4.6 Article

A 15-day course of donepezil modulates spectral EEG dynamics related to target auditory stimuli in young, healthy adult volunteers

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 130, 期 5, 页码 863-875

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.11.018

关键词

Donepezil; EEG markers; Event-related potential; Inter-trial coherence; Event-related spectral perturbation

资金

  1. European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7: 2007-2013) as part of the Innovative Medicine Initiative [115009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To identify possible electroencephalographic (EEG) markers of donepezil's effect on cortical activity in young, healthy adult volunteers at the group level. Methods: Thirty subjects were administered a daily dose of either 5 mg donepezil or placebo for 15 days in a double-blind, randomized, cross-over trial. The electroencephalogram during an auditory oddball paradigm was recorded from 58 scalp electrodes. Current source density (CSD) transformations were applied to EEG epochs. The event-related potential (ERP), inter-trial coherence (ITC: the phase consistency of the EEG spectrum) and event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP: the EEG power spectrum relative to the baseline) were calculated for the target (oddball) stimuli. Results: The donepezil and placebo conditions differed in terms of the changes in delta/theta/alpha/beta ITC and ERSP in various regions of the scalp (especially the frontal electrodes) but not in terms of latency and amplitude of the P300-ERP component. Conclusion: Our results suggest that ITC and ERSP analyses can provide EEG markers of donepezil's effects in young, healthy, adult volunteers at a group level. Significance: Novel EEG markers could be useful to assess the therapeutic potential of drug candidates in Alzheimer's disease in healthy volunteers prior to the initiation of Phase II/III clinical studies in patients. (C) 2015 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据