ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06974279TaMSUpdated Jul 10, 2026

Post-Stroke Aphasia TMS

An interventional study of Precision TMS with SFA and Control TMS with SFA in Aphasia, Stroke and Language, sponsored by Medical College of Wisconsin. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-10.

Sponsored by Medical College of Wisconsin · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Sep 2025; still recruiting 1 year 2 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The investigator proposes to examine the effects of excitatory transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) combined with semantic feature analysis (SFA) language therapy to improve word-finding abilities in stroke survivors with aphasia (SWA).

Read the detailed description

In this project, the investigator will use functional neuroimaging and inhibitory TMS to determine precise therapy-responsive targets for excitatory TMS therapy with SFA. One group of stroke survivors will receive SFA + TMS targeting the precision site, and another group will receive SFA + TMS targeting a control site. The primary outcome will be changes in picture naming accuracy. We expect that excitatory TMS targeting a precision site would result in larger improvements in naming accuracy than TMS targeting a control site. Results will provide the efficacy of precision TMS in post-stroke aphasia.

02

Conditions studied

  • Aphasia
  • Stroke
  • Language

Keywords

  • Aphasia
  • Stroke
  • Language
  • TMS
03

In context

Aphasia

338 studies on the registry are indexed under Aphasia; 95 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 50 is above the median of 30 across 298 interventional studies indexed under Aphasia.

Browse Aphasia studies →

Lead sponsor

Medical College of Wisconsin is the lead sponsor of 548 studies on the registry; 122 are open to participants now.

Of its 75 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 57 (76%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

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

  • Diagnosed with left hemisphere stroke
  • Consent date >= 1 month after stroke onset
  • Fluent in English
  • 18 years of age or older

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severe cognitive, auditory or visual impairments that would preclude cognitive and language testing
  • Presence of major untreated or unstable psychiatric disease (e.g. schizophrenia, bipolar disease)
  • A chronic medical condition that is not treated or is unstable
  • The presence of cardiac stimulators or pacemakers or intracardiac lines, neurostimulators, medication infusion device, any other implants near the scalp (e.g., cochlear implants) or in the eye, metal in the body (e.g., splinters, fragments, clips)
  • Pregnancy
  • History of skull fractures, or skin diseases
  • History of ongoing or unmanaged seizures
  • Presence of factors that potentially decrease seizure thresholds: on pro-convulsant medications, untreated sleep deprivation or insomnia, ongoing alcoholism or illegal drug abuse (e.g., cocaine or MDMA users)
  • History of dyslexia or other developmental learning disabilities
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
50 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Precision TMS

    SFA will be administered immediately after precision TMS

    Device: Precision TMS with SFA

  • Placebo comparator
    Control TMS

    SFA will be administered immediately after control TMS

    Device: Control TMS with SFA

Interventions

  • DevicePrecision TMS with SFA

    Excitatory TMS delivered using a precision site finding approach and intermittent theta burst stimulation protocol

  • DeviceControl TMS with SFA

    Excitatory TMS using intermittent theta burst stimulation delivered to a control vertex site.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Accuracy on a picture naming test

    Changes in accuracy on untrained stimuli after SFA+TMS compared between groups (precision, control).

