Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36739095›Full record

ReviewBrain research bulletin2023

Karim Nader and the unification of memory erasure: PKMζ inhibition and reconsolidation blockade.

Todd Charlton Sacktor

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain research bulletin, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Todd Charlton SacktorDepartments of Physiology and Pharmacology, Anesthesiology, and Neurology, The Robert F. Furchgott Center for Neural and Behavioral Science, State University of New York Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA. Electronic address: todd.sacktor@downstate.edu.
State University of New York · US

Funding

Molecular mechanisms of memory maintenance and dysfunction in neural circuitsR01MH115304 · NIMH · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI FENTON, ANDRE ANTONIO, SACKTOR, TODD C · 2018 to 2022
$4.1M
Regulation and Neural Function of Atypical PKCR37MH057068 · NIMH · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI SACKTOR, TODD C · 2011 to 2020
$4.0M
Minocycline Plus N-Acetylcysteine Improves Brain Structure and Function After Experimental Brain Injury with Clinically Useful Time WindowsR01NS108190 · NINDS · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI BERGOLD, PETER J, SACKTOR, TODD C · 2019 to 2023
$2.6M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH115304NIMH NIH HHS R37 MH057068NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS108190
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Karim Nader is rightly celebrated for his seminal studies on memory reconsolidation. This commentary celebrates another related contribution - his work on memory maintenance by the autonomously active PKC isoform, PKMζ. There are two methods for "erasing" previously established long-term memory maintenance: 1) inhibiting PKMζ, and 2) blocking reconsolidation. Prior to Nader's research on PKMζ, these two forms of memory erasure were thought to be fundamentally different. Inhibiting PKMζ in a brain region disrupts memory held in storage. But if the inhibitor is injected into the same region immediately after memory retrieval, the drug has no effect. Conversely, inhibiting protein synthesis immediately after memory retrieval blocks reconsolidation. But protein synthesis inhibitors have no effect on memory held in storage without retrieval. The work of Paolo Virginia Migues, Nader, and colleagues, however, revealed an unexpected link between the mechanisms of memory maintenance by PKMζ and the kinase's regulation of postsynaptic AMPAR trafficking that potentiates synaptic transmission and expresses memory during retrieval. This insight led Matteo Bernabo, Nader, and colleagues to observe that memory retrieval first rapidly degrades PKMζ, and then induces the resynthesis of the kinase to restore maintenance of the retrieved memory. This finding explains why a PKMζ inhibitor such as ZIP, if injected in a brain region storing a memory, does not erase the memory immediately after retrieval - the kinase maintaining the retrieved memory has been degraded but not yet resynthesized. Moreover, Bernabo et al. showed that suppressing the resynthesis of PKMζ after its degradation prevents memory reconsolidation, reproducing the effect of general protein synthesis inhibition. Thus, Nader and colleagues demonstrated PKMζ inhibition and reconsolidation blockade disrupt in different ways the same molecular mechanism of memory maintenance - PKMζ inhibition erases all memories maintained in storage by the kinase; reconsolidation blockade disrupts specific recalled memories maintained by PKMζ by preventing resynthesis of the kinase after its degradation.

Indexed as

MemoryProtein Kinase CLong-Term PotentiationMemory, Long-TermSynaptic TransmissionProtein Kinase CLong-term potentiationLTPPKM-zetaPKMzetaZeta-inhibitory peptideZIP

Identifiers

PMID36739095
PMCPMC12418765
OpenAlexW4318972899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.