Elevated dopamine D1 receptor availability in striatum of Göttingen minipigs after electroconvulsive therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), a direct form of brain stimulation, is an effective antidepressant. We hypothesized that the beneficial effects of ECT are mediated by increased dopaminergic neurotransmission, in which the baseline activity of D1 receptors may predict the response to ECT. We established a novel model of brain stimulation in Göttingen minipigs based on the protocol of ECT applied in humans. With positron emission tomography (PET), we determined a measure of dopaminergic neurotransmission with the dopamine D1 receptor antagonist [ 11 C]SCH23390. Seven minipigs were anesthetized and completed PET at baseline, prior to the onset of ECT treatment, and at 24–48 h and 8–10 days after the end of a clinical course of ECT, consisting of 10 ECT sessions over a 3.5-week period. In all pigs, the binding of [ 11 C]SCH23390 to striatal D1 receptors had increased by 24–48 h after ECT, and in most, binding returned towards baseline at 8–10 days. Increased binding was observed in inverse proportion to baseline binding rates. Increased binding to dopamine D1 receptors suggests facilitation of dopaminergic neurotransmission, which may contribute to the therapeutic effects of ECT. Importantly, the baseline binding capacity of D1 receptors predicts the magnitude of increased binding, up to a maximum binding capacity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".