    Time frame: immediately after and 8-12 weeks after last SFA+TMS treatment

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Patrício, Brígida F, Luis M. T. Jesus and Madeline N. Cruice. "Quality of life of the caregivers of people with aphasia. A systematic review." (2013).
  • Esteban, O., Blair, R., Markiewicz, C. J., Berleant, S. L., Moodie, C., Ma, F., Isik, A. I., Erramuzpe, A., Goncalves, M., Poldrack, R. A., & Gorgolewski, K. J. (2017). poldracklab/fmriprep: 1.0.0-rc5 (1.0.0-rc5). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.996169
  • Hallett M. Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a primer. Neuron. 2007 Jul 19;55(2):187-99. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.06.026. PubMed 17640522 ↗
  • Griffis JC, Nenert R, Allendorfer JB, Szaflarski JP. Interhemispheric Plasticity following Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation in Chronic Poststroke Aphasia. Neural Plast. 2016;2016:4796906. doi: 10.1155/2016/4796906. Epub 2016 Jan 10. PubMed 26881111 ↗
  • Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A. Screening questionnaire before TMS: an update. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Aug;122(8):1686. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2010.12.037. Epub 2011 Jan 11. No abstract available. PubMed 21227747 ↗
  • Keel JC, Smith MJ, Wassermann EM. A safety screening questionnaire for transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001 Apr;112(4):720. doi: 10.1016/s1388-2457(00)00518-6. No abstract available. PubMed 11332408 ↗
  • Wassermann EM. Risk and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: report and suggested guidelines from the International Workshop on the Safety of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, June 5-7, 1996. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998 Jan;108(1):1-16. doi: 10.1016/s0168-5597(97)00096-8. PubMed 9474057 ↗
  • Oberman L, Edwards D, Eldaief M, Pascual-Leone A. Safety of theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation: a systematic review of the literature. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Feb;28(1):67-74. doi: 10.1097/WNP.0b013e318205135f. PubMed 21221011 ↗
  • Lerner AJ, Wassermann EM, Tamir DI. Seizures from transcranial magnetic stimulation 2012-2016: Results of a survey of active laboratories and clinics. Clin Neurophysiol. 2019 Aug;130(8):1409-1416. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2019.03.016. Epub 2019 Apr 6. PubMed 31104898 ↗
  • Rossi S, Antal A, Bestmann S, Bikson M, Brewer C, Brockmoller J, Carpenter LL, Cincotta M, Chen R, Daskalakis JD, Di Lazzaro V, Fox MD, George MS, Gilbert D, Kimiskidis VK, Koch G, Ilmoniemi RJ, Lefaucheur JP, Leocani L, Lisanby SH, Miniussi C, Padberg F, Pascual-Leone A, Paulus W, Peterchev AV, Quartarone A, Rotenberg A, Rothwell J, Rossini PM, Santarnecchi E, Shafi MM, Siebner HR, Ugawa Y, Wassermann EM, Zangen A, Ziemann U, Hallett M; basis of this article began with a Consensus Statement from the IFCN Workshop on "Present, Future of TMS: Safety, Ethical Guidelines", Siena, October 17-20, 2018, updating through April 2020. Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: Expert Guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol. 2021 Jan;132(1):269-306. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.10.003. Epub 2020 Oct 24. PubMed 33243615 ↗
  • Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A; Safety of TMS Consensus Group. Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009 Dec;120(12):2008-2039. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016. Epub 2009 Oct 14. PubMed 19833552 ↗
  • Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Xu, T., Brockman, G., McLeavey, C., & Sutskever, I. (2023). Robust speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, 202, 28492-28518.
  • Wilson SM, Eriksson DK, Schneck SM, Lucanie JM. A quick aphasia battery for efficient, reliable, and multidimensional assessment of language function. PLoS One. 2018 Feb 9;13(2):e0192773. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192773. eCollection 2018. PubMed 29425241 ↗
  • Lin Y, Zhu M, Su Z. The pursuit of balance: An overview of covariate-adaptive randomization techniques in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Nov;45(Pt A):21-5. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.011. Epub 2015 Aug 2. PubMed 26244705 ↗
  • Walsh V, Cowey A. Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cognitive neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000 Oct;1(1):73-9. doi: 10.1038/35036239. PubMed 11252771 ↗
  • Devlin JT, Watkins KE. Stimulating language: insights from TMS. Brain. 2007 Mar;130(Pt 3):610-22. doi: 10.1093/brain/awl331. Epub 2006 Nov 29. PubMed 17138570 ↗
  • Pascual-Leone A, Bartres-Faz D, Keenan JP. Transcranial magnetic stimulation: studying the brain-behaviour relationship by induction of 'virtual lesions'. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1999 Jul 29;354(1387):1229-38. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1999.0476. PubMed 10466148 ↗
  • Vines BW, Schnider NM, Schlaug G. Testing for causality with transcranial direct current stimulation: pitch memory and the left supramarginal gyrus. Neuroreport. 2006 Jul 17;17(10):1047-50. doi: 10.1097/01.wnr.0000223396.05070.a2. PubMed 16791101 ↗
  • Fridriksson J, Rorden C, Elm J, Sen S, George MS, Bonilha L. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation vs Sham Stimulation to Treat Aphasia After Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018 Dec 1;75(12):1470-1476. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.2287. PubMed 30128538 ↗
  • Abo M, Kakuda W, Watanabe M, Morooka A, Kawakami K, Senoo A. Effectiveness of low-frequency rTMS and intensive speech therapy in poststroke patients with aphasia: a pilot study based on evaluation by fMRI in relation to type of aphasia. Eur Neurol. 2012;68(4):199-208. doi: 10.1159/000338773. Epub 2012 Aug 29. PubMed 22948550 ↗
