|
|
|
|
 |
The
Manhattan Adult ADD Support Group
We Offer Support
& Information To Adults
In NYC
And The Surrounding Communities
With ADD/ADHD
We Are Not
"Lazy, Crazy, Or Stupid" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADD IN THE NEWS |
| |
|
Seeing Your Pain |
| |
|
Learning to consciously alter brain
activity through MRI feedback could help control pain and other
disorders. |
| |
 |
| |
I'm lying in the plastic cocoon of an
MRI machine, an instrument that measures activity in different parts
of the brain. As I try to hold still, the loudly clanking machine
runs a structural scan to locate the anterior cingulate cortex and
the insula, regions involved in processing pain. A computer then
translates the MRI signal into three small animated fires,
representing the activity levels of the cingulate and the right and
left insula, projected onto a screen above my face.
I concentrate to make those fires roar and ebb, using only my
thoughts. As I do, the MRI is measuring changes in the blood flow to
selected parts of my brain. The patterns of blood flow tell the
computer how neural activity is changing. By trying to control the
size of the fires, I am attempting to control brain activity in the
cingulate and insula, and in turn to quell the chronic back pain
that has irked me in recent years.
Monitoring my progress is Christopher deCharms, a neuroscientist and
founder of Omneuron, a startup company in Menlo Park, CA. DeCharms
has spent the last five years developing imaging techniques that can
be used to teach patients to control their brain activity. Changes
in neural activity usually take place unconsciously, as different
parts of the brain are engaged to perform tasks or process stimuli.
Neurons in the language circuit start firing, for example, when you
have a conversation with a friend. When you watch a scary movie,
neurons in the amygdala, an area involved in emotion, fire more
frequently. But consciously controlling these changes -- damping
activity in specific brain regions -- could theoretically be useful
for treating not only pain but such diseases as depression or even
stroke. Exerting that kind of control is difficult, but it may offer
an alternative to drugs that is both more precise and less likely to
cause side effects.
Until a few years ago, selective control of brain activity was just
a provocative idea. But a new version of functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) has, for the first time, made brain
activity visible in real time. The technology was just what deCharms
needed. He and his collaborator Sean Mackey, associate director of
the Pain Management Division at Stanford University, have already
shown that their technique works, at least in the short term. In
December, they published the results of their first study in the
journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, showing
that both healthy subjects and chronic-pain patients could learn to
control brain activity -- and pain -- using real-time fMRI.
"There are potentially dozens of diseases of the brain and nervous
system caused by an inappropriate level of brain activation in
different areas," says deCharms. He cautions that fMRI feedback is
not yet ready for clinical use -- he and Mackey are still confirming
their results in long-term clinical trials. But even as he refines
the use of the technique for treating pain, deCharms is now testing
it in patients with anxiety disorders. And other scientists are
running or planning pilot studies of fMRI feedback to treat
depression, stroke, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD),
and post-traumatic stress disorder. |
| |
Mind Control
DeCharms was still a graduate student at the University of
California, San Francisco, in the 1990s when he started studying how
the neural connections in the brain grow and change with experience,
a phenomenon called neuro-plasticity. Neuroscientists knew that
repeatedly exercising parts of the brain can elicit permanent
changes in the complex neural circuitry responsible for, say,
hearing or vision. DeCharms theorized that by consciously increasing
or decreasing the neural activity in specific brain areas involved
in disease, patients could control some of their symptoms and
perhaps permanently change their brains for the better. DeCharms
believes that patients with depression, for example, might be able
to use fMRI feedback to learn to control the neurons that release
the signaling molecule serotonin, and perhaps the cells serotonin
acts on, as well. This would achieve the same goal as drugs like
Prozac -- increasing the amount of serotonin available in the brain
-- but might not produce side effects.
