MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408345976 · doi:10.1093/brain/awaf103

Modulating inhibitory synaptic plasticity to restore basal ganglia dynamics in Parkinson's disease

2025· article· en· W4408345976 on OpenAlexafffund
Kiah A Spencer, Alexandra Boogers, Srdjan Sumarac, David Crompton, Leon A Steiner, Luka A. Živković, Yijinmide Buren, Alexandre Boutet, Andrés M. Lozano, Suneil K. Kalia, William D. Hutchison, Alfonso Fasano, Luka Milosevic

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParkinson Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceBasal gangliaInhibitory postsynaptic potentialParkinson's diseaseSynaptic plasticityHomeostatic plasticityPsychologyBiologyDiseaseMedicineCentral nervous systemMetaplasticityInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease is characterized, in part, by hypoactivity of direct pathway inhibitory projections from striatum to the globus pallidus internus (GPi) and indirect pathway inhibitory projections from globus pallidus externus (GPe) to the subthalamic nucleus (STN). In people with Parkinson's disease (n = 32), we explored the potential use of intracranial stimulation for eliciting long-term potentiation (LTP) of these underactive pathways to produce improvement of symptoms that persist beyond stimulation cessation. During GPi deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery, we found strong evidence (P < 0.05; BF10 > 10) of increased amplitudes of hand movements and striato-GPi evoked potentials before versus after high-frequency microstimulation. In a small sample of outpatients with sensing-enabled GPi-DBS, we found anecdotal evidence (P < 0.10; BF10 > 1) of improved hand movements and attenuated beta frequency oscillations. In STN, enduring behavioural effects, potentiation of GPe-STN projections (intraoperative), and decreases to beta oscillations (extraoperative) were not observed. Our findings support that LTP-like effects in GPi may produce motor improvements that extend beyond stimulation cessation, while the lack of effects in STN suggests the need for optimizing stimulation paradigms for effective LTP induction. These findings nevertheless highlight the potential of LTP-based strategies for sustained therapeutic benefits, which may be useful for mitigating DBS side-effects and optimizing battery usage.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207