MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220837287 · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2022.851067

The Convergence Model of Brain Reward Circuitry: Implications for Relief of Treatment-Resistant Depression by Deep-Brain Stimulation of the Medial Forebrain Bundle

2022· article· en· W4220837287 on OpenAlexafffund
Vasilios Pallikaras, Peter Shizgal

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMedial forebrain bundleBrain stimulation rewardDeep brain stimulationNeuroscienceForebrainDepression (economics)StimulationPsychologyBrain stimulationTreatment-resistant depressionMedicineDopamineInternal medicineAmygdalaStriatumCentral nervous systemMajor depressive disorderNucleus accumbensEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep-brain stimulation of the medial forebrain bundle (MFB) can provide effective, enduring relief of treatment-resistant depression. Panksepp provided an explanatory framework: the MFB constitutes the core of the neural circuitry subserving the anticipation and pursuit of rewards: the "SEEKING" system. On that view, the SEEKING system is hypoactive in depressed individuals; background electrical stimulation of the MFB alleviates symptoms by normalizing activity. Panksepp attributed intracranial self-stimulation to excitation of the SEEKING system in which the ascending projections of midbrain dopamine neurons are an essential component. In parallel with Panksepp's qualitative work, intracranial self-stimulation has long been studied quantitatively by psychophysical means. That work argues that the predominant directly stimulated substrate for MFB self-stimulation are myelinated, non-dopaminergic fibers, more readily excited by brief electrical current pulses than the thin, unmyelinated axons of the midbrain dopamine neurons. The series-circuit hypothesis reconciles this view with the evidence implicating dopamine in MFB self-stimulation as follows: direct activation of myelinated MFB fibers is rewarding due to their trans-synaptic activation of midbrain dopamine neurons. A recent study in which rats worked for optogenetic stimulation of midbrain dopamine neurons challenges the series-circuit hypothesis and provides a new model of intracranial self-stimulation in which the myelinated non-dopaminergic neurons and the midbrain dopamine projections access the behavioral final common path for reward seeking via separate, converging routes. We explore the potential implications of this convergence model for the interpretation of the antidepressant effect of MFB stimulation. We also discuss the consistent finding that psychomotor stimulants, which boost dopaminergic neurotransmission, fail to provide a monotherapy for depression. We propose that non-dopaminergic MFB components may contribute to the therapeutic effect in parallel to, in synergy with, or even instead of, a dopaminergic component.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Behavioral NeuroscienceSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207