10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of Transcranial Low-Level Light Therapy vs Sham Therapy Among Patients With Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury : A Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Is near-infrared low-level light therapy (LLLT) feasible and safe after moderate traumatic brain injury, and does LLLT affect the brain and exhibit neuroreactivity?

          Findings

          In this randomized clinical trial including 68 patients with moderate traumatic brain injury who were randomized to receive LLLT or sham therapy, 28 patients completed at least 1 LLLT session without any reported adverse events. In the late subacute stage, there were statistically significant differences in the magnetic resonance imaging–derived diffusion parameters of the white matter tracts between the sham- and light-treated groups, demonstrating neuroreactivity of LLLT.

          Meaning

          The results of this clinical trial show that transcranial LLLT is feasible, safe, and affects the brain in a measurable manner.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Preclinical studies have shown that transcranial near-infrared low-level light therapy (LLLT) administered after traumatic brain injury (TBI) confers a neuroprotective response.

          Objectives

          To assess the feasibility and safety of LLLT administered acutely after a moderate TBI and the neuroreactivity to LLLT through quantitative magnetic resonance imaging metrics and neurocognitive assessment.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          A randomized, single-center, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group trial was conducted from November 27, 2015, through July 11, 2019. Participants included 68 men and women with acute, nonpenetrating, moderate TBI who were randomized to LLLT or sham treatment. Analysis of the response-evaluable population was conducted.

          Interventions

          Transcranial LLLT was administered using a custom-built helmet starting within 72 hours after the trauma. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in the acute (within 72 hours), early subacute (2-3 weeks), and late subacute (approximately 3 months) stages of recovery. Clinical assessments were performed concomitantly and at 6 months via the Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire (RPQ), a 16-item questionnaire with each item assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (no problem) to 4 (severe problem).

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The number of participants to successfully and safely complete LLLT without any adverse events within the first 7 days after the therapy was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were the differential effect of LLLT on MR brain diffusion parameters and RPQ scores compared with the sham group.

          Results

          Of the 68 patients who were randomized (33 to LLLT and 35 to sham therapy), 28 completed at least 1 LLLT session. No adverse events referable to LLLT were reported. Forty-three patients (22 men [51.2%]; mean [SD] age, 50.49 [17.44] years]) completed the study with at least 1 magnetic resonance imaging scan: 19 individuals in the LLLT group and 24 in the sham treatment group. Radial diffusivity (RD), mean diffusivity (MD), and fractional anisotropy (FA) showed significant time and treatment interaction at 3-month time point (RD: 0.013; 95% CI, 0.006 to 0.019; P < .001; MD: 0.008; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.015; P = .03; FA: −0.018; 95% CI, −0.026 to −0.010; P < .001).The LLLT group had lower RPQ scores, but this effect did not reach statistical significance (time effect P = .39, treatment effect P = .61, and time × treatment effect P = .91).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this randomized clinical trial, LLLT was feasible in all patients and did not exhibit any adverse events. Light therapy altered multiple diffusion tensor parameters in a statistically significant manner in the late subacute stage. This study provides the first human evidence to date that light therapy engages neural substrates that play a role in the pathophysiologic factors of moderate TBI and also suggests diffusion imaging as the biomarker of therapeutic response.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02233413

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial evaluates the effect of near-infrared low-level light therapy in patients with traumatic brain injury from the time of injury until 3 months after the injury.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability.

          After head injuries, particularly mild or moderate ones, a range of post-concussion symptoms (PCS) are often reported by patients. Such symptoms may significantly affect patients' psychosocial functioning. To date, no measure of the severity of PCS has been developed. This study presents the Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) as such a measure, derived from published material, and investigates its reliability. The RPQ's reliability was investigated under two experimental conditions. Study 1 examined its test-retest reliability when used as a self-report questionnaire at 7-10 days after injury. Forty-one head-injured patients completed an RPQ at 7-10 days following their head injury and again approximately 24 h later. Study 2 examined the questionnaire's inter-rater reliability when used as a measure administered by two separate investigators. Forty-six head-injured patients had an RPQ administered by an investigator at 6 months after injury. A second investigator readministered the questionnaire approximately 7 days later. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were calculated for ratings on the total symptom scores, and for individual items. High reliability was found for the total PCS scores under both experimental conditions (Rs = + 0.91 in study 1 and Rs = + 0.87 in study 2). Good reliability was also found for individual PCS items generally, although with some variation between different symptoms. The results are discussed in relation to the major difficulties involved when looking for appropriate experimental criteria against which measures of PCS can be validated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Infrared laser therapy for ischemic stroke: a new treatment strategy: results of the NeuroThera Effectiveness and Safety Trial-1 (NEST-1).

