Back

Activity-induced gene expression in the human brain

Chatterjee, S.; Park, B. J.; Vanrobaeys, Y.; Heiney, S. A.; Rhone, A. E.; Nourski, K. V.; Langmack, L.; Mukherjee, U.; Kovach, C. K.; Kocsis, Z.; Kikuchi, Y.; Petkov, C. I.; Hefti, M. M.; Bahl, E.; Michaelson, J. J.; Kawasaki, H.; Oya, H.; Howard, M. A.; Nickl-Jockschat, T.; Lin, L.-C.; Abel, T.

2023-09-22 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.09.21.558812 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Direct electrical stimulation (eSTIM) is widely used clinically, from neurosurgical mapping to therapeutic interventions for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders1-10. Despite over a century of application, its molecular and cellular underpinnings remain unknown. Here, using state-of-the-art single-nuclei multiomic profiling, we map changes in cell-type-specific gene expression and chromatin accessibility in vivo in the human cortex following eSTIM of neurosurgery patients. eSTIM impacts a network of cells that extends beyond excitatory neurons to include inhibitory neurons, astrocytes, oligodendrocytes and microglia. We observed an upregulation of canonical immediate-early genes (IEGs: FOS, NPAS4, EGR4) in excitatory and inhibitory neurons and induction of cytokine-related genes CCL3 and CCL4 in microglia. The cross-species conservation of this gene signature, together with our examination of a cohort of both epilepsy and cancer patients, underscores the fundamental role of these changes in stimulation-driven plasticity while controlling for disease and environmental confounds. Our study of changes in chromatin accessibility reveals a common code that involves a cell-type specific signature of transcription factor binding motifs for members of the EGR family. By addressing these previously unexplored questions about activity-induced gene expression in vivo in the human brain, our findings challenge the long-standing neuron-centric view of eSTIM, highlighting the broader role of non-neuronal cells, including microglia, in mediating the impact of brain stimulation.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.