Lack of effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on short-term smoking cessation: Results of a randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial

• Published in: Drug and alcohol dependence 2019-01, Vol.194, p.244-251
• Main Authors: Falcone, Mary, Bernardo, Leah, Wileyto, E. Paul, Allenby, Cheyenne, Burke, Anne Marie, Hamilton, Roy, Cristancho, Mario, Ashare, Rebecca L., Loughead, James, Lerman, Caryn
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abstinence; Adult; Brain stimulation; Carbon monoxide; Cigarette Smoking - psychology; Cigarette Smoking - therapy; Cigarette Smoking - trends; Cigarettes; Clinical research; Clinical trials; Cognition - physiology; Cognitive ability; Cognitive control; Cognitive functioning; Consumption; Cortex; Counseling; Direct current; Double-Blind Method; Double-blind studies; Drug addiction; Efficacy; Electrical stimulation of the brain; ESB; Evidence-based medicine; Female; Help seeking behavior; Humans; Latency; Male; Middle Aged; Prefrontal cortex; Prefrontal Cortex - physiology; Randomization; Side effects; Smoke; Smoking; Smoking cessation; Smoking Cessation - methods; Smoking Cessation - psychology; Stimulation; tDCS; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation - methods; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation - trends; Transdermal medication; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0376-8716; 1879-0046
• DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.10.016

•We examined effects of anodal tDCS targeted to the left DLPFC on smoking behavior.•1 mA or 2 mA tDCS (vs. sham) had no effect on days of abstinence or smoking rates.•Active tDCS (vs. sham) did not improve ability to resist smoking in the laboratory. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to improve measures of executive cognitive function and reduce cigarette consumption. Studies conducted to date have been small, and the results are mixed. This randomized, double-blind, parallel arm clinical trial tested the effects of active anodal tDCS targeted to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (versus sham) on 7-day smoking cessation in 106 treatment-seeking smokers. Participants received three sessions of sham (n = 35), 1 mA (n = 35), or 2 mA (n = 36) tDCS in the context of a validated smoking lapse paradigm then received brief smoking cessation counseling and completed a monitored quit attempt. The primary outcome was total number of days of abstinence confirmed via exhaled carbon monoxide. During the quit period, there were no effects of dose group on days of abstinence (sham, M (SD): 2.5 days (±2.5); 1 mA: 2.5 days (±2.5); 2 mA: 2.4 days (±2.3); β = -0.08; p = 0.76) or on change in daily smoking rate (sham, M (SD): 12.6 CPD (±4.8); 1 mA: -11.8 CPD (±4.4); 2 mA: -11.7 CPD (±5.3); β = 0.42, p = 0.49), nor were there effects of dose group on latency to smoke or number of cigarettes smoked during the smoking lapse paradigm. Side effects of tDCS were generally mild (