            The NeuroThera Effectiveness and Safety Trial-1 (NEST-1) study evaluated the safety and preliminary effectiveness of the NeuroThera Laser System in the ability to improve 90-day outcomes in ischemic stroke patients treated within 24 hours from stroke onset. The NeuroThera Laser System therapeutic approach involves use of infrared laser technology and has shown significant and sustained beneficial effects in animal models of ischemic stroke. This was a prospective, intention-to-treat, multicenter, international, double-blind, trial involving 120 ischemic stroke patients treated, randomized 2:1 ratio, with 79 patients in the active treatment group and 41 in the sham (placebo) control group. Only patients with baseline stroke severity measured by National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores of 7 to 22 were included. Patients who received tissue plasminogen activator were excluded. Outcome measures were the patients' scores on the NIHSS, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, and Glasgow Outcome Scale at 90 days after treatment. The primary outcome measure, prospectively identified, was successful treatment, documented by NIHSS. This was defined as a complete recovery at day 90 (NIHSS 0 to 1), or a decrease in NIHSS score of at least 9 points (day 90 versus baseline), and was tested as a binary measure (bNIH). Secondary outcome measures included mRS, Barthel Index, and Glasgow Outcome Scale. Primary statistical analyses were performed with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel rank test, stratified by baseline NIHSS score or by time to treatment for the bNIH and mRS. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to confirm the results. Mean time to treatment was >16 hours (median time to treatment 18 hours for active and 17 hours for control). Time to treatment ranged from 2 to 24 hours. More patients (70%) in the active treatment group had successful outcomes than did controls (51%), as measured prospectively on the bNIH (P=0.035 stratified by severity and time to treatment; P=0.048 stratified only by severity). Similarly, more patients (59%) had successful outcomes than did controls (44%) as measured at 90 days as a binary mRS score of 0 to 2 (P=0.034 stratified by severity and time to treatment; P=0.043 stratified only by severity). Also, more patients in the active treatment group had successful outcomes than controls as measured by the change in mean NIHSS score from baseline to 90 days (P=0.021 stratified by time to treatment) and the full mRS ("shift in Rankin") score (P=0.020 stratified by severity and time to treatment; P=0.026 stratified only by severity). The prevalence odds ratio for bNIH was 1.40 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.93) and for binary mRS was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.83), controlling for baseline severity. Similar results held for the Barthel Index and Glasgow Outcome Scale. Mortality rates and serious adverse events (SAEs) did not differ significantly (8.9% and 25.3% for active 9.8% and 36.6% for control, respectively, for mortality and SAEs). The NEST-1 study indicates that infrared laser therapy has shown initial safety and effectiveness for the treatment of ischemic stroke in humans when initiated within 24 hours of stroke onset. A larger confirmatory trial to demonstrate safety and effectiveness is warranted.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effectiveness and safety of transcranial laser therapy for acute ischemic stroke.