"If you practice a new form of dance, the first thing that happens
is you learn to do the activity better. You engage the musculature,
and it becomes stronger," says deCharms. "Eventually, your physical
body has been changed. It's a long-lasting effect, even when you're
not consciously trying." One key to strengthening the right dance
muscles, of course, is feedback on your performance: dance studios
always have mirrors on the walls. DeCharms hoped the same process
would work in the brain, if he could find a way to measure brain
activity rapidly and accurately enough for patients to learn to
control it and to mimic desired patterns.
The idea of using feedback in the brain is not new. For 30 years,
scientists have used electroencephalograms (EEG) -- a technology
that measures electrical activity coming from the brain -- to train
people to elicit or maintain a particular type of electrical
pattern. Results from preliminary studies suggest that such training
is somewhat effective for treating ADHD and substance abuse, though
large, placebo-controlled studies have not yet been completed. But
because EEG technology picks up electrical activity spanning
multiple brain areas, its usefulness for specific feedback is
limited. DeCharms wanted to target the anatomically tiny brain
structures involved in disease, and in sensations like pain.
In contrast to EEG, fMRI measures the blood flow in precise areas of
the brain, yielding much finer spatial resolution. It shows which
areas are working hardest during a specific task, and it can also
point out which parts of the brain are functioning abnormally in
specific diseases. But for deCharms, it was the development of
real-time fMRI that was the breakthrough. FMRI generates an enormous
amount of data, which used to take days or weeks to analyze and
interpret. But newer algorithms and greater computing power have
collapsed that processing time down to milliseconds. That means
scientists -- and subjects -- can watch brain activity as it
happens.
For deCharms and his collaborators, this type of fMRI held a
powerful appeal. They theorized that people with neurological or
psychological disorders could perform mental exercises to try to
modulate activity in specific neural systems that had gone awry and
get immediate feedback on which strategies were most effective. Then
they could use those strategies to feel better. |
| |
Tigers and Pain
I've suffered from chronic back pain for five years, the symptoms
persisting despite an array of treatments: stomach-wrenching amounts
of ibuprofen, prescription painkillers that made me woozy, lengthy
ergonomics consultations, and months of physical therapy and
acupuncture. My problem is not uncommon. An estimated 50 million
Americans suffer from chronic pain, and for a large percentage of
those patients, existing therapies are inadequate.
Pain is a complex phenomenon. It depends both on neural signals that
are generated during tissue damage, as when you grab a hot pan, and
on a higher-level system that interprets those signals to form the
pain experience -- an interpretation that may be altered by your
emotions and level of attention. For example, soldiers wounded on
the battlefield often don't feel the extent of their injuries until
they are out of danger. So while pain is an adaptation that evolved
to help us avoid bodily injury, our brains have also evolved a
sophisticated system for turning it off. "You need to be able to run
from a tiger, even if you're hurt," says deCharms.
DeCharms chose pain as his first test of real-time fMRI technology,
partly because the need is so great and partly because the
neurological circuit that underlies pain is well understood. Opioid
drugs, such as morphine, target these neurons chemically.
Implantable stimulators, which can be an effective treatment for
pain, target the circuit with small jolts of electricity. DeCharms,
on the other hand, wanted to try to target the system consciously,
through cognitive processes.
In last December's paper in the National Academy journal, deCharms,
Mackey, and their collaborators described a study in which
participants learned a series of mental exercises derived from
strategies used in pain clinics. For example, they might have been
asked to imagine the sensation of their brains' releasing
painkilling compounds into the aching area, or to imagine that their
painful tissue was as healthy as a pain-free part of their body.
Subjects then climbed into the MRI scanner, where they wore special
virtual-reality goggles that displayed the activity in a part of the
brain involved in feeling pain -- the anterior cingulate cortex.
They were instructed to try to increase or decrease the activity by
performing the exercises. The MRI data gave them direct feedback on
how well their mental strategies were working, allowing them to
adjust their technique. Some people picked up the knack quickly,
while others needed several sessions to learn appropriate control
methods.
Eight patients with chronic pain that wasn't adequately controlled
by more conventional means reported a 44 to 64 percent decrease in
pain after the training, three times the pain reduction reported by
a control group. Those who exercised the greatest control over brain
activity showed the greatest benefit.
The researchers also designed an elaborate set of controls to show
that the results didn't simply reflect the placebo effect or an
artifact of the experimental process. For example, subjects who did
not get fMRI feedback but were instructed to focus attention to and
away from their pain did not show as much pain relief. Patients who
got fMRI feedback from another part of the brain also did not
benefit; nor did patients who got feedback from the cingulate of
another person. "If expectation or being in the scanner were
contributing ... then that group should have seen a similar result,"
says deCharms. The researchers also conducted tests in which
chronic-pain patients were given more-traditional biofeedback data,
such as heart rate or blood pressure. Patients who received fMRI
feedback had a significantly greater reduction in pain.
However, some scientists say it's still not clear what kind of role
attention, or even emotion, is playing. "In our experience, people
are so engaged in the task, they don't even know how long they're in
the [MRI]," says Seung-Schik Yoo, a Harvard University
neuroscientist who is also studying real-time fMRI. "If someone is
so captivated, they could forget to pay attention to the pain." And
success in controlling the activity levels shown on the screens
could further distract a patient from the pain. "When it works, time
flies," says Yoo. "When it doesn't, you get frustrated." He adds
that the best way to determine whether test subjects are permanently
affecting their brains will be a long-term clinical trial, like the
one deCharms and Mackey have under way. Still, says Yoo, "Their work
has paved the way in pain control using this new technique." |
| |
All in Your Head
When I told my father about my trip to Omneuron, he asked a question
that deCharms is asked often. If you can mentally control pain, why
do you need MRI feedback? Shouldn't the pain, or lack of it, be
feedback enough?
The short answer is no. "No other technique that involves feedback
has been able to do this sort of thing that well," says Peter A.
Bandettini, director of the fMRI core facility at the National
Institutes of Health in Bethesda, MD. According to Bandettini,
figuring out why the fMRI feedback is effective is one of the big
remaining tasks. He says the answer lies partly in the way fMRI
pinpoints precise areas of the brain. But that still leaves a huge
question: how do patients actually manipulate the activity in those
areas? How do they will control over activity levels? "People figure
out how to change the activation, but they don't know exactly what
they do," he says. "I think if we learn more about that, the
technique will become more widely applicable."
Mackey hopes to eventually unravel the neural systems responsible
for the painkilling effects. It's possible that activating the
cingulate leads to the release of chemicals such as endorphins,
natural painkillers produced by the brain. In fact, the process may
be similar to the one that causes the placebo effect. Placebo
treatments can have a profound effect on pain and on certain
diseases, notably depression -- even inducing changes in the brain.
Recent studies show that sham painkillers can trigger the release of
endorphins and activate the anterior cingulate, the same brain area
under scrutiny in the feedback study. According to deCharms, fMRI
feedback may provide a way to consciously control this process.
Even if they are uncertain about the mechanisms behind fMRI
feedback, biomedical researchers are excited about exploring its
possibilities. "The results from deCharms's experiment are
compelling enough that people will probably be jumping in," says
Bandettini. Adds Tor Wager, a psychologist at Columbia University,
"The field of neurofeedback is wide open. ... We need more research
that explores what people can do themselves." The possibilities are
likely to grow as neuroscientists zero in on the brain areas
responsible for different functions and the specific abnormalities
linked to different disorders.
Many experts caution, though, that it's still too early to determine
the broad therapeutic potential. "We're going to have to do the
studies and see if feedback is helpful," says John Gabrieli, an MIT
neuroscientist who collaborated with deCharms and is now planning to
test fMRI feedback for ADHD. "We need to figure out which disorders
are amenable, how long the effects last, and what contexts are
needed to support them." And as in any test of a novel technology,
the findings must be repeated in other labs.
It's possible that some parts of the brain are more susceptible to
conscious control than others, and such differences could limit the
number of areas that are responsive to fMRI feedback. The anterior
cingulate cortex, for example, may be easier to control because it
is involved in attention, which we actively modulate throughout the
day, as we work or daydream, read or watch television. Diseases such
as depression or social phobias, which can often be treated
effectively with behavioral therapy, might also be good candidates
for fMRI feedback, says Gabrieli.
Yoo, meanwhile, hopes to show that fMRI feedback could speed
rehabilitation from stroke or other brain injuries. Patients often
lose a particular function, such as speech or part of their vision,
when such an injury kills a cluster of neurons. Sometimes the brain
can heal itself, either spontaneously or through practice, by
reorganizing nearby neurons to take over. This process generally
takes place unconsciously, but Yoo says fMRI feedback could teach
patients how to consciously activate the regenerating areas.
Among the most compelling therapeutic possibilities is a combination
of fMRI feedback with cognitive behavioral therapy, a popular form
of talk therapy in which patients learn to change negative thought
patterns. During a standard session, a patient might tell the
therapist about an event that provokes anxiety and then use specific
mental exercises to calm down. In the version deCharms and
colleagues are testing, a patient lies in the scanner and
communicates with a therapist in the next room through a speaker.
Both therapist and patient can watch the patient's brain activity
throughout the session. Using that information, patients might try
to consciously alter the activity patterns that flare up when they
become anxious. |
|
A Painful Lesson
Before I hit the scanner at deCharms's lab, we practice a few of the
mental exercises that he routinely teaches his subjects. I imagine
my brain releasing endorphins, their painkilling signals traveling
down the length of my spinal cord to reach my lower back. To try to
increase my pain, I imagine that my lower back is burning. (Trying
to worsen the pain sounds counterproductive, but deCharms theorizes
that learning to modulate pain in both directions will give patients
more power over brain activity.) I'm shocked by how sharply I can
make the pain flare up.
Now that I'm inside the scanner, the screen instructs me to try to
increase or decrease the size of the fires representing my brain
activity. I set to work, trying to focus simultaneously on my pain
and on the screen overhead. The fires wax and wane a bit, sometimes
smoldering, sometimes burning at a steady pace. My pain that day is
mild, and it's difficult to tell if the fires are flickering
randomly or at my will. Try as I might to extinguish the flame or
coax it to a roaring blaze, the fire mostly burns low.
After about 15 minutes, the technician's voice crackles over a
speaker in the scanner -- my first session is over, and to my
surprise, I did achieve some control. She projects onto the screen a
rough graph comparing activity in the cingulate during the intervals
when I tried to increase the fires with the activity when I tried to
decrease them. There is a clear difference between the lines.
When the technician asks if I want to try another session, I agree,
determined to do even better this time around. During this session,
I switch mental strategies, which deCharms recommends as a way to
find the technique that works best. Instead of imagining endorphins
being released in my brain, I focus on the healthy tissue of my hand
and try to imagine that my back feels just as pain-free. The fires
on the screen flicker and flare, and I'm convinced I have a better
handle on my neural activity. When I receive my official results
several weeks later, I discover I was right. I performed best during
my last session, successfully controlling the activity in my right
and left insula.
DeCharms is now trying to determine the best ways to teach fMRI
feedback; if long-term studies confirm his team's initial findings,
and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves the treatment, he
eventually hopes to open treatment clinics. Like a complex dance,
the technique is hard to pick up, and some people are naturally
better at it than others. "We need to figure out who is good at this
and how to make it easier," says deCharms. His team is developing
new ways to display brain activity to make feedback more effective.
The fire graphic used in my session, for example, is a relatively
new addition. The researchers are also doing extensive psychological
screening to see if people who easily learn to control their brain
activity have identifying characteristics. One of the biggest
factors will probably be motivation. Feedback somewhat resembles
exercise, albeit an odd mental form of it -- so it requires
willingness and effort.
My own test run is just a single afternoon, and I can't tell if my
pain is any better. But I did seem to control select parts of my
brain. And for better or worse, after two hours in the scanner, I am
definitely conscious of my lower back.
Emily Singer is the biotechnology and life sciences editor of
Technology Review. |
|
|
|
Home Page |
Preceding Article >
|
Mailing List
|
Contact Us |
| |
|