ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2025
The role of structural and functional parameters in designing pathology-specific tDCS protocols for primary progressive aphasia.
Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe two subtypes of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) associated with Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD)-non-fluent (nfvPPA) and semantic (svPPA)-have distinct structural and functional abnormalities. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targets the language network to address deficits, yet a single, arbitrary montage is often applied despite pathophysiological differences. Since tDCS current distribution depends on brain structure and function, variant-specific montages are essential. This study presents a pathology-specific approach for tDCS montage selection, identifying the optimal montage for each PPA variant.
methodT1-weighted and resting-state fMRI data from 38 healthy, 31 nfvPPA and 32 svPPA subjects were obtained. Grey matter volume and functional entropy were analysed across 116 brain regions. Patients and controls were compared to identify significant differences in atrophy and entropy. Electric-field modelling of three widely used dorsal, ventral, and frontal tDCS montages provided current intensity estimates in the language network. Canonical Correlation Analysis examined the relationship between current intensity, atrophy, and entropy.
resultsStructural and functional changes differed between the two PPA variants: nfvPPA showed left frontal atrophy and reduced entropy in the left parietal/cerebellar areas, while svPPA exhibited left temporal atrophy and reduced entropy in the left frontal and right temporal regions. Atrophy distribution primarily influenced tDCS current spread, determining montage suitability. In nfvPPA, the frontal montage showed a strong association between delivered current and grey mettwr volume of atrophied areas, whereas in svPPA, a similar pattern was observed for the ventral montage.
conclusionThe study identifies the frontal montage as the most suitable for nfvPPA and the ventral montage for svPPA. This study highlights the importance of pathology-specific tDCS montage selection, emphasizing the need for variant-based modulation of the language network in PPA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.