Decreased binding of the D3 dopamine receptor-preferring ligand [11C]-(+)-PHNO in drug-naive Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The D(3) dopamine (DA) receptor is a member of the D(2)-like DA receptor family. While the D(2) receptor is abundant especially in motor-regions of the striatum, the D(3) receptor shows a relative abundance in limbic regions and globus pallidus. This receptor is of current interest in neurology because of its potential involvement in psychiatric and motor complications in Parkinson's disease and the possibility that dopamine D(3)-preferring agonist therapy might delay progression of the disorder. Preclinical data indicate that striatal levels of the D(3) (but not the D(2)) DA receptor are decreased following lesion of nigrostriatal DA neurons; at present, there are no in vivo data on this receptor subtype in Parkinson's disease. The objective of this positron emission tomography study was to compare [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO (D(3) versus D(2) preferring) and [(11)C]raclopride (D(3) = D(2)) binding in brain of non-depressed, non-demented, dopaminergic drug-naïve patients with early-stage Parkinson's disease (n = 10), relative to matched-controls (n = 9). Parkinson's disease was associated with a trend for bilaterally decreased [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO (but not [(11)C]raclopride) binding in the D(3)-rich ventral striatum (-11%, P = 0.07) and significantly decreased binding in globus pallidus (-42%, P = 0.02). In contrast, in the primarily D(2)-populated putamen, both [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO (25%, P = 0.02) and [(11)C]raclopride (25%, P < 0.01) binding were similarly increased, especially on the side contra-lateral to the symptoms. In the midbrain, presumably containing D(3) receptors localized to the substantia nigra, [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO binding was normal. Decreased [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO to [(11)C]raclopride ratio correlated with motor deficits and lowered-mood (P < 0.02). Our imaging data suggest that brain DA neuron loss in the human causes region-specific differential changes in DA D(2) and D(3) receptors with D(3) receptor 'downregulation' possibly related to some motor and mood problems in Parkinson disease. D(3) receptor levels might be a determinant vulnerability factor underlying side-effects associated with treatment; hence, these initial findings provide valuable baseline information to understand the role of D(3) receptors in response to Parkinson's disease medication.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".