This Key Event Relationship is licensed under the Creative Commons BY-SA license. This license allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms.
Relationship: 630
Title
Occurrence, A paroxysmal depolarizing shift leads to Occurrence, Epileptic seizure
Upstream event
Downstream event
AOPs Referencing Relationship
| AOP Name | Adjacency | Weight of Evidence | Quantitative Understanding | Point of Contact | Author Status | OECD Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Binding to the picrotoxin site of ionotropic GABA receptors leading to epileptic seizures in adult brain | adjacent | High | Moderate | Cataia Ives (send email) | Open for citation & comment | WPHA/WNT Endorsed |
Taxonomic Applicability
Sex Applicability
Life Stage Applicability
Dichter and Ayala (1987) reviewed our current understanding of the simple focal seizure models, where interictal discharge (ID) and seizures seem most closely related. In acute focal epilepsy, during the ID, thousands of neurons in the focus synchronously undergo an unusually large depolarization (the paroxysmal depolarizing shift or PDS), superimposed on which is a burst of action potentials. The PDS is followed by a hyperpolarizing potential (the post-PDS HP) and neuronal inhibition. In areas surrounding the focus, many neurons are inhibited during the ID. In distant projection areas, neurons can be excited briefly but more often are inhibited during the ID, according to their synaptic interactions. Axons that end within the focus generate action potentials, which can "backfire" and propagate antidromically. In addition, during the ID, at the site of the focus, extracellular levels of K+ increase and levels of Ca2+ decrease, presumably because of exit of K+ from and entry of Ca2+ into neuronal processes during the intense neuronal activity.
| ID | Experimental Design | Species | Upstream Observation | Downstream Observation | Citation (first author, year) | Notes |
|---|
| Title | First Author | Biological Plausibility |
Dose Concordance |
Temporal Concordance |
Incidence Concordance |
|---|
Biological Plausibility
Dose Concordance Evidence
Temporal Concordance Evidence
Incidence Concordance Evidence
Uncertainties and Inconsistencies
A crucial issue related to the development of the ID is how so many neurons within a focus develop simultaneous depolarizations. Synchronization may occur by any of several synaptic and nonsynaptic mechanisms: (i) recurrent synaptic excitation, (ii) antidromic activation of the afferent fibers, (iii) ephaptic interactions due to large currents that flow through extracellular spaces, (iv) changes in extracellular ionic concentrations, (v) electrical coupling between cortical neurons, and (vi) the diffuse liberation of modulators (Dichter and Ayala 1987). Two alternative hypotheses emerged, that could broadly be categorized as the epileptic neuron versus the epileptic network. In practice it really is impossible to divorce the two: epilepsy is essentially a collective phenomenon that requires synchrony amongst large numbers of neurons, but the reason for the excessive synchrony and excitation can be abnormal intrinsic properties (the epileptic neuron), or abnormal circuitry (the epileptic network), or both (in most cases) (Jefferys 2010).
Is it known how much change in the first event is needed to impact the second? No quantitative relationship has yet been established between these two key events.
Are there known modulators of the response-response relationships? Yes. For detailed description of known modulators, see Dichter and Ayala (1987).
Are there models or extrapolation approaches that help describe those relationships? Yes. For more information on different models and hypotheses, see Dichter and Ayala (1987) and Jeffreys (2010).
Response-response Relationship
Time-scale
Known Feedforward/Feedback loops influencing this KER
Most lines of supporting evidence come from studies using human and rodent epilepsy models. See Dichter and Ayala (1987) and Jefferys (2010) for examples.