was beneficial.

The molecular basis of thrombolysis and its clinical application in stroke

The rationale for thrombolysis, the most promising pharmacological approach in acute ischaemic stroke, is centred on the principal cause of most ischaemic strokes: the thrombus that occludes the cerebral artery, and renders part of the brain ischaemic. The occluding thrombus is bound together within fibrin. Fibrinolysis acts by activation of plasminogen to plasmin; plasmin splits fibrinogen and fibrin and lyses the clot, which then allows reperfusion of the ischaemic brain. Thrombolytic agents include streptokinase (SK) and recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) amongst others under test or development. SK is nonfibrin-specific, has a longer half-life than tissue-type plasminogen activator (t-PA), prevents re-occlusion and is degraded enzymatically in the circulation. rt-PA is more fibrin-specific and clot-dissolving, and is metabolized during the first passage in the liver. In animal models of ischaemic stroke, the effects of rt-PA are remarkably consistent with the effects seen in human clinical trials. For clinical application, some outcome data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews which includes all randomized evidence available on thrombolysis in man were used. Trials included tested urokinase, SK, rt-PA, pro-urokinase, or desmoteplase. The chief immediate hazard of thrombolytic therapy is fatal intracranial bleeding. However, despite the risk, the human trial data suggest the immediate hazards and the apparent substantial scope for net benefit of thrombolytic therapy given up to 6 h of acute ischaemic stroke. So far the fibrin-specific rt-PA is the only agent to be approved for use in stroke. This may be due to its short half-life and its absence of any specific amount of circulating fibrinogen degradation products, thereby leaving platelet function intact. The short half-life does not leave rt-PA without danger for haemorrhage after the infusion. Due to its fibrin-specificity, it can persist within a fibrin-rich clot for one or more days. The molecular mechanisms with regards to fibrin-specificity in thrombolytic agents should, if further studied, be addressed in within-trial comparisons. rt-PA has antigenic properties and although their long-term clinical relevance is unclear there should be surveillance for allergic reactions in relation to treatment. Although rt-PA is approved for use in selected patients, there is scope for benefit in a much wider variety of patients. A number of trials are underway to assess which additional patients - beyond the age and time limits of the current approval - might benefit, and how best to identify them.

Pharmacotherapy in stroke rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy is commonly given to patients recovering from a stroke to prevent further complications (e.g. recurrent stroke, seizures) or enhance recovery. However, some drugs may have a negative impact on neuroplasticity.

OBJECTIVES

This review examines currently used drugs that are believed to promote recovery from motor and cognitive disturbances associated with stroke.

METHODS

Literature regarding the properties, efficacy, safety, and dosing of drugs used to promote recovery after stroke was reviewed.

RESULTS

The data on pharmacotherapy are insufficient to support a claim of significantly improved rehabilitation outcomes. Moreover, a growing body of evidence indicates that some agents can impair functional reorganization and slow the recovery process. However, a few chemicals are reported to be beneficial for stroke rehabilitation. The most promising are noradrenergic and dopaminergic agents, as well as several growth factors; these should be the future focus of extensive randomized clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no drug with proven efficacy in enhancing poststroke recovery.

Interventions for treating depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important consequence of stroke that impacts on recovery yet is often not detected or inadequately treated. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether pharmaceutical, psychological, or electroconvulsive treatment (ECT) of depression in patients with stroke can improve outcome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the trials registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group (last searched October 2007) and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis Group (last searched February 2008). In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2006), EMBASE (1980 to May 2006), CINAHL (1982 to May 2006), PsycINFO (1967 to May 2006) and other databases. We also searched reference lists, clinical trials registers, conference proceedings and dissertation abstracts, and contacted authors, researchers and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmaceutical agents with placebo, or various forms of psychotherapy or ECT with standard care (or attention control), in patients with stroke, with the intention of treating depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors selected trials for inclusion and assessed methodological quality; three review authors extracted, cross-checked and entered data. Primary analyses were the prevalence of diagnosable depressive disorder at the end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included depression scores on standard scales, physical function, death, recurrent stroke and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials (17 interventions), with 1655 participants, were included in the review. Data were available for 13 pharmaceutical agents, and four trials of psychotherapy. There were no trials of ECT. The analyses were complicated by the lack of standardised diagnostic and outcome criteria, and differing analytic methods. There was some evidence of benefit of pharmacotherapy in terms of a complete remission of depression and a reduction (improvement) in scores on depression rating scales, but there was also evidence of an associated increase in adverse events. There was no evidence of benefit of psychotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A small but significant effect of pharmacotherapy (not psychotherapy) on treating depression and reducing depressive symptoms was found, as was a significant increase in adverse events. More research is required before recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments.