              We hypothesized that transcranial laser therapy (TLT) can use near-infrared laser technology to treat acute ischemic stroke. The NeuroThera Effectiveness and Safety Trial-2 (NEST-2) tested the safety and efficacy of TLT in acute ischemic stroke. This double-blind, randomized study compared TLT treatment to sham control. Patients receiving tissue plasminogen activator and patients with evidence of hemorrhagic infarct were excluded. The primary efficacy end point was a favorable 90-day score of 0 to 2 assessed by the modified Rankin Scale. Other 90-day end points included the overall shift in modified Rankin Scale and assessments of change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score. We randomized 660 patients: 331 received TLT and 327 received sham; 120 (36.3%) in the TLT group achieved favorable outcome versus 101 (30.9%), in the sham group (P=0.094), odds ratio 1.38 (95% CI, 0.95 to 2.00). Comparable results were seen for the other outcome measures. Although no prespecified test achieved significance, a post hoc analysis of patients with a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of <16 showed a favorable outcome at 90 days on the primary end point (P<0.044). Mortality rates and serious adverse events did not differ between groups with 17.5% and 17.4% mortality, 37.8% and 41.8% serious adverse events for TLT and sham, respectively. TLT within 24 hours from stroke onset demonstrated safety but did not meet formal statistical significance for efficacy. However, all predefined analyses showed a favorable trend, consistent with the previous clinical trial (NEST-1). Both studies indicate that mortality and adverse event rates were not adversely affected by TLT. A definitive trial with refined baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale exclusion criteria is planned.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                14 September 2020
                September 2020
                14 September 2020
                : 3
                : 9
                : e2017337
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
                [2 ]Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
                [3 ]Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Boston, Massachusetts
                [4 ]School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
                [5 ]Department of Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
                [6 ]Office of Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense, Washington, DC
                [7 ]Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: May 26, 2020.
                Published: September 14, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.17337
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Figueiro Longo MG et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Maria Gabriela Figueiro Longo, MD, MSc, Division of Emergency Radiology, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St, Blk SB Rm 0029A, Boston, MA 02114 ( mfigueirolongo@ 123456mgh.harvard.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Longo and Tan (co-first authors) contributed equally to this work. Dr Gupta had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Welt, Avesta, Chico-Calero, Parry, Drake, Anderson, Rauch, Diaz-Arrastia, Lev, Hamblin, Vakoc, Gupta.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Figueiro Longo, Tan, Chan, Welt, Avesta, Ratai, Mercaldo, Yendiki, Namati, Parry, Rauch, Lev, Lee, Vakoc.
                D rafting of the manuscript: Figueiro Longo, Tan, Chan, Mercaldo, Vakoc, Gupta.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Figueiro Longo, Welt, Avesta, Ratai, Yendiki, Namati, Chico-Calero, Parry, Drake, Anderson, Rauch, Diaz-Arrastia, Lev, Lee, Hamblin, Vakoc.
                Statistical analysis: Tan, Mercaldo, Rauch, Gupta.
                Obtained funding: Avesta, Drake, Anderson, Vakoc, Gupta.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Figueiro Longo, Welt, Avesta, Namati, Chico-Calero, Parry, Drake, Rauch, Lev, Lee, Vakoc, Gupta.
                Supervision: Welt, Avesta, Chico-Calero, Anderson, Lev, Lee, Hamblin, Vakoc, Gupta.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Namati reported receiving grants from Department of Defense during the conduct of the study. Dr Parry reported receiving grants from the Department of Defense during the conduct of the study. Dr Drake reported receiving grants from the Department of Defense during the conduct of the study. Dr Anderson reported receiving grants from the Department of Defense during the conduct of the study. Dr Diaz-Arrastia reported receiving stock options from Neural Analytics Inc, Brain Box Solutions Inc, and Nia Therapeutics Inc, and consulting fees from Pinteon Therapeutics and MesoScale Discoveries outside the submitted work. Dr Lev reported receiving personal fees from GE Healthcare and Takeda Pharm outside the submitted work. Dr Lee reported receiving grants from the Department of Defense during the conduct of the study, serving as a consultant to Butterfly Network Inc, and receiving research grants from Nihon-Kohden and Beckman Coulter outside the study. Dr Hamblin reported receiving personal fees from Vielight Inc, JOOVV Inc, ARC LED Inc, Transdermal cap Inc, Hologenix Inc, and MB Lasertherapy outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This research fund was partially supported by grants from Air Force contract FA8650-17-C-9113; Army USAMRAA Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program, contract W81XWH-15-C-0052; and Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program W81XWH-13-2-0067.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The grant support was used for design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Article
                zoi200627
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.17337
                7490644
                32926117
                973e06e4-0df4-41bb-a6a1-19251e082114
                Copyright 2020 Figueiro Longo MG et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 22 January 2020
                : 26 May 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Neurology

                Comments

                Comment on this article