  • Lefaucheur JP, Aleman A, Baeken C, Benninger DH, Brunelin J, Di Lazzaro V, Filipovic SR, Grefkes C, Hasan A, Hummel FC, Jaaskelainen SK, Langguth B, Leocani L, Londero A, Nardone R, Nguyen JP, Nyffeler T, Oliveira-Maia AJ, Oliviero A, Padberg F, Palm U, Paulus W, Poulet E, Quartarone A, Rachid F, Rektorova I, Rossi S, Sahlsten H, Schecklmann M, Szekely D, Ziemann U. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): An update (2014-2018). Clin Neurophysiol. 2020 Feb;131(2):474-528. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2019.11.002. Epub 2020 Jan 1. PubMed 31901449 ↗
  • Hamilton RH, Chrysikou EG, Coslett B. Mechanisms of aphasia recovery after stroke and the role of noninvasive brain stimulation. Brain Lang. 2011 Jul;118(1-2):40-50. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.02.005. Epub 2011 Apr 2. PubMed 21459427 ↗
  • Shah-Basak PP, Wurzman R, Purcell JB, Gervits F, Hamilton R. Fields or flows? A comparative metaanalysis of transcranial magnetic and direct current stimulation to treat post-stroke aphasia. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2016 May 2;34(4):537-58. doi: 10.3233/RNN-150616. PubMed 27163249 ↗
  • Norise C, Hamilton RH. Non-invasive Brain Stimulation in the Treatment of Post-stroke and Neurodegenerative Aphasia: Parallels, Differences, and Lessons Learned. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017 Jan 23;10:675. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00675. eCollection 2016. PubMed 28167904 ↗
  • Kielar A, Patterson D, Chou YH. Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in treating stroke aphasia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2022 Aug;140:196-227. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2022.04.017. Epub 2022 May 5. PubMed 35606322 ↗
  • Chou TY, Wang JC, Lin MY, Tsai PY. Low-Frequency vs. Theta Burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Non-fluent Aphasia in Stroke: A Proof-of-Concept Study. Front Aging Neurosci. 2022 Jan 14;13:800377. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.800377. eCollection 2021. PubMed 35095477 ↗
  • Huang YZ, Edwards MJ, Rounis E, Bhatia KP, Rothwell JC. Theta burst stimulation of the human motor cortex. Neuron. 2005 Jan 20;45(2):201-6. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.033. PubMed 15664172 ↗
  • Chen R, Classen J, Gerloff C, Celnik P, Wassermann EM, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Depression of motor cortex excitability by low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neurology. 1997 May;48(5):1398-403. doi: 10.1212/wnl.48.5.1398. PubMed 9153480 ↗
  • Shah-Basak PP, Norise C, Garcia G, Torres J, Faseyitan O, Hamilton RH. Individualized treatment with transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with chronic non-fluent aphasia due to stroke. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 Apr 21;9:201. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00201. eCollection 2015. PubMed 25954178 ↗
  • Paulus W. Toward establishing a therapeutic window for rTMS by theta burst stimulation. Neuron. 2005 Jan 20;45(2):181-3. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.008. PubMed 15664167 ↗
  • Szaflarski JP, Nenert R, Allendorfer JB, Martin AN, Amara AW, Griffis JC, Dietz A, Mark VW, Sung VW, Walker HC, Zhou X, Lindsell CJ. Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) for Treatment of Chronic Post-Stroke Aphasia: Results of a Pilot Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial. Med Sci Monit. 2021 Jun 29;27:e931468. doi: 10.12659/MSM.931468. PubMed 34183640 ↗
  • Szaflarski JP, Griffis J, Vannest J, Allendorfer JB, Nenert R, Amara AW, Sung V, Walker HC, Martin AN, Mark VW, Zhou X. A feasibility study of combined intermittent theta burst stimulation and modified constraint-induced aphasia therapy in chronic post-stroke aphasia. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2018;36(4):503-518. doi: 10.3233/RNN-180812. PubMed 29889086 ↗
  • Szaflarski JP, Vannest J, Wu SW, DiFrancesco MW, Banks C, Gilbert DL. Excitatory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces improvements in chronic post-stroke aphasia. Med Sci Monit. 2011 Feb 25;17(3):CR132-9. doi: 10.12659/msm.881446. PubMed 21358599 ↗
  • Shah-Basak P, Boukrina O, Li XR, Jebahi F, Kielar A. Targeted neurorehabilitation strategies in post-stroke aphasia. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2023;41(3-4):129-191. doi: 10.3233/RNN-231344. PubMed 37980575 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

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

Started Sep 2025 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2036, 135 months after the start.

Of 183 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Aphasia, half reached primary completion within 36 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 19 and three quarters within 57. This study's planned 135 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 185 studies reached it within 36 months; a quarter within 20 and three quarters within 57.

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

Registered
Feb 17, 2025
First posted
May 15, 2025
StartActual
Sep 1, 2025
Primary completionEst.
Dec 31, 2036
CompletionEst.
Dec 31, 2036
Last update
Jul 10, 2026
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 Jul 10, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06974279
Responsible party
Priyanka Shah-Basak, PhD (Assistant Professor, Medical College of Wisconsin) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 15, 2025
Start date
Sep 1, 2025
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2036 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2036 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 10, 2026

Study contacts

Sidney Schoenrock, MA
Contact
sschoenrock@mcw.edu
414-955-7579
Ari Hjelmeseth
Contact
ahjelmeseth@mcw.edu
414-955-7578

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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