Apomorphine-Induced Changes in Synaptic Dopamine Levels: Positron Emission Tomography Evidence for Presynaptic Inhibition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors developed a novel positron emission tomography method to estimate changes in the synaptic level of dopamine ([DA]) induced by direct dopamine agonists (for example, apomorphine) in patients with Parkinson disease. The method is based on the typical asymmetry of the nigrostriatal lesion that often occurs in Parkinson disease. Using the between-side difference (ipsilateral (I) and contralateral (C) putamen to the more affected body side) of the inverse of the putamen [11C]raclopride binding potential (BP), the authors obtained [equation: see text] at baseline (that is, before apomorphine administration) and [equation: see text] after apomorphine administration (assuming the concentration of apomorphine is equal in both putamina). The between-side difference in the estimated synaptic concentration of dopamine (diff[DA]) should remain constant unless apomorphine affects dopamine release differently between the two sides. The authors found that apomorphine given subcutaneously at doses of 0.03 and 0.06 mg/kg induced significant changes in their estimate of diff[DA] (P < 0.05). Such changes were more pronounced when only patients with a stable response to levodopa were considered (P < 0.01). These findings provide in vivo evidence that direct dopamine agonists can inhibit the release of endogenous dopamine. The authors propose that this effect is mainly mediated by the activation of presynaptic D2/D3 dopamine receptors.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".