Transcranial direct current stimulation and neuroplasticity genes: implications for psychiatric disorders

Chhabra, Harleen; Shivakumar, Venkataram; Agarwal, Sri Mahavir; Bose, Anushree; Venugopal, Deepthi; Rajasekaran, Ashwini; Subbanna, Manjula; Kalmady, Sunil V.; Narayanaswamy, Janardhanan C.; Debnath, Monojit; Venkatasubramanian, Ganesan

doi:10.1017/neu.2015.20

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 94 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For this purpose, mainly genes with an established role in the regulation of neuroplasticity (Chhabra et al, 2016), particularly the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) Val66Met and the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) Val108/158Met polymorphisms have been investigated.…”

Section: Tdcs In Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Modulation of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Effects on Cognition

Wiegand

Nieratschker

Plewnia

2016

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High inter-individual variability substantially challenges the explanatory power of studies on the modulation of cognitive functions with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). These differences in responsivity have been linked with a critical state-dependency of stimulation effects. In general, genetic diversity is a decisive biological basis of variations in neuronal network functioning. Therefore, it is most likely that inter-individual variability of tDCS-induced changes in cognitive functions is due to specific interactions between genetically determined network properties and the specific type of stimulation. In this context, predominantly the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) Val66Met and the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) Val108/158Met polymorphisms have been investigated. The studies on the interaction between the BDNF Val66Met polymorphism and the effect of brain stimulation indicate a critical but yet heterogeneous interaction. But up to now, data on the interplay between this polymorphism and tDCS on cognitive functioning are not available. However, recently, the functional Val(108/158)Met polymorphism in the COMT gene, that is particularly involved in the regulation of executive functions by means of the dopaminergic tone in frontal brain areas, has been demonstrated to specifically predict the effect of tDCS on cognitive control. Following an inverted U-shaped function, the high dopaminergic activity in Met allele homozygous individuals has been shown to be associated with a reduction of executive functioning by anodal tDCS to the prefrontal cortex. Consistently, Val homozygous individuals with lower dopaminergic tone show a clear reduction of response inhibition with cathodal tDCS. These findings exemplify the notion of a complex but neurophysiologically consistent interaction between genetically determined variations of neuronal activity and tDCS, particularly in the cognitive domain. Consequently, a systematic analysis and consideration of genetic modulators of tDCS effects will be helpful to improve the efficacy of brain stimulation and particularly tDCS in the investigation and treatment of cognitive functions.

show abstract

Section: Tdcs In Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Modulation of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Effects on Cognition

Wiegand

Nieratschker

Plewnia

2016

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When compared to individuals with normal expression of the BDNF gene, those with the BDNF gene variant respond differently to NIBS protocols with smaller changes in CSE following tDCS (Antal et al, 2010;Frazer et al, 2016;Puri et al, 2015;Teo et al, 2014) and TBS (Antal et al, 2010;Cheeran et al, 2008; M. Lee et al, 2013). The relationship between NIBS after-effects and BDNF gene variant however is not entirely clear, with several studies reporting no association between BDNF gene expression and the after-effects of tDCS (Brunoni et al, 2013;Chhabra et al, 2016;Di Lazzaro et al, 2012;Fujiyama et al, 2014) or TBS (Li Voti et al, 2011;Mastroeni et al, 2013). These inconsistencies in research findings suggest isolated variations in BDNF gene expression may not predict inter-individual variability to NIBS.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can genetic polymorphisms predict response variability to anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex?

Pellegrini

Zoghi

Jaberzadeh

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic mediation of cortical plasticity and the role genetic variants play in previously observed response variability to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have become important issues in the tDCS literature in recent years. This study investigated whether inter-individual variability to tDCS was in-part genetically mediated. In sixty-one healthy males, anodal-tDCS (a-tDCS) andsham-tDCS were administered to the primary motor cortex at 1mA for 10-minutes via 6x4cm active and 7x5cm return electrodes. Twenty-five single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) motor evoked potentials (MEP) were recorded to represent corticospinal excitability (CSE).Twenty-five paired-pulse MEPs were recorded with 3ms inter-stimulus interval (ISI) to assess intracortical inhibition (ICI) via short-interval intracranial inhibition (SICI) and 10ms ISI for intracortical facilitation (ICF). Saliva samples tested for specific genetic polymorphisms in genes encoding for excitatory and inhibitory neuroreceptors. Individuals were sub-grouped based on a pre-determined threshold and via statistical cluster analysis. Two distinct subgroups were identified, increases in CSE following a-tDCS (i.e. Responders) and no increase or even reductions in CSE (i.e. Non-responders). No changes in ICI or ICF were reported. No relationships were reported between genetic polymorphisms in excitatory receptor genes and a-tDCS responders. An association was reported between a-tDCS responders and GABRA3 gene polymorphisms encoding for GABA-A receptors suggesting potential relationships between GABA-A receptor variations and capacity to undergo tDCS-induced cortical plasticity. In the largest tDCS study of its kind, this study presents an important step forward in determining the contribution genetic factors play in previously observed inter-individual variability to tDCS.

show abstract

“…Non-invasive stimulation techniques such as TMS, tDCS, tRNS, and tACS are not the only methods of relevance for predicting outcomes of cortically implanted electrodes-so too is genetics. Polymorphisms of neuroplasticity genes such as BDNF, COMT, and others might become helpful in the future for selecting the right patients for cortical implants, analogous to what has been shown for noninvasive stimulation such as TMS and tDCS (117,118).…”

Section: Future Of Cortical Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 96%

State of the Art: Novel Applications for Cortical Stimulation

Ridder

Perera

Vanneste

2017

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial direct current stimulation and neuroplasticity genes: implications for psychiatric disorders

Cited by 18 publications

References 94 publications

Genetic Modulation of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Effects on Cognition

Genetic Modulation of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Effects on Cognition

Can genetic polymorphisms predict response variability to anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex?

State of the Art: Novel Applications for Cortical Stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About