The influence of Conditioned Stimuli on [11C]-(+)-PHNO PET Binding in Tobacco Smokers after a One Week Abstinence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stimuli previously paired with drugs of dependence can produce cravings that are associated with increased dopamine (DA) levels in limbic and striatal brain areas. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging with [11C]-(+)-PHNO allows for a sensitive measurement of changes in DA levels. The purpose of the present study was to investigate changes in DA levels, measured with PET imaging with [11C]-(+)-PHNO, in regions of interest in smokers who had maintained abstinence for 7-10 days. Participants (N=10) underwent two PET scans on separate days, during which they viewed either smoking-related or neutral images, in counterbalanced order. Craving was measured with the 12-item Tobacco Craving Questionnaire (TCQ) and the Questionnaire on Smoking Urges-Brief (QSU-B). Compared to neutral cues, smoking cues did not increase craving. There were no changes in [11C]-(+)-PHNO binding in the cue condition compared to the neutral condition for most regions of interest (ventral pallidum, globus pallidus, limbic striatum, associative striatum, sensorimotor striatum). However, binding potential in the substantia nigra was greater in the smoking-cue condition, indicating decreased synaptic dopamine. There is a potential change of DA level occurring in midbrain following the presentation of smoking-related cues.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".