Biomarkers of recovery after stroke

Current Opinion in Neurology

Volumn 21, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 654-659

  Milot, Marie Hélène ^a   Cramer, Steven C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Plasticity; Recovery; Stroke; Therapy

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; GROWTH FACTOR; NEUROTRANSMITTER;

ANGIOGENESIS; APHASIA; ATTENTION DISTURBANCE; BLOOD PRESSURE; BRAIN BLOOD FLOW; BRAIN INJURY; BRAIN MAPPING; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM FUNCTION; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONVALESCENCE; DENDRITE; DEPRESSION; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; DISABILITY; DISEASE MARKER; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED MUSCLE RESPONSE; EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GLIA; HEMIPARESIS; HEMISPHERE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; NERVE EXCITABILITY; NERVE FIBER; NEURAL STEM CELL; NEUROANATOMY; NEUROCHEMISTRY; NEUROIMAGING; PATIENT SELECTION; PLASTICITY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; PROTEIN BLOOD LEVEL; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STROKE; SYNAPSE; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING; VALIDITY;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; HUMANS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE;

EID: 56749117840     PISSN: 13507540     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0b013e3283186f96     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Greeham G, Duncan P, Stason W, et al. Post-stroke rehabilitation. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research; 1995.
2. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke. II. Restorative therapies. Ann Neurol 2008; 63:549-560.
3. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006; 296:2095-2104.
4. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Retention of upper limb function in stroke survivors who have received constraint-induced movement therapy: the EXCITE randomised trial. Lancet Neurol 2008; 7:33-40. This report provides phase 3 data showing that an intervention in patients with chronic stroke can produce significant, meaningful, and enduring behavioral gains.
5. Butefisch C, Davis B, Wise S, et al. Mechanisms of use-dependent plasticity in the human motor cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97:3661-3665.
6. Tardy J, Pariente J, Leger A, et al. Methylphenidate modulates cerebral poststroke reorganization. Neuroimage 2006; 33:913-922.
7. Temple RJ. A regulatory authority's opinion about surrogate endpoints. In: Nimmo WS, Tucker GT, editors. Clinical measurement in drug evaluation. John Wiley & sons; 1995. pp. 3-22.
8. Carey J, Kimberley T, Lewis S, et al. Analysis of fMRI and finger tracking training in subjects with chronic stroke. Brain 2002; 125:773-788.
9. Fleming T, DeMets D. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996; 125:605-613.
10. Stephen RM, Gillies RJ. Promise and progress for functional and molecular imaging of response to targeted therapies. Pharm Res 2007; 24:1172-1185.
11. Collins JM. Functional imaging in phase I studies: decorations or decision making? J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:2807-2809.
12. Lansberg MG, Thijs VN, Hamilton S, et al. Evaluation of the clinical-diffusion and perfusion-diffusion mismatch models in DEFUSE. Stroke 2007; 38:1826-1830.
13. Furlan AJ, Eyding D, Albers GW, et al. Dose Escalation of Desmoteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke (DEDAS) : evidence of safety and efficacy 3 to 9 h after stroke onset. Stroke 2006; 37:1227-1231.
14. Hacke W, Albers G, Al-Rawi Y, et al. The Desmoteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke Trial (DIAS): a phase Il MRI-based 9-h window acute stroke thrombolysis trial with intravenous desmoteplase. Stroke 2005; 36:66-73.
15. Boissel J, Collet J, Moleur P, Haugh M. Surrogate endpoints: a basis for a rational approach. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 43:235-244.
16. Bucher H, Guyatt G, Cook D, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature: XIX. Applying clinical trial results. A. How to use an article measuring the effect of an intervention on surrogate end points. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1999; 282:771-778.
17. Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, et al. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain 2008; 131:425-437. This study demonstrates specificity of brain changes in relation to a restorative therapy.
18. Bosnell R, Wegner C, Kincses ZT, et al. Reproducibility of fMRI in the clinical setting: implications for trial designs. Neuroimage 2008; 42:603-610. A particularly thoughtful treatment of the issue of reliability of fMRI in its application to studies of patients with neurological disorders.
19. Eaton KP, Szaflarski JP, Altaye M, et al. Reliability of fMRI for studies of language in poststroke aphasia subjects. Neuroimage 2008; 41:311-322.
20. Kimberley TJ, Khandekar G, Borich M. fMRI reliability in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res 2008; 186:183-190.
21. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke. I. Mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol 2008; 63:272-287.
22. Nudo RJ. Postinfarct cortical plasticity and behavioral recovery. Stroke 2007; 38:840-845.
23. Carmichael ST. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of neural repair after stroke: making waves. Ann Neurol 2006; 59:735-742.
24. Chopp M, Zhang ZG, Jiang Q. Neurogenesis, angiogenesis, and MRI indices of functional recovery from stroke. Stroke 2007; 38:827-831.
25. Ward N, Brown M, Thompson A, Frackowiak R. Neural correlates of outcome after stroke: a cross-sectional fMRI study. Brain 2003; 126:1430-1448.
26. Rocca MA, Filippi M. Functional MRI in multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimaging 2007; 17 (Suppl 1):36S-41S.
27. Newman AB, Simonsick EM, Naydeck BL, et al. Association of long-distance corridor walk performance with mortality, cardiovascular disease, mobility limitation, and disability. JAMA 2006; 295:2018-2026.
28. Smania N, Paolucci S, Tinazzi M, et al. Active finger extension: a simple movement predicting recovery of arm function in patients with acute stroke. Stroke 2007; 38:1088-1090.
29. Geiger S, Holdenrieder S, Stieber P, et al. Nucleosomes as a new prognostic marker in early cerebral stroke. J Neurol 2007; 254:617-623.
30. Brott T, Marler J, Olinger C, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: lesion size by computed tomography. Stroke 1989; 20:871-875.
31. Saver J, Johnston K, Homer D, et al. Infarct volume as a surrogate or auxiliary outcome measure in ischemic stroke clinical trials. The RANTTAS investigators. Stroke 1999; 30:293-298.
32. Bocti C, Swartz RH, Gao FQ, et al. A new visual rating scale to assess strategic white matter hyperintensities within cholinergic pathways in dementia. Stroke 2005; 36:2126-2131.
33. Schaechter JD, Moore CI, Connell BD, et al. Structural and functional plasticity in the somatosensory cortex of chronic stroke patients. Brain 2006; 129:2722-2733.
34. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, et al. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke 2008; 39:1520-1525.
35. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, et al. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007; 130:170-180. This landmark paper demonstrates important advances in use of multimodal testing for predicting treatment gains among patients with chronic stroke.
36. Ding G, Jiang Q, Li L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging investigation of axonal remodeling and angiogenesis after embolic stroke in sildenafil-treated rats. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2008; 28:1440-1448.
37. Dijkhuizen R, Singhal A, Mandeville J, et al. Correlation between brain reorganization, ischemic damage, and neurologic status after transient focal cerebral ischemia in rats: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurosci 2003; 23:510-517.
38. Nair DG, Hutchinson S, Fregni F, et al. Imaging correlates of motor recovery from cerebral infarction and their physiological significance in well recovered patients. Neuroimage 2007; 34:253-263.
39. Ward NS, Newton JM, Swayne OB, et al. Motor system activation after subcortical stroke depends on corticospinal system integrity. Brain 2006; 129:809-819.
40. Talelli P, Greenwood PJ, Rothwell JC. Arm function after stroke: neurophysiological correlates and recovery mechanisms assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 2006; 117:1641-1659.
41. Grefkes C, Nowak DA, Eickhoff SB, et al. Cortical connectivity after subcortical stroke assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol 2008; 63:236-246. A clear use of connectivity measures in the assessment of patients with stroke.
42. Thickbroom GW, Byrnes ML, Archer SA, Mastaglia FL. Motor outcome after subcortical stroke correlates with the degree of cortical reorganization. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115:2144-2150.
43. Zemke A, Heagerty P, Lee C, Cramer S. Motor cortex organization after stroke is related to side of stroke and level of recovery. Stroke 2003; 34:E23-E28.
44. Weiller C, Chollet F, Friston K, et al. Functional reorganization of the brain in recovery from striatocapsular infarct ion in man. Ann Neurol 1992; 31:463-472.
45. Turton A, Wroe S, Trepte N, et al. Contralateral and ipsilateral EMG responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation during recovery of arm and hand function after stroke. Electroenceph Clin Neurophys 1996; 101:316-328.
46. Manganotti P, Acier M, Zanette G, et al. Motor cortical disinhibition during early and late recovery after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22:396-403.
47. Winhuisen L, Thiel A, Schumacher B, et al. Role of the contralateral inferior frontal gyrus in recovery of language function in poststroke aphasia: a combined repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and positron emission tomography study. Stroke 2005; 36:1759-1763.
48. Johansen-Berg H, Rushworth M, Bogdanovic M, et al. The role of ipsilateral premotor cortex in hand movement after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002; 99:14518-14523.
49. Schaechter J, Kraft E, Hilliard T, et al. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002; 16:326-338.
50. Luft A, McCombe-Waller S, Whitall J, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 292:1853-1861.
51. Raboyeau G, De Boissezon X, Marie N, et al. Right hemisphere activation in recovery from aphasia: lesion effect or function recruitment? Neurology 2008; 70:290-298.
52. Cramer S, Nelles G, Benson R, et al. A functional MRI study of subjects recovered from hemiparetic stroke. Stroke 1997; 28:2518-2527.
53. Calautti C, Naccarato M, Jones PS, et al. The relationship between motor deficit and hemisphere activation balance after stroke: a 3T fMRI study. Neuroimage 2007; 34:322-331.
54. Dong Y, Dobkin BH, Cen SY, et al. Motor cortex activation during treatment may predict therapeutic gains in paretic hand function after stroke. Stroke 2006; 37:1552-1555.
55. Koski L, Mernar T, Dobkin B. Immediate and long-term changes in cortico- motor output in response to rehabilitation: correlation with functional improvements in chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2004; 18:230-249.
56. Loubinoux I, Dechaumont-Palacin S, Castel-Lacanal E, et al. Prognostic value of fMRI in recovery of hand function in subcortical stroke patients. Cereb Cortex 2007; 17:2980-2987.
57. Cramer SC, Parrish TB, Levy RM, et al. Predicting functional gains in a stroke trial. Stroke 2007; 38:2108-2114.
58. Hodics T, Cohen LG, Cramer SC. Functional imaging of intervention effects in stroke motor rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87:36-42.
59. Ward N, Brown M, Thompson A, Frackowiak R. The influence of time after stroke on brain activations during a motor task. Ann Neurol 2004; 55:829-834.
60. Saur D, Lange R, Baumgaertner A, et al. Dynamics of language reorganization after stroke. Brain 2006; 129:1371-1384.