In vivo quantification of regional dopamine‐D3 receptor binding potential of (+)‐PHNO: Studies in non‐human primates and transgenic mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Examination of dopamine-D3 (D3) receptors with positron emission tomography (PET) have been hampered in the past by the lack of a PET ligand with sufficient selectivity for D3 over dopamine-D2 (D2) receptors. The two types co-localize in the brain, with D2 density significantly higher than D3, hence nonselective PET ligands inform on D2, rather than D3 status. [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO is a novel PET ligand with a preferential affinity for D3 over D2. We used the selective D3 antagonist, SB-277011 to dissect regional fractions of the [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO signal attributable to D3 and D2 in primate brain. The results were compared with quantitative autoradiography with (3)H-(+)-PHNO in wild-type, D2-knock-out, and D3-knock-out mice examined at baseline and following administration of SB-277011. Both sets of results converged to indicate a predominant D3-related component to (+)-PHNO binding in extra-striatal regions, with binding in the midbrain being entirely attributable to D3. The midbrain is thus an excellent target region to examine D3 receptor occupancy with [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO PET in vivo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".