Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
PHASE1/PHASE2
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-08-08
2027-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Association Between Brain Stimulations for the Rehabilitation of Chronic Stroke Patients
NCT02817867
Exploration of Repeated High-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Acute Phase Aphasia in Post-stroke Patients
NCT06787508
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Stroke Motor Rehabilitation Treatment
NCT03268070
The Impact of Neuronavigation in rTMS for Hemiplegic Stroke Patients.
NCT07284017
TMS in Aphasia Recovery
NCT04777214
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Notably, previous research has demonstrated that apathy is distinct from post-stroke depression, fatigue, and other affective and cognitive impairments and often persists despite improvements in these associated domains. Existing literature has implicated the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in transdiagnostic amotivation and apathy. The dorsal medial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) lies immediately superficial to the ACC and, via strong functional and structural interconnections and, makes this a promising target for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to modify the substrates of apathy and is a safe and acceptable stimulation target.
Furthermore, rTMS is especially promising for post-stroke apathy (PSA) as it provides the flexibility for personalizing TMS coil placement in relation to post-stroke brain network anomalies, which vary significantly across stroke survivors. A typical course of rTMS entails one treatment/day for 4 to 6 weeks (30-40 sessions), which can be burdensome and reduce adherence, particularly for those with mobility limitations, as is common in stroke. Accelerated rTMS, a recent innovation in which multiple sessions are delivered each day to reduce treatment burden, is safe and effective in depression.
As a first test of suitability in post-stroke apathy (n=14), investigators conducted an open-label pilot trial that delivered 12 sessions of 600 pulses of accelerated intermittent theta burst (iTBS)-rTMS on each of three days within one week to dmPFC (36 total sessions; 21,600 total pulses). Targeting was standardized using neuronavigation and MNI coordinates to position the TMS coil over the left dmPFC. No adverse neuroradiological, neurocognitive, or neuropsychiatric effects were noted coupled with high retention (\>80%) and acceptability ratings. Furthermore, while this Phase I pilot trial was not dosed for efficacy, investigators observed significant effect size (Cohen's d on the Lille Apathy Rating Scale from baseline to one-month was 0.61 along with improvements in apathy, improved quality of life with reduced caregiver burden.
In a separate ongoing dose-response study in the MUSC Brain Stimulation Lab, accelerated iTBS to left dlPFC was applied for up to 10 sessions per day for 5 days, maximum 50 active sessions, 30,000 individual total pulses among individuals with moderate to severe anxiety and depression. The preliminary findings suggest that psychosocial functioning/quality of life improves at higher doses, and the emerging dose-response curve suggests the asymptote is likely above the maximum dose tested (i.e., 10 sessions/day).
Taken together, 1) accelerated rTMS is safe and effective, 2) has the potential to rapidly remediate cross-domain neuropsychiatric impairment in chronic stroke, including apathy and 3) examining higher dose is warranted to optimize outcomes.
In this present study we will examine 1) the efficacy of active relative to sham stimulation in a double-blind, randomized design, 2) safety, acceptability, and efficacy of higher dosing in stroke patients 3) durability, 4) generalizability of gains in other neuropsychiatric and neurocognitive domains outside apathy.
Specifically, we will conduct a double-blind, randomized, sham controlled phase I/II trial of accelerated iTBS-rTMS for PSA and associated impairments in chronic stroke. 36 patients (age 40-80 years) with PSA secondary to ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke (≥6 months chronicity) will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to two stimulation groups: 1) active iTBS to left dmPFC targeted to standardized MNI coordinates, or 2) electrical sham.
Protocol, target location, and assessments will mirror our Phase 1 trial, in which investigators observed large open-label effects, except in this study, investigators will increase to 6 days of treatment over 2 weeks (total 72 sessions; 43,200 total pulses), enabling assessment of efficacy and durability over follow-up.
Participants will undergo clinical assessments at baseline, immediately post-treatment, and 1-month follow-up. Brain MRIs will be collected at pre- and immediately post-treatment.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Active TMS
This group will receive active accelereated iTBS-rTMS
MagVenture MagPro Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) System (Active)
Active treatment will consist of high-dose iTBS-rTMS to left dmPFC delivered in runs of 600 pulses at an intensity of 120% resting motor threshold (rMT). iTBS triplets at 50 Hz will be delivered for 2 seconds, repeated every 10 seconds for a total of 190 seconds. Each session will be separated by at least 10-15 minutes and a total of 12 sessions will be given on each treatment day (3-4 hours per study day). A total of 43,200 pulses will be delivered over the entire six days of treatment.
Brainsight Neuronavigation System
A brainsight neuronavigation system will be used during TMS treatments to target treatment location using individual MRI data
Sham TMS
This group will receive sham accelerated iTBS-rTMS
MagVenture MagPro Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) System (Sham)
For the sham stimulation group, a focal electric sham will be used which is indistinguishable from active TMS including a pretreatment individualized sham titration, sham outputs noises synchronized to pulse delivery, and an individualized level of sham stimulation throughout the treatment.
Technicians administering active vs sham TMS will be masked by using a random code generated by the statistician that will indicate whether to use the active or sham side of the coil. Treatments will appear identical to the technician regardless of whether active or sham TMS is administered.
