MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086779277 · doi:10.1139/y02-048

New insights into the antidepressant actions of substance P (NK<sub>1</sub> receptor) antagonists

2002· review· en· W2086779277 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N.M.J. Rupniak

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntidepressantAnxiolyticPharmacologyReceptorNeuroscienceAnimal models of depressionForebrainBlockadeMedicineBiologyInternal medicineCentral nervous systemHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considerable progress has been made in understanding the neural circuits involved the antidepressant and anxiolytic efficacy of substance P (NK, receptor) antagonists (SPAs). Progress has been hampered by species differences in the pharmacology of the NK1 receptor, and the availability of NK1R-/- mice has been a particularly useful resource in overcoming this difficulty. Using neuroanatomical, behavioural, and electrophysiological techniques, studies have now established that pharmacological blockade or deletion of the NK1 receptor produces an antidepressant and anxiolytic-like profile in a range of behavioural assays that is distinct from that of established drugs. There is evidence from focal injection studies that some of these effects may be mediated directly by blockade of NK, receptors in the amygdala and its projections to the hypothalamus, periaqueductal gray, and reticulopontine nucleus. Substance P and NK1 receptors are also intimately associated with ascending 5-HT and norepinephrine projections to the forebrain, and alterations in the function of these systems are also likely to be related to the antidepressant efficacy of SPAs. Unlike some established drugs, SPAs are generally well tolerated and do not induce sedation or motor impairment in preclinical species. These findings are consistent with a novel antidepressant mechanism of action of SPAs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations50
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207