CANNABINOIDS REGULATE TYPE 1 CANNABINOID RECEPTOR EXPRESSION IN CELL CULTURE MODELS OF HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1) levels decline in the striatum of animal models of Huntington’s disease (HD) and in the brains of human patients suffering from HD prior to other pathogenic changes. CB1 levels can be elevated by treatment with cannabinoids in non-neuronal cells. We wanted to determine: 1) whether cannabinoid treatment could induce CB1 expression in a striatal cell line, and 2) determine the molecular mechanisms by which cannabinoids and mutant huntingtin regulate CB1 expression. Treatment of striatal cell lines with CB1-specific agonists produced a CB1 receptor-, Akt-, and NF-?B-dependent increase in CB1 promoter activity and mRNA expression that was attenuated in the presence of mutant huntingtin. Cannabinoid treatment was associated with increased expression of the trophic factor BDNF-2 and the mitochondrial regulator PGC1? in the cell types tested. In vivo, cannabinoids may initiate a positive feedback loop increasing receptor expression and restoring cannabinoid-dependent inhibition of neurotransmitter release.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".