Abstract
Background There is high variability in post-stroke aphasia severity and predicting recovery remains imprecise. Standard prognostics do not include neurophysiological indicators or genetic biomarkers of neuroplasticity, which may be critical sources of variability.
Objective To evaluate whether a common polymorphism (Val66Met) in the gene for brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) contributes to variability in post-stroke language recovery, and to assess whether BDNF polymorphism interacts with neurophysiological indicators of neuroplasticity to improve estimates of aphasia severity.
Methods Saliva samples and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were collected from participants with chronic aphasia subsequent to left-hemisphere stroke. MEPs were collected prior to continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS; index for cortical excitability) and 10 minutes following cTBS (index for stimulation-induced neuroplasticity) to the left primary motor cortex. Analyses assessed the extent to which BDNF polymorphism interacted with cortical excitability and stimulation-induced neuroplasticity to predict aphasia severity beyond established predictors.
Results Val66Val carriers showed less aphasia severity than Met allele carriers, after controlling for lesion volume and time post-stroke. Furthermore, Val66Val carriers showed expected effects of age on aphasia severity, and positive associations between both cortical excitability and stimulation-induced neuroplasticity and severity. In contrast, Met allele carriers showed weaker effects of age and negative associations between cortical excitability, stimulation-induced neuroplasticity and aphasia severity.
Conclusions Neurophysiological indicators and genetic biomarkers of neuroplasticity improved ability to predict aphasia severity. Furthermore, BDNF polymorphism interacted with cortical excitability and stimulation-induced neuroplasticity to improve predictions. These findings provide novel insights into mechanisms of variability in stroke recovery and may improve aphasia prognostics.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported by NIH grant R01DC012780 awarded to Roy Hamilton. Preparation of this manuscript was also supported by a Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute/University of Pennsylvania postdoctoral training fellowship, NIH T32HD071844.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board ruled on the ethics of this study and provided ethical approval of the research reported herein.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflicts of interest: There are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication. There has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
Data Availability
Please contact the authors for additional information on the data referred to in this manuscript.
