Exercise promotes growth and rescues volume deficits in the hippocampus after cranial radiation in young mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human and animal studies suggest that exercise promotes healthy brain development and function, including promoting hippocampal growth. Childhood cancer survivors that have received cranial radiotherapy exhibit hippocampal volume deficits and are at risk of impaired cognitive function, thus they may benefit from regular exercise. While morphological changes induced by exercise have been characterized using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in humans and animal models, evaluation of changes across the brain through development and following cranial radiation is lacking. In this study, we used high-resolution longitudinal MRI through development to evaluate the effects of exercise in a pediatric mouse model of cranial radiation. Female mice received whole-brain radiation (7 Gy) or sham radiation (0 Gy) at an infant equivalent age (P16). One week after irradiation, mice were housed in either a regular cage or a cage equipped with a running wheel. In vivo MRI was performed prior to irradiation, and at three subsequent timepoints to evaluate the effects of radiation and exercise. We used a linear mixed-effects model to assess volumetric and cortical thickness changes. Exercise caused substantial increases in the volumes of certain brain regions, notably the hippocampus in both irradiated and nonirradiated mice. Volume increases exceeded the deficits induced by cranial irradiation. The effect of exercise and irradiation on subregional hippocampal volumes was also characterized. In addition, we characterized cortical thickness changes across development and found that it peaked between P23 and P43, depending on the region. Exercise also induced regional alterations in cortical thickness after 3 weeks of voluntary exercise, while irradiation did not substantially alter cortical thickness. Our results show that exercise has the potential to alter neuroanatomical outcomes in both irradiated and nonirradiated mice. This supports ongoing research exploring exercise as a strategy for improving neurocognitive development for children, particularly those treated with cranial radiotherapy.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".