Abstract
Background The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) plays an important role in the cognitive and emotional processing of pain. Prior studies have used deep brain stimulation (DBS) to treat chronic pain, but results have been inconsistent. This may be due to network adaptation over time and variable causes of chronic pain. Identifying patient-specific pain network features may be necessary to determine patient candidacy for DBS.
Hypothesis Cingulate stimulation would increase patients’ hot pain thresholds if non-stimulation 70-150 Hz activity encoded psychophysical pain responses.
Methods In this study, four patients who underwent intracranial monitoring for epilepsy monitoring participated in a pain task. They placed their hand on a device capable of eliciting thermal pain for five seconds and rated their pain. We used these results to determine the individual’s thermal pain threshold with and without electrical stimulation. Two different types of generalized linear mixed-effects models (GLME) were employed to assess the neural representations underlying binary and graded pain psychophysics.
Results The pain threshold for each patient was determined from the psychometric probability density function. Two patients had a higher pain threshold with stimulation than without, while the other two patients had no difference. We also evaluated the relationship between neural activity and pain responses. We found that patients who responded to stimulation had specific time windows where high-frequency activity was associated with increased pain ratings.
Conclusion Stimulation of cingulate regions with increased pain-related neural activity was more effective at modulating pain perception than stimulating non-responsive areas. Personalized evaluation of neural activity biomarkers could help identify the best target for stimulation and predict its effectiveness in future studies evaluating DBS.
Competing Interest Statement
JDR has received consulting fees from Medtronic, NeuroPace, and Corlieve Therapeutics.
Funding Statement
JDR was supported by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K23 NS114178). RMC was supported by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke T32 NS115723.
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 Utah Institutional Review Board gave ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Disclosures: JDR has received consulting fees from Medtronic, NeuroPace, and Corlieve Therapeutics.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
