MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1618333650 · doi:10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.wmp41

Abstract W MP41: Potentiation of Gaba-Mediated Synaptic Inhibition in the Recovery Phase: A Novel Therapeutic Target for Stroke

2014· article· en· W1618333650 on OpenAlexaff
Takeshi Hiu, Tonya Bliss, Jeanne T. Paz, Eric T. Wang, Zoya Farzampour, Andrew Olson, Kristina D. Micheva, Gordon Wang, Kevin Tran, Nathan C. Manley, Robin Lemmens, Yasuhiro Nishiyama, Ahmet Arac, Scott Hamilton, Nancy O’Rourke, Stephen J Smith, John R. Huguenard, Gary K. Steinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsStuart Olson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGABAergicInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceGABAA receptorMedicineLong-term potentiationStroke (engine)Synaptic plasticityNeuroplasticityAgonistReceptorPharmacologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Stroke is a major cause of disability yet pharmacotherapy targeting the recovery phase is lacking. Cortical circuit reorganization adjacent to the stroke site promotes recovery, thus elucidating mechanisms that promote this plasticity could lead to new therapeutics. Tonic neuronal inhibition, mediated by extrasynaptic GABA A receptors,inhibits post-stroke recovery. However, effects of phasic (synaptic) GABA signaling - which promotes plasticity during development - are unknown. Here we use a combined approach of i) array tomography to determine the composition of GABA synapses in the post-stroke mouse brain, ii) electrophysiology to determine whether stroke leads to functional changes in GABA-mediated phasic inhibition, and (iii) treatment with zolpidem, an FDA-approved GABA agonist, to modulate recovery. Results: We found, using array tomography, a 1.7-fold increase in the number of GABAergic synapses containing the α1 receptor subunit in layer 5 of the peri-infarct cortex (synapse number/μm 3 : 0.039±0.006 (control) vs 0.064±0.006 (stroke); P<0.01), but not in layer 2/3. There was an associated increase in spontaneous inhibitory post-synaptic currents (sIPSC) specific to layer 5 pyramidal neurons (sIPSC charge (fC): -403±27.8 (control) vs -724±166 (stroke); p=0.03). This effect was transient, occurring during the onset of functional recovery. To test whether the increased phasic inhibitory GABAergic signaling promotes stroke recovery, we treated animals with zolpidem, an agonist with high affinity for α1 subunit-containing GABA A receptors. Low dose zolpidem increased GABA A phasic signaling in layer 5 pyramidal cells and notably increased the rate and extent of behavioral recovery without altering infarct size. Conclusions: These data provide the first evidence that enhanced GABA A -mediated synaptic activity during the recovery phase improves stroke outcome. These data identify modulation of phasic GABA signaling as a novel therapeutic strategy for stroke, indicate zolpidem as a potential drug to improve recovery, and underscore the necessity to distinguish the role of tonic and phasic GABA inhibition in stroke recovery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→