Corticostriatal circuits mediate various aspects of goal-directed behavior and are critically important for basal ganglia-related disorders. Activity in these circuits is regulated by the endocannabinoid system via stimulation of CB1 cannabinoid receptors. CB1 receptors are highly expressed in projection neurons and select interneurons of the striatum, but expression levels vary considerably between different striatal regions (functional domains). We investigated CB1 receptor expression within specific corticostriatal circuits by mapping CB1 mRNA levels in striatal sectors defined by their cortical inputs in rats. We also assessed changes in CB1 expression in the striatum during development. Our results show that CB1 expression is highest in juveniles (P25) and then progressively decreases toward adolescent (P40) and adult (P70) levels. At every age, CB1 receptors are predominantly expressed in sensorimotor striatal sectors, with considerably lower expression in associative and limbic sectors. Moreover, for most corticostriatal circuits there is an inverse relationship between cortical and striatal expression levels. Thus, striatal sectors with high CB1 expression (sensorimotor sectors) tend to receive inputs from cortical areas with low expression, while striatal sectors with low expression (associative/limbic sectors) receive inputs from cortical regions with higher expression (medial prefrontal cortex). In so far as CB1 mRNA levels reflect receptor function, our findings suggest differential CB1 signaling between different developmental stages and between sensorimotor and associative/limbic circuits. The regional distribution of CB1 receptor expression in the striatum further suggests that, in sensorimotor sectors, CB1 receptors mostly regulate GABA inputs from local axon collaterals of projection neurons, whereas in associative/limbic sectors, CB1 regulation of GABA inputs from interneurons and glutamate inputs may be more important.

There is a growing demand for new brain-enhancing technologies to improve mental performance, both for patients with cognitive disorders and for healthy individuals. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive, painless, and easy to use neuromodulatory technique that can improve performance on a variety of cognitive tasks in humans despite its exact mode of action remains unclear. We have conducted a mini-review of the literature to first briefly summarize the growing amount of data from clinical trials assessing the efficacy of tDCS, focusing exclusively on learning and memory performances in healthy human subjects and in patients with depression, schizophrenia, and other neurological disorders. We then discuss these findings in the context of the strikingly few studies resulting from animal research. Finally, we highlight future directions and limitations in this field and emphasize the need to develop translational studies to better understand how tDCS improves memory, a necessary condition before it can be used as a therapeutic tool.

Apathy is commonly defined as a loss of motivation leading to a reduction in goal-directed behaviors. This multidimensional syndrome, which includes cognitive, emotional and behavioral components, is one of the most prevalent neuropsychiatric features of Parkinson’s disease (PD). It has been established that the prevalence of apathy increases as PD progresses. However, the pathophysiology and anatomic substrate of this syndrome remain unclear. Apathy seems to be underpinned by impaired anatomical structures that link the prefrontal cortex with the limbic system. It can be encountered in the prodromal stage of the disease and in fluctuating PD patients receiving bilateral chronic subthalamic nucleus stimulation. In these stages, apathy may be considered as a disorder of motivation that embodies amotivational behavioral syndrome, is underpinned by combined dopaminergic and serotonergic denervation and is dopa-responsive. In contrast, in advanced PD patients, apathy may be considered as cognitive apathy that announces cognitive decline and PD dementia, is underpinned by diffuse neurotransmitter system dysfunction and Lewy pathology spreading and is no longer dopa-responsive. In this review, we discuss the clinical patterns of apathy and their treatment, the neurobiological basis of apathy, the potential role of the anatomical structures involved and the pathways in motivational and cognitive apathy.

This guideline summarizes updated safety data (2017-2025) and provides expert recommendations on the use of low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) in humans. tES encompasses several techniques including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (otDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), transcranial temporal interference stimulation (tTIS), and their combinations or variations. Across over 300,000 sessions involving healthy individuals, patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, and other clinical populations, no tES-related serious adverse events (AEs) have been reported. Moderate AEs are rare and limited to a small range of specific applications. Mild AEs are common and include transient symptoms such as localized sensations (e.g., tingling or burning), headaches, and fatigue. Similar mild AEs are also reported by individuals receiving placebo stimulation. The frequency, magnitude, and type of AEs are comparable across healthy, clinical, and vulnerable groups, including children, elderly, or pregnant women. Combined interventions (e.g., co-application with EEG, TMS, or neuroimaging) have not shown increased safety risks. Safety is well-established for both bipolar and multichannel tES when applied up to 4 mA and up to 60 min per day. Higher intensities and longer stimulation durations may also be safe. Nevertheless, the number of studies using intensities above 4 mA or stimulating longer than 60 min is low. Home-based use of treatments is growing rapidly, leveraging remote supervision to provide patients with greater access and enable repeated, sustained dosing paradigms. We recommend using screening and AE questionnaires in future controlled studies, in particular when planning to extend the stimulation parameters applied. We discuss recent regulatory and ethical issues.