Source 1review2024AGR
Toolkit/focused ultrasound
focused ultrasound
Also known as: focused ultrasound, focused ultrasound stimulation, FUS, LIFU, low-intensity focused ultrasound, MRgFUS, tFUS
Taxonomy: Mechanism Branch / Architecture. Workflows sit above the mechanism and technique branches rather than replacing them.
Summary
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a noninvasive physical delivery and control modality that penetrates deep biological tissues and induces confined mild hyperthermia to activate heat-sensitive genetic modules. In the cited 2023 study, FUS was coupled to heat-sensitive CRISPR, CRISPRa, and CRISPRi systems to enable remote spatiotemporal regulation of genome and epigenome function in live cells and animals.
Usefulness & Problems
Why this is useful
FUS is useful as a deep-tissue, noninvasive trigger for remote control of engineered gene regulation systems. The cited work shows that FUS can activate heat-sensitive CRISPR effectors to upregulate, repress, or knock out exogenous and endogenous genes across different cell types and in animal settings.
Source:
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Source:
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
Source:
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
Problem solved
This tool addresses the problem of achieving spatiotemporally confined control of genome and epigenome regulation in living tissues without invasive access. The evidence specifically supports use of localized ultrasound-induced heating to trigger heat-sensitive CRISPR modules in defined regions.
Source:
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Source:
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
Problem links
We Can’t Safely and Controllably Deliver Complex Molecular Payloads to the Targets We Want in the Body
Gap mapView gapFocused ultrasound is a concrete noninvasive targeting modality with explicit evidence for deep-tissue and brain-relevant use, including BBB-opening-related hints and remote spatiotemporal control in animals. That makes it one of the few supplied items that directly addresses the gap's need for safer, more controllable in vivo targeting beyond standard viral or nanoparticle delivery alone.
candidate approach to promote cortical plasticity in late-life depression
LiteratureThe review suggests FUS may be part of a strategy to improve cortical plasticity, network connectivity, and prefrontal function.
Source:
The review suggests FUS may be part of a strategy to improve cortical plasticity, network connectivity, and prefrontal function.
enables noninvasive or targeted access to spinal cord tissue
LiteratureThe review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
Source:
The review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
improving delivery of nanobodies to the brain
LiteratureIt is intended to improve brain access for nanobody therapeutics.
Source:
It is intended to improve brain access for nanobody therapeutics.
limited drug penetration into the brain due to the blood-brain barrier
LiteratureIt addresses the problem that the blood-brain barrier limits delivery of drugs into the brain for Alzheimer's disease treatment.
Source:
It addresses the problem that the blood-brain barrier limits delivery of drugs into the brain for Alzheimer's disease treatment.
offers a tunable platform to address treatment resistance mechanisms in GBM
LiteratureThe review frames FUS as a tunable platform for overcoming core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma, including immune suppression and barriers to therapy delivery.
Source:
The review frames FUS as a tunable platform for overcoming core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma, including immune suppression and barriers to therapy delivery.
provides a biophysical approach for neuromodulation
LiteratureIt contributes a focused physical method for altering dysfunctional brain activity.
Source:
It contributes a focused physical method for altering dysfunctional brain activity.
provides a modality for neuromodulation in neuropathic pain and spasticity
LiteratureThe review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
Source:
The review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
provides a neuromodulation modality considered as an alternative treatment strategy for chronic insomnia
LiteratureIt is presented as a candidate modality for biologically informed intervention in chronic insomnia.
Source:
It is presented as a candidate modality for biologically informed intervention in chronic insomnia.
provides a noninvasive neuromodulation modality for peripheral nerve targets
LiteratureIt addresses the need for noninvasive neuromodulation with deep penetration and precise targeting, including for peripheral nerve targets.
Source:
It addresses the need for noninvasive neuromodulation with deep penetration and precise targeting, including for peripheral nerve targets.
Provides a noninvasive treatment option
LiteratureIt offers a noninvasive alternative within the Parkinson's disease treatment landscape. This is presented as a distinguishing advantage relative to other interventions.
