ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03368703Updated Jan 13, 2020

Physiopathology of Lower Cortical Activation in COPD Patients: Contribution of Cortical Neuromodulation

An interventional study of Anodal transcranial direct-current-stimulation and Sham transcranial direct-current-stimulation in Physiology, sponsored by 5 Santé. Completed at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 45 Years to 75 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-01-13.

Sponsored by 5 Santé · Not applicable, Interventional, and Basic science

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
34
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
45 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Patients with COPD have lower cortical activation and higher cortical inhibitory levels. The purpose of this study is to test the reversibility the lower cortical activation by counterbalancing the increased cortical inhibitory levels with neuro-modulation.

Read the detailed description

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients exhibit not only respiratory symptoms but also a peripheral muscular weakness. This weakness is characterized by a loss in strength, harmful for the patients' life quality and vital prognostic. Even if many papers have enlightened damages at a peripheral level, the muscular atrophy itself cannot totally explain the loss in force. Furthermore, the contractile properties of COPD muscles fibres are preserved. Consequently, it seems that the peripheral muscle weakness cannot only be explained by peripheral factors and central structures may be involved.

A recent work showed that during quadriceps voluntary contraction, cortical activation in COPD patients was significantly lower than in healthy subjects, contributing in the loss in strength. However, the pathophysiology underlying this loss of strength is still unclear and two hypotheses can be advanced: 1) the influence of anatomical lesions in the brain of COPD patients and 2) the particular metabolism of this population. Indeed, COPD patients show a reduced oxidative activity and an increased glycolytic contribution (decreased type I fibres and increased type II fibres, increased glycolytic enzymes activity, increased metabolites production). This specific metabolic may lead to an over-activation of type III-IV afferents, projecting onto somatosensory cortex sensitive to metabolites at a peripheral level, and produce inhibitory activity on the primary motor cortex, seat of the motor control. What is reported in the literature so far, is that COPD patients display increased cortical inhibitory values than healthy subjects.

Therefore, beyond understanding better the nervous mechanisms involved in the COPD's peripheral muscle weakness, the aim of this study is to counterbalance this increased cortical inhibitory level.

We hypothesize that modulating inhibitory processes at a cortical level would induced a reduction of inhibitions in patients with COPD and an increase in the force produced. In case this hypothesis would be verified, we will be able to confirm that this increased cortical level in COPD patients is reversible and may be a target for rehabilitation.

02

Conditions studied

  • Physiology

Keywords

  • COPD
  • Transcranial direct-current stimulation
  • Transcranial magnetic stimulation
  • Motor-evoked potentials
  • Inhibition
  • Muscle weakness
03

In context

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive

5,520 studies on the registry are indexed under Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; 856 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 34 is below the median of 62 across 3,839 interventional studies indexed under Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive.

Browse Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive studies →

Lead sponsor

5 Santé is the lead sponsor of 13 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
45 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Health insurance
  • Patients : Gold II-IV
  • Patients : No rehabilitation since at least 1 yrs
  • Control : sedentary (\< 9 Voorips)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant women
  • Seizures
  • Unable to give written consent
  • Metalic object above shoulders
  • Dermatological issue concerning surface electrodes
  • Drugs influencing central nervous system
  • Caffeine consumption > 4 coffee / day
  • Neurological disorders
  • Patients : recent exacerbation (\< 4 weeks)
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Basic science
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator)
Enrollment
34 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    COPD patients

    COPD patients group

    Device: Anodal transcranial direct-current-stimulation · Device: Sham transcranial direct-current-stimulation

  • Active comparator
    Healthy subjects

    Healthy subject group, matched with COPD patients group on age, weight and BMI

    Device: Anodal transcranial direct-current-stimulation · Device: Sham transcranial direct-current-stimulation

Interventions

  • DeviceAnodal transcranial direct-current-stimulation

    2mA / 20min Anodal and Sham tDCS over dominant M1. Anodal tDCS consists of 30s of ramp up followed by 20min of stimulation and 30s of ramp down.

  • DeviceSham transcranial direct-current-stimulation

    Sham tDCS consists of only 30s of ramp up followed by 30s of ramp down and no further stimulation. Participants therefore have the same feeling for both modalities : slight itching due to the induced current at the beginning of the protocol (during around 30s) allowing no differentiation by the participant between the anodal or sham sessions.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in motor-evoked potentials

    Cortical excitability

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) ; Post-Stim (immediately post-intervention) ; Post-30 (30min post-intervention)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in short-interval intracortical inhibition

    Cortical inhibition level

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) ; Post-Stim (immediately post-intervention) ; Post-30 (30min post-intervention)

  2. Change in cortical silent period

    Cortical inhibition level

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) ; Post-Stim (immediately post-intervention) ; Post-30 (30min post-intervention)

  3. Change in cortical voluntary activation

    Motor command

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) ; Post-Stim (immediately post-intervention) ; Post-30 (30min post-intervention)

  4. Change in strength

    Functional output

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) ; Post-Stim (immediately post-intervention) ; Post-30 (30min post-intervention)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Cliniques du Souffle
    Lodeve, Herault 34700, France
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Jun 2017 to primary completion in Jun 2018, 12 months.

Of 1,094 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, half reached primary completion within 22 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 41. This study's 12 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 1,181 studies reached it within 22 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 39.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Dec 19, 2016
First posted
Dec 11, 2017
StartActual
Jun 1, 2017
Primary completionActual
Jun 30, 2018
CompletionActual
Jun 30, 2018
Last update
Jan 13, 2020
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 13, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03368703
Lead sponsor
5 Santé
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Dec 11, 2017
Start date
Jun 1, 2017
Primary completion
Jun 30, 2018
Completion
Jun 30, 2018
Last update
Jan 13, 2020

Study contacts

Philippe Guerin, MD
principal investigator · 5 Santé

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion