Skip to content

Ameliorating Cognitive Control in Binge Eating Disorder

Ameliorating Cognitive Control in Binge Eating Disorder by Electrical Brain Stimulation

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04572087
Acronym
ACCElect
Enrollment
41
Registered
2020-10-01
Start date
2020-09-08
Completion date
2022-03-09
Last updated
2022-05-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Binge-Eating Disorder

Keywords

Brain stimulation, cognitive control, behavioral training, binge eating disorder, response inhibition, eye tracking, eating disorder, impulsivity

Brief summary

There is evidence that impairment of impulse regulation is involved in the development and maintenance of eating disorders, especially in Binge Eating Disorder (BED). BED is characterized by recurrent episodes of binge eating with experienced loss of control over eating. Controlling impulsive behaviour, cognitive flexibility, planning and decision making are key abilities of impulse regulation. Some of these impaired cognitive functions are linked to decreased activity of certain brain regions. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a well-established method to alter brain activity. In the current project, we explore if a computer-assisted training programme for patients with BED that is combined with tDCS is feasible and able to ameliorate impulse regulation and impulsive eating behaviour. We hypothesize that the cognitive training programme with additional tDCS will result in a greater decrease of BED symptoms and a stronger increase in impulse regulation skills compared with the cognitive training programme without tDCS by using a placebo stimulation.

Detailed description

Patients with BED form a subgroup of obese patients with a disinhibited eating pattern that is associated with major impairments in cognitive control. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) has been identified as a brain region closely tied to cognitive control processes and crucially involved in the control of eating behaviour. This suggests the dlPFC as a target for the modulation of cognitive control processes over eating in BED. This modulation can be achieved by both, a cognitive training task and by noninvasive brain stimulation using tDCS. In studies with healthy normal-weight participants, (1) different cognitive training task enhance control over eating behaviour, (2) tDCS is an effective tool to ameliorate cognitive control processes, and (3) has beneficial effects on motivational aspects of eating behaviour, i.e. food craving. Based on this evidence, we will use a combination of a cognitive control task and tDCS to enhance cognitive control over eating in patients with BED. This is to the best of our knowledge one of the first studies to use tDCS as an intervention to enhance cognitive control over eating in patients with BED. o Sample size: We will allocate 40 patients in the trial, i.e. 20 patients in each study arm. o Recruitment: Patients are recruited by announcements, mails to the distributor list of the university hospital, existing databases of patients, and current patients of the university hospital. Patients are screened by a standardized checklist. In- and exclusion criteria are checked during the screening procedure and during the baseline diagnostic before randomisation. o Standard Operating Procedures: For the recruitment, diagnostic and experimental sessions, Standard Operating Procedures are documented for the experimenter. This includes the order of clinical interviews, questionnaires and operating with the technical measurement instruments. The experimenters are regularly supervised. All adverse events will be listed and severe adverse events will be reported immediately to the PIs. o Quality assurance plan: Randomized allocation to the stimulation condition (verum vs. sahm) and statistical analyses is done externally by the Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University Tübingen, Germany (ICEAB). Objective technical measurement instruments are mostly used to record data. o Data checks: Data is recorded mostly by objective technical measurement instruments, so no external monitoring is needed. We will spot check entered questionnaire data, in particular binge eating frequency in the past four weeks will be double checked as this is the primary outcome (PO). o Source data verification: Data are spot checked by comparing the entries in the source data with the entries in the database. Each PO entry will be double checked. There are pre-defined criteria for entering data into the database. * Data dictionary: A data dictionary that contains detailed descriptions of each variable and how to be entered is available. o Plan for missing data: Missing data and invalid data as well as the reasons will be recorded. o Statistical analysis plan: A mixed model approach will be used to analyze the PO and secondary outcomes (SOs).

Interventions

OTHERBehavioral training and verum stimulation

Cognitive control training and verum tDCS

OTHERBehavioral training and sham stimulation

Cognitive control training and sham tDCS

Sponsors

Prof. Dr. Katrin Giel
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

The participants as well as the experimenters are blinded to the treatment group by using a unique 5-digit code for each participant which activates either verum or sham stimulation. The participants and experimenters are blinded to the randomisation condition as current in the sham condition is applied for 40 seconds at the beginning of each training session and during this time, no training of the cognitive control task is done. As participants perceive typical sensations of tDCS (e.g. tingling) and tDCS electrodes are actually mounted, this is considered as a valid placebo control. The PIs and the biostatistician from the external ICEAB who is doing the statistical analysis are blinded as well until the end of the analysis.

Intervention model description

After the baseline measure (T0) without tDCS, participants are randomized to either the group that receives 6 training sessions (T1-T6) with 2 milliampere (ma) anodal tDCS to the right dlPFC or the group that receives 6 training sessions and sham tDCS. After the six training sessions within 2 weeks a post measurement concerning task performance (T7) without tDCS takes place. 4 Weeks after treatment, the diagnostic post measurement (T8) will be executed. 3 months later, a follow-up via phone (T9) will be done.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* BED according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) * Legal age * BMI above 20 kg/m2

Exclusion criteria

* Insufficient knowledge of German language * Current pregnancy or lactation period * Current or lifetime psychotic disorder, bipolar-I disorder, current substance dependence, suicidality * Past bariatric surgery * Severe physical disease which influence weight or eating behaviour (e.g. severe diabetes) or neurologic disease * Non-removable metal parts in the area of the head * Pacemaker * Neuroleptics and benzodiazepine * impaired vision, ametropia, eye diseases

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Binge eating frequencyassessed at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)Change of the frequency of Binge eating episodes in the last 4 weeks according to the Eating Disorder Examination Interview (EDE) between baseline (T0) and diagnostic post assessment (T8). The EDE is a validated semi-structured clinical interview.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
antisaccade taskassessed at baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6) and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)antisaccade task error rate and latency assessed by eye tracking
Go/No-Go taskat baseline (T0) and at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)Go/No-Go task task error rate and latency
stimulus ratingat baseline (T0) and and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)one self-developed questionnaire including visual analogue scales (0-10 cm) concerning valence, appetite, wanting, liking of the presented stimuli
Eating disorder pathology (EDE)assessed at baseline (T0), at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8) and 3 months follow-up (T9)assessed by the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE), Range 0-6 with higer scores indication higer eating disorder pathology
eating behaviour (TFEQ)at baseline (T0), at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)assessed by the Three-factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ), Range 0-1 with higher scores indicating more pathological eating behaviour
food craving (FCQ-S)at baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6) and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)assessed by the Food Craving Questionnaire, State Version (FCQ-S), Range 1-5 with higher scores indicating higher food craving
Binge eating frequency follow-upassessed at baseline (T0) and at 3 months follow-up (T9)Change of the frequency of Binge eating episodes in the last 4 weeks according to EDE between baseline (T0) and 3 months follow up (T9)
impulsivity (UPPS)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)assessed by the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale (UPPS), Range 1-4 with higher scores indicating higher impulsivity
well-being (WHO-5)at baseline (T0), the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)assessed by the WHO (Five) - Well-being Questionnaire (WHO-5), Range 0-5 with higher scores indicating higher well-being
depressive symptoms (BDI II)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)assessed by the Becks Depression Inventory, Version 2 (BDI II), Range 0-3 with higher scores indicating higher depressive symptoms
Body Mass Index (BMI)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)computed by objectively assessed weight and height
acceptance and feasibilityfrom baseline (T0) throughout all measurement points until 3 months follow-up (T9)drop-out rate throughout T0 to T9, percentage of included patients from the eligible patients at T0
evaluation of the training programmeassessed at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)self-developed questionnaire at T7 (Range 1-5 with higher cores indicating more satisfaction with the training programme)
impulsive behaviours per weekat baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6), the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)assessed by a self-developed process analysis questionnaire, values \> 0 (unlimited frequency) with higher scores indicating more impulsive behaviours per week

Countries

Germany

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 13, 2026