MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003018473 · doi:10.7554/elife.49717

CXCL12-induced rescue of cortical dendritic spines and cognitive flexibility

2020· article· en· W3003018473 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindsay K. Festa, Elena Irollo, Brian J. Platt, Yuzen Tian, Stan Floresco, Olimpia Meucci

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on Drug AbuseNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDendritic spineNeuroscienceNeurocognitiveCognitive flexibilitySynaptic pruningPrefrontal cortexCognitive declineBiologyCognitionInflammationPsychologyMedicineImmunologyMicrogliaHippocampal formationDementiaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synaptodendritic pruning is a common cause of cognitive decline in neurological disorders, including HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND). HAND persists in treated patients as a result of chronic inflammation and low-level expression of viral proteins, though the mechanisms involved in synaptic damage are unclear. Here, we report that the chemokine CXCL12 recoups both cognitive performance and synaptodendritic health in a rodent model of HAND, which recapitulates the neuroinflammatory state of virally controlled individuals and the associated structural/functional deficiencies. CXCL12 preferentially regulates plastic thin spines on layer II/III pyramidal neurons of the medial prefrontal cortex via CXCR4-dependent stimulation of the Rac1/PAK actin polymerization pathway, leading to increased spine density and improved flexible behavior. Our studies unveil a critical role of CXCL12/CXCR4 signaling in spine dynamics and cognitive flexibility, suggesting that HAND - or other diseases driven by spine loss - may be reversible and upturned by targeting Rac1-dependent processes in cortical neurons.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLifeSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207