Interventions for preventing depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important consequence of stroke that impacts on recovery yet often is not detected or is inadequately treated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if pharmaceutical or psychological interventions can prevent depression and improve physical and psychological outcomes in patients with stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Trials Registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group (October 2007) and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis Group (February 2008). In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2006), EMBASE (1980 to May 2006), CINAHL (1982 to May 2006), PsycINFO (1967 to May 2006), Applied Science and Technology Plus (1986 to May 2006), Arts and Humanities Index (1991 to September 2002), Biological Abstracts (1969 to September 2002), BIOSIS Previews (2002 to May 2006), General Science Plus (1994 to September 2002), Science Citation Index (1992 to May 2006), Social Sciences Citation Index (1991 to May 2006), SocioFile (1974 to May 2006) ISI Web of Science (2002 to February 2008), reference lists, trial registers, conference proceedings and dissertation abstracts, and contacted authors, researchers and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmaceutical agents with placebo, or psychotherapy against standard care (or attention control) to prevent depression in patients with stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Primary analyses were the proportion of patients who met the standard diagnostic criteria for depression applied in the trials at the end of follow up. Secondary outcomes included depression scores on standard scales, physical function, death, recurrent stroke and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials involving 1515 participants were included. Data were available for 10 pharmaceutical trials (12 comparisons) and four psychotherapy trials. The time from stroke to entry ranged from a few hours to seven months, but most patients were recruited within one month of acute stroke. The duration of treatment ranged from two weeks to one year. There was no clear effect of pharmacological therapy on the prevention of depression or other endpoints. A significant improvement in mood and the prevention of depression was evident for psychotherapy, but the treatment effects were small.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A small but significant effect of psychotherapy on improving mood and preventing depression was identified. More evidence is required before recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments after stroke.

Aphasia therapy on a neuroscience basis

BACKGROUND: Brain research has documented that the cortical mechanisms for language and action are tightly interwoven and, concurrently, new approaches to language therapy in neurological patients are being developed that implement language training in the context of relevant linguistic and non-linguistic actions, therefore taking advantage of the mutual connections of language and action systems in the brain. A further well-known neuroscience principle is that learning at the neuronal level is driven by correlation; consequently, new approaches to language therapy emphasise massed practice in a short time, thus maximising therapy quantity and frequency and, therefore, correlation at the behavioural and neuronal levels. Learned non-use of unsuccessful actions plays a major role in the chronification of neurological deficits, and behavioural approaches to therapy have therefore employed shaping and other learning techniques to counteract such non-use. AIMS: Advances in theoretical and experimental neuroscience have important implications for clinical practice. We exemplify this in the domain of aphasia rehabilitation. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: Whereas classical wisdom had been that aphasia cannot be significantly improved at a chronic stage, we here review evidence that one type of intensive language-action therapy (ILAT)-constraint-induced aphasia therapy-led to significant improvement of language performance in patients with chronic aphasia. We discuss perspectives for further improving speech-language therapy, including drug treatment that may be particularly fruitful when applied in conjunction with behavioural treatment. In a final section we highlight intensive and rapid therapy studies in chronic aphasia as a unique tool for exploring the cortical reorganisation of language. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that intensive language action therapy is an efficient tool for improving language functions even at chronic stages of aphasia. Therapy studies using this technique can open new perspectives for research into the plasticity of human language circuits.

CNS-active drugs in aging population at high risk of cerebrovascular events: evidence from preclinical and clinical studies

The recovery process following cerebral insults such as stroke is affected by aging and pharmacotherapy. The use of medication including CNS-active drugs has increased in the elderly during recent years. However, surprisingly little is known about how safe they are with respect to severity of sensorimotor and cognitive impairments or recovery of function following possible cerebrovascular accidents. This review examines the experimental and clinical literature, primarily from 1995 onwards, concerning medication in relation to cerebrovascular events and functional recovery. Special attention is directed to polypharmacy and to new CNS-active drugs, which the elderly are already taking or are prescribed to treat emerging, stroke-induced psychiatric symptoms. The neurobiological mechanisms affected by these drugs are discussed.

Recognition of Depression in Aphasic Stroke Patients

BACKGROUND

Data on post-stroke depression in aphasia are scarce.

METHODS

Eighty-nine acute stroke patients with aphasia of all types were followed for 6 months to investigate if depression can be reliably diagnosed (DSM-IV criteria) and validly assessed by the verbal Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and a global technique (Clinical Global Impressions Rating Scale for Severity). A standard aphasia test was performed.

RESULTS

In 60 patients (67%) at baseline and in 100% at 6 months, comprehension allowed a reliable DSM-IV diagnosis. Among these patients MADRS was feasible in 95% at baseline and in 100% at 6 months. The assistance of relatives and staff increases the feasibility and decreases the validity. Depression was identified in 24% during the 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Depression diagnosis and severity rating can reliably be made in the acute phase in at least two thirds of aphasic patients, and feasibility increases over time.

Disorders of speech and language: aphasia, apraxia and dysarthria

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review recent important papers pertaining to acquired aphasia, apraxia of speech and dysarthria with special attention to clinically significant work published in the last 12 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

The role of the contralateral inferior frontal gyrus in language recovery after stroke is controversial, but is an area of active research, particularly in functional imaging studies. Recent treatment studies in poststroke aphasia have shown that intensity of language therapy may be more important than the method of therapy. Some studies have indicated that amphetamines, piracetam and repetitive transcortical magnetic stimulation may be effective adjuncts to speech and language therapy. Treatment studies for poststroke dysarthria indicate that speech supplementation strategies may be effective and deserve further study.

SUMMARY

Recent studies of aphasia provide clues regarding language recovery poststroke, but further studies of the role of the ipsi and contralateral inferior frontal gyrus are necessary, and should be longitudinal. There are relatively few recent studies on the treatment of acquired disorders of speech and language, other than poststroke aphasia.

Aphasia and right hemisphere syndromes in stroke

This article highlights the latest findings regarding the effect of acute and chronic stroke on behavior, specifically left hemispheric injury causing aphasia and right hemispheric injury causing neglect, visual-spatial problems, and other cognitive syndromes. We review papers published in the past 2 years pertaining to localization, assessment, recovery, treatment, and outcomes of aphasia and right hemisphere cognitive syndromes following stroke.