Evaluation of microglia activation related markers following a clinical course of TBS: A non-human primate study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the applicability and popularity of theta burst stimulation (TBS) paradigms remain, current knowledge of their neurobiological effects is still limited, especially with respect to their impact on glial cells and neuroinflammatory processes. We used a multimodal imaging approach to assess the effects of a clinical course of TBS on markers for microglia activation and tissue injury as an indirect assessment of neuroinflammatory processes. Healthy non-human primates received continuous TBS (cTBS), intermittent TBS (iTBS), or sham stimulation over the motor cortex at 90% of resting motor threshold. Stimulation was delivered to the awake subjects 5 times a week for 3-4 weeks. Translocator protein (TSPO) expression was evaluated using Positron Emission Tomography and [11C]PBR28, and myo-inositol (mI) and N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA) concentrations were assessed with Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy. Animals were then euthanized, and immunofluorescence staining was performed using antibodies against TSPO. Paired t-tests showed no significant changes in [11C]PBR28 measurements after stimulation. Similarly, no significant changes in mI and NAA concentrations were found. Post-mortem TSPO evaluation showed comparable mean immunofluorescence intensity after active TBS and sham delivery. The current study suggests that in healthy brains a clinical course of TBS, as evaluated with in-vivo imaging techniques (PET and MRS), did not measurably modulate the expression of glia related markers and metabolite associated with neural viability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".