Distribution of Monoamine Oxidase Proteins in Human Brain: Implications for Brain Imaging Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of monoamine oxidases (MAO-A: [(11)C]harmine, [(11)C]clorgyline, and [(11)C]befloxatone; MAO-B: [(11)C]deprenyl-D2) has been actively pursued given clinical importance of MAOs in human neuropsychiatric disorders. However, it is unknown how well PET outcome measures for the different radiotracers are quantitatively related to actual MAO protein levels. We measured regional distribution (n=38) and developmental/aging changes (21 hours to 99 years) of both MAOs by quantitative immunoblotting in autopsied normal human brain. MAO-A was more abundant than MAO-B in infants, which was reversed as MAO-B levels increased faster before 1 year and, unlike MAO-A, kept increasing steadily to senescence. In adults, regional protein levels of both MAOs were positively and proportionally correlated with literature postmortem data of MAO activities and binding densities. With the exception of [(11)C]befloxatone (binding potential (BP), r=0.61, P=0.15), correlations between regional PET outcome measures of binding in the literature and MAO protein levels were good (P<0.01) for [(11)C]harmine (distribution volume, r=0.86), [(11)C]clorgyline (λk3, r=0.82), and [(11)C]deprenyl-D2 (λk3 or modified Patlak slope, r=0.78 to 0.87), supporting validity of the latter imaging measures. However, compared with in vitro data, the latter PET measures underestimated regional contrast by ∼2-fold. Further studies are needed to address cause of the in vivo vs. in vitro nonproportionality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".