Brain Stimulation (May 2022)
Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation modulates timing but not acquisition of conditioned eyeblink responses in SCA3 patients
Abstract
Background: Delay eyeblink conditioning is an extensively studied motor learning paradigm that critically depends on the integrity of the cerebellum. In healthy individuals, modulation of cerebellar excitability using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to alter the acquisition and/or timing of conditioned eyeblink responses (CRs). It remains unknown whether such effects can also be elicited in patients with cerebellar disorders. Objective: To investigate if repeated sessions of cerebellar tDCS modify acquisition and/or timing of CRs in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia type 3 (SCA3) and to evaluate possible associations between disease severity measures and eyeblink conditioning parameters. Methods: Delay eyeblink conditioning was examined in 20 mildly to moderately affected individuals with SCA3 and 31 healthy controls. After the baseline assessment, patients were randomly assigned to receive ten sessions of cerebellar anodal tDCS or sham tDCS (i.e., five days per week for two consecutive weeks). Patients and investigators were blinded to treatment allocation. The same eyeblink conditioning protocol was administered directly after the last tDCS session. The Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA), cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome scale (CCAS-S), and disease duration were used as clinical measures of disease severity. Results: At baseline, SCA3 patients exhibited significantly fewer CRs than healthy controls. Acquisition was inversely associated with the number of failed CCAS-S test items but not with SARA score. Onset and peak latencies of CRs were longer in SCA3 patients and correlated with disease duration. Repeated sessions of cerebellar anodal tDCS did not affect CR acquisition, but had a significant treatment effect on both timing parameters. While a shift of CRs toward the conditioned stimulus was observed in the sham group (i.e., timing became more similar to that of healthy controls, presumably reflecting the effect of a second eyeblink conditioning session), anodal tDCS induced a shift of CRs in the opposite direction (i.e., toward the unconditioned stimulus). Conclusion: Our findings provide evidence that cerebellar tDCS is capable of modifying cerebellar function in SCA3 patients. Future studies should assess whether this intervention similarly modulates temporal processing in other degenerative ataxias.