Brainsight Neuronavigation System
A brainsight neuronavigation system will be used during TMS treatments to target treatment location using individual MRI data
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
MagVenture MagPro Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) System (Active)
Active treatment will consist of high-dose iTBS-rTMS to left dmPFC delivered in runs of 600 pulses at an intensity of 120% resting motor threshold (rMT). iTBS triplets at 50 Hz will be delivered for 2 seconds, repeated every 10 seconds for a total of 190 seconds. Each session will be separated by at least 10-15 minutes and a total of 12 sessions will be given on each treatment day (3-4 hours per study day). A total of 43,200 pulses will be delivered over the entire six days of treatment.
MagVenture MagPro Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) System (Sham)
For the sham stimulation group, a focal electric sham will be used which is indistinguishable from active TMS including a pretreatment individualized sham titration, sham outputs noises synchronized to pulse delivery, and an individualized level of sham stimulation throughout the treatment.
Technicians administering active vs sham TMS will be masked by using a random code generated by the statistician that will indicate whether to use the active or sham side of the coil. Treatments will appear identical to the technician regardless of whether active or sham TMS is administered.
Brainsight Neuronavigation System
A brainsight neuronavigation system will be used during TMS treatments to target treatment location using individual MRI data
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Right- or left-hemisphere ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke with at least 6 months chronicity
* Symptomatic apathy as confirmed by (A) total score on the Apathy Evaluation Scale by the participant or the caregiver/co-participant (AES) of ≥39
* Ability to participate in psychometric testing and cognitive tasks
* Intact cortex at the TMS target site as confirmed by pre-treatment MRI
* Ability to have a co-participant/caregiver who meets the criteria as detailed below.
* Age 18 years or older
* Is a reliable informant who has at least weekly contact with the participant and can speak to the participant's cognitive and everyday functioning.
Exclusion Criteria
* Concomitant neurological disorders affecting motor or cognitive function (e.g. dementia)
* Moderate or severe global aphasia
* Visual impairment precluding completion of cognitive tasks
* Presence of contraindications to MRI or TMS including electrically, magnetically or mechanically activated metal or nonmetal implants such as cardiac pacemaker, intracerebral vascular clips or any other electrically sensitive support system;
* Pregnancy (to be later confirmed by UPT in any premenopausal female participants)
* History of a seizure disorder
* Preexisting scalp lesion, wound, bone defect, or hemicraniectomy
* Claustrophobia precluding ability to undergo an MRI
* Active substance use disorder
* Psychotic disorders
* Bipolar 1 Disorder
* Acute suicidality as assessed by the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)30 or suicide attempt in the previous year
For CO-PARTICIPANT/CAREGIVER:
\- Unable to engage with study procedures in which Co-Participant input is needed.
40 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Medical University of South Carolina
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Parneet Grewal, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Medical University of South Carolina
Lisa McTeague, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Medical University of South Carolina
Kevin Caulfield, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Medical University of South Carolina
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Medical University of South Carolina Brain Stimulation Lab
Charleston, South Carolina, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Marin RS, Biedrzycki RC, Firinciogullari S. Reliability and validity of the Apathy Evaluation Scale. Psychiatry Res. 1991 Aug;38(2):143-62. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(91)90040-v.
Casaletto KB, Umlauf A, Beaumont J, Gershon R, Slotkin J, Akshoomoff N, Heaton RK. Demographically Corrected Normative Standards for the English Version of the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2015 May;21(5):378-91. doi: 10.1017/S1355617715000351. Epub 2015 Jun 1.
Sockeel P, Dujardin K, Devos D, Deneve C, Destee A, Defebvre L. The Lille apathy rating scale (LARS), a new instrument for detecting and quantifying apathy: validation in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006 May;77(5):579-84. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2005.075929.
Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bedirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005 Apr;53(4):695-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x.
Levy R, Dubois B. Apathy and the functional anatomy of the prefrontal cortex-basal ganglia circuits. Cereb Cortex. 2006 Jul;16(7):916-28. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhj043. Epub 2005 Oct 5.
Jorge RE, Starkstein SE, Robinson RG. Apathy following stroke. Can J Psychiatry. 2010 Jun;55(6):350-4. doi: 10.1177/070674371005500603.
Santa N, Sugimori H, Kusuda K, Yamashita Y, Ibayashi S, Iida M. Apathy and functional recovery following first-ever stroke. Int J Rehabil Res. 2008 Dec;31(4):321-6. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e3282fc0f0e.
Le Heron C, Apps MAJ, Husain M. The anatomy of apathy: A neurocognitive framework for amotivated behaviour. Neuropsychologia. 2018 Sep;118(Pt B):54-67. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.07.003. Epub 2017 Jul 8.
Sasaki N, Hara T, Yamada N, Niimi M, Kakuda W, Abo M. The Efficacy of High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Improving Apathy in Chronic Stroke Patients. Eur Neurol. 2017;78(1-2):28-32. doi: 10.1159/000477440. Epub 2017 Jun 3.
Holtzheimer PE 3rd, McDonald WM, Mufti M, Kelley ME, Quinn S, Corso G, Epstein CM. Accelerated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression. Depress Anxiety. 2010 Oct;27(10):960-3. doi: 10.1002/da.20731.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Pro00144684
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.