The gene expression signature of electrical stimulation in the human brain
Snehajyoti ChatterjeeiD, Muhammad ElsadanyiD, Yann S. VanrobaeysiD, Annie I GleasoniD, Brian J. ParkiD, Shane A. HeineyiD, Ariane E. RhoneiD, Kirill V. NourskiiD, Budhaditya BasuiD, Utsav MukherjeeiD, Lucy LangmackiD, Christopher K. KovachiD, Zsuzsanna KocsisiD, Yukiko KikuchiiD, Yaneri A. AyalaiD, Mark Bowren, Marco M. HeftiiD, Ethan BahliD, Kailin Yang, Jeremy D. Greenlee, Hiroto KawasakiiD, Hiroyuki OyaiD, Matthew A. HowardiD, Christopher I. PetkoviD, Thomas Nickl‐JockschatiD, , Ted G. AbeliD
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.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 1
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Stimulation modulates cell assemblies linked with gene networks in the human temporal cortex ex vivo
H. Moore, Mantre Dehnad, … Geneviève Konopka·bioRxiv·Jun 25, 2025
- Cell-type specific responses to single-pulse electrical stimulation of the human brain
Rhiannon L Cowan, Tyler S. Davis, … Elliot H. Smith·Brain stimulationPeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2025
- The effects of direct brain stimulation in humans depend on frequency, amplitude, and white-matter proximity.
Uma R. Mohan, Andrew J. Watrous, … Joshua Jacobs·Brain stimulationPeer-reviewed·May 21, 2020
- Spatiotemporal recruitment of inhibition and excitation in the mammalian cortex during electrical stimulation
Maria C. Dadarlat, Yujiao Jennifer Sun, Michael P. Stryker·NeuronPeer-reviewed·Dec 21, 2023
- Stimulation with ECoG electrodes modulates cortical activity and sensory processing in the awake mouse brain
Jiang Lan Fan, Keundong Lee, … Na Ji·bioRxiv·Oct 28, 2025
- Human single-neuron activity is modulated by intracranial theta burst stimulation of the basolateral amygdala
Justin M. Campbell, Rhiannon L Cowan, … Jon Timothy Willie·eLifePeer-reviewed·Sep 19, 2025