Source:
It offers a noninvasive alternative within the Parkinson's disease treatment landscape. This is presented as a distinguishing advantage relative to other interventions.
provides a nonionizing, noninvasive modality for multimodal cancer treatment
LiteratureIt addresses the need for improved efficacy, precision, and safety in cancer management by enabling multimodal intervention without ionizing radiation or invasive procedures.
Source:
It addresses the need for improved efficacy, precision, and safety in cancer management by enabling multimodal intervention without ionizing radiation or invasive procedures.
provides deep tissue access for neuromodulation
LiteratureIt helps achieve noninvasive neuromodulation at depth and can remove the need for bulky invasive implants in layered systems.
Source:
It helps achieve noninvasive neuromodulation at depth and can remove the need for bulky invasive implants in layered systems.
provides external control over therapeutic bacterial activation in tumors
LiteratureIt addresses the need for localized external control of bacterial cancer immunotherapy.
Source:
It addresses the need for localized external control of bacterial cancer immunotherapy.
provides non-destructive mechanical stimulation of neurons while preserving viability and morphology under the reported conditions
LiteratureIt offers a way to modulate neuronal calcium-dependent signaling without the overt structural damage or viability loss reported in this study. This supports use as a safe acoustic stimulation window for mechanistic neuromodulation studies.
Source:
It offers a way to modulate neuronal calcium-dependent signaling without the overt structural damage or viability loss reported in this study. This supports use as a safe acoustic stimulation window for mechanistic neuromodulation studies.
provides precise noninvasive modulation of GBM-relevant biological effects
LiteratureThe review frames FUS as a tunable platform for overcoming core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma, including immune suppression and barriers to therapy delivery.
Source:
The review frames FUS as a tunable platform for overcoming core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma, including immune suppression and barriers to therapy delivery.
providing a focused energy-based approach associated with pain reduction in preclinical neuropathic pain studies
LiteratureThe review frames focused ultrasound as a potential way to alleviate neuropathic pain in preclinical systems. It is positioned as a non-pharmacologic approach for a condition that is challenging to manage.
Source:
The review frames focused ultrasound as a potential way to alleviate neuropathic pain in preclinical systems. It is positioned as a non-pharmacologic approach for a condition that is challenging to manage.
reduces need for invasive implants in some neuromodulation approaches
LiteratureIt helps achieve noninvasive neuromodulation at depth and can remove the need for bulky invasive implants in layered systems.
Source:
It helps achieve noninvasive neuromodulation at depth and can remove the need for bulky invasive implants in layered systems.
serves as a delivery-enabling modality discussed within glioblastoma treatment strategies
LiteratureWithin the review context, it is part of the set of approaches intended to improve therapeutic efficacy against glioblastoma.
Source:
Within the review context, it is part of the set of approaches intended to improve therapeutic efficacy against glioblastoma.
supports localized delivery by increasing blood-spinal cord barrier permeability
LiteratureThe review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
Source:
The review supports FUS as a way to achieve targeted spinal cord intervention, including localized drug delivery through BSCB disruption and neuromodulation for pain or spasticity. It also may alter local injury responses after spinal cord injury.
Published Workflows
Objective: Review and synthesize the technical evolution, mechanistic regimes, and therapeutic applications of focused ultrasound in glioblastoma across preclinical and clinical studies.
Why it works: The review is structured to capture how FUS parameter tuning and intensity subtypes map onto distinct biological mechanisms and therapeutic applications in GBM, allowing comparison across preclinical and clinical evidence.
thermal bioeffectsmechanical bioeffectsimmunomodulationbarrier permeability modulationcell deathcomprehensive literature reviewstudy inclusion based on defined FUS parameters and biological endpoints
Stages
- 1.Literature search(broad_screen)
This stage casts a broad net to collect the available FUS literature relevant to glioblastoma before applying inclusion criteria.
Selection: Studies were identified using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for preclinical and clinical FUS studies in GBM.
- 2.Eligibility filtering(selection)
This stage narrows the literature to studies that are interpretable for mechanistic and translational analysis because they report defined FUS parameters and biological endpoints.
Selection: Articles were included if they discussed FUS mechanisms, bioeffects, or combinatory approaches and had defined FUS parameters and biological endpoints.
