MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122386516 · doi:10.2174/1389450111314070006

Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor (PPAR) Agonists as Promising New Medications for Drug Addiction: Preclinical Evidence

2013· review· en· W2122386516 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard Le Foll, Patricia Di Ciano, Leigh V. Panlilio, Steven R. Goldberg, Roberto Ciccocioppo

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Targets · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptorAddictionPPAR agonistPharmacologyReceptorNicotineMedicineDrugInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines the growing literature on the role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) in addiction. There are two subtypes of PPAR receptors that have been studied in addiction: PPAR-α and PPAR-γ. The role of each PPAR subtype in common models of addictive behavior, mainly pre-clinical models, is summarized. In particular, studies are reviewed that investigated the effects of PPAR-α agonists on relapse, sensitization, conditioned place preference, withdrawal and drug intake, and effects of PPAR-γ agonists on relapse, withdrawal and drug intake. Finally, studies that investigated the effects of PPAR agonists on neural pathways of addiction are reviewed. Taken together these preclinical data indicate that PPAR agonists are promising new medications for drug addiction treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations66
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Drug TargetsSame topicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorFrench-language works237,207