Author response: Longitudinal assessment of DREADD expression and efficacy in the monkey brain
Le résumé fourni par la source
Designer Receptors Exclusively Activated by Designer Drugs (DREADDs) offer a powerful means for reversible control of neuronal activity through systemic administration of inert actuators. Because chemogenetic control relies on DREADD expression levels, understanding and quantifying the temporal dynamics of their expression is crucial for planning long-term experiments in monkeys. In this study, we longitudinally quantified in vivo DREADD expression in macaque monkeys using positron emission tomography with the DREADD-selective tracer [11C]deschloroclozapine (DCZ), complemented by functional studies. Twenty macaque monkeys were evaluated after being injected with adeno-associated virus vectors expressing the DREADDs hM4Di or hM3Dq, whose expression was quantified as changes in [11C]DCZ binding potential from baseline levels. Expression levels of both hM4Di and hM3Dq peaked around 60 days post-injection, remained stable for about 1.5 years, and declined gradually after two years. Significant chemogenetic control of neural activity and behavior persisted for about two years. The presence of protein tags significantly influenced expression levels, with co-expressed protein tags reducing overall expression levels. These findings provide valuable insights and guidelines for optimizing the use of DREADDs in long-term primate studies and potential therapeutic applications.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Author response: Longitudinal assessment of DREADD expression and efficacy in the monkey brain
- Date Crossref
- 24/09/2025
- Éditeur
- eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
- Type
- peer-review
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.