Steps
- 1.Search PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for GBM-focused FUS studies
Identify preclinical and clinical studies utilizing focused ultrasound in the context of glioblastoma.
A broad search is required before any eligibility filtering can be applied.
- 2.Apply inclusion criteria based on mechanisms, bioeffects, combination approaches, and defined endpoints
Retain studies that are relevant to FUS mechanisms and applications in GBM and that report defined FUS parameters and biological endpoints.
Filtering follows the broad search so the review can focus on interpretable and decision-relevant studies.
Objective: Evaluate whether low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound can safely modulate calcium-dependent signaling in primary cortical cultures without causing overt cellular damage.
Why it works: The workflow pairs a non-invasive mechanical stimulation step with orthogonal post-exposure readouts to determine whether functional calcium changes occur without detectable toxicity or structural damage.
mechanical stimulation of neuronal activitycalcium-dependent neurochemical signaling modulationfocused ultrasound exposurepost-exposure viability assayprotein quantificationmorphological assessmentconfocal calcium imaging
Stages
- 1.Primary cortical culture preparation and group assignment(library_build)
This stage creates the in vitro neuronal system and comparison groups needed for subsequent FUS exposure and post-exposure analysis.
Selection: Establish DIV14 primary cortical neuron cultures and divide them into Control, FUS 5 V, and FUS 10 V groups.
- 2.Focused ultrasound exposure(functional_characterization)
This stage applies the candidate neuromodulation stimulus whose safety and functional effects are then measured.
Selection: Expose cultures to low-intensity pulsed FUS at 300 kHz for 10 min using a transducer positioned 5 mm above the dish.
- 3.Post-exposure safety and functional assessment(confirmatory_validation)
This stage determines whether FUS-induced calcium effects occur without overt damage, supporting the claim of a safe acoustic window.
Selection: Assess viability, total protein, morphology, and intracellular calcium responsiveness after FUS exposure.
Steps
- 1.Isolate embryonic rat cortical neurons and culture for 14 days in vitro
Generate mature primary cortical cultures for ultrasound testing.
Cultures had to be established before exposure groups could be assigned and stimulated.
- 2.Divide cultures into control and FUS exposure groups
Create comparison groups for evaluating dose-labeled FUS conditions against untreated control.
Group assignment is required before applying different exposure conditions.
- 3.Apply low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasoundstimulation modality
Mechanically stimulate neuronal cultures to test whether FUS modulates calcium-dependent signaling.
The stimulus must be delivered before any post-exposure safety or calcium-response measurements can be made.
- 4.Measure post-exposure viability, protein content, morphology, and calcium responsiveness
Determine whether FUS changes calcium signaling while preserving cell health and structure.
These readouts are performed after exposure to interpret the biological consequences of FUS.
Objective: Develop and evaluate an ultrasound-sensitive liposomal exatecan platform for tumor-localized drug release in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Why it works: The abstract states that IMP305 combines tumor-specific drug delivery with cavitation-induced loosening of PDAC stromal architecture, enabling more efficient intratumoral drug release.
ultrasound-mediated cavitationcavitation-induced loosening of stromal architecturetriggered release of encapsulated exatecanliposomal encapsulationfocused ultrasound activationxenograft efficacy testing
Stages
- 1.Triggered release characterization(functional_characterization)
This stage establishes that IMP305 can be structurally disrupted by cavitation and can release encapsulated exatecan before therapeutic testing.
Selection: Extent of cavitation-triggered structural disruption and exatecan release from IMP305.
- 2.In vivo efficacy and tolerability evaluation(in_vivo_validation)
This stage tests whether the formulation's triggered-release behavior translates into improved tolerated dose and antitumor efficacy in vivo.
Selection: Maximal tolerated dose and antitumor benefit in PANC-1 xenograft mice, including focused ultrasound combination.
Steps
- 1.Measure cavitation-triggered structural disruption of IMP305engineered formulation being characterized
Assess whether ultrasound-mediated cavitation disrupts the liposomal structure.
The abstract presents structural disruption as the mechanistic basis for subsequent exatecan release.
- 2.Quantify exatecan release after cavitation-triggered disruptionengineered formulation being characterized
Determine how much encapsulated exatecan is released after cