Working memory is a cognitive process that involves maintaining and manipulating information for a short period of time. WM is central to many cognitive processes and declines rapidly with age. Deficits in WM are seen in older adults and in patients with dementia, schizophrenia, major depression, mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, etc. The frontal, parietal, and occipital cortices are significantly involved in WM processing and all brain oscillations are implicated in tackling WM tasks, particularly theta and gamma bands. The theta/gamma (...) neural code hypothesis assumes that retained memory items are recorded via theta-nested gamma cycles. Neuronal oscillations can be manipulated by sensory, invasive- and non-invasive brain stimulations. Transcranial alternating-current stimulation and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation are frequency-tuned non-invasive brain stimulation techniques that have been used to entrain endogenous oscillations in a frequency-specific manner. Compared to rTMS, tACS demonstrates superior cost, tolerability, portability, and safety profile, making it an attractive potential tool for improving cognitive performance. Although cognitive research with tACS is still in its infancy compared to rTMS, a number of studies have shown a promising WM enhancement effect, especially in the elderly and patients with cognitive deficits. This review focuses on the various methods and outcomes of tACS on WM in healthy and unhealthy human adults and highlights the established findings, unknowns, challenges, and perspectives important for translating laboratory tACS into realistic clinical settings. This will allow researchers to identify gaps in the literature and develop frequency-tuned tACS protocols with promising safety and efficacy outcomes. Therefore, research efforts in this direction should help to consider frequency-tuned tACS as a non-pharmacological tool of cognitive rehabilitation in physiological aging and patients with cognitive deficits. (shrink)

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) as investigational intervention for symptomatic relief from Alzheimer disease (AD) has generated big expectations. Our aim is to discuss the ethical justification of this research agenda by examining the underlying research rationale as well as potential methodological pitfalls. The shortcomings we address are of high ethical importance because only scientifically valid research has the potential to be ethical. We performed a systematic search on MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included 166 publications about DBS for AD into the (...) analysis of research rationale, risks and ethical aspects. Fifty-eight patients were reported in peer-reviewed journals with very mixed results. A grey literature search revealed hints for 75 yet to be published, potentially enrolled patients. The results of our systematic review indicate methodological shortcomings in the literature that are both scientific and ethical in nature. According to our analysis, research with human subjects was performed before decisive preclinical research was published examining the specific research question at stake. We also raise the concern that conclusions on the potential safety and efficacy have been reported in the literature that seem premature given the design of the feasibility studies from which they were drawn. In addition, some publications report that DBS for AD was performed without written informed consent from some patients, but from surrogates only. Furthermore, registered ongoing trials plan to enroll severely demented patients. We provide reasons that this would violate Art. 28 of the Declaration of Helsinki, because DBS for AD involves more than minimal risks and burdens, and because its efficacy and safety are not yet empirically established to be likely. Based on our empirical analysis, we argue that clinical research on interventions of risk class III (Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency) should not be exploratory but grounded on sound, preclinically tested, and disease-specific a posteriori hypotheses. This also applies to DBS for dementia as long as therapeutic benefits are uncertain, and especially when research subjects with cognitive deficits are involved, who may foreseeably progress to full incapacity to provide informed consent during the required follow-up period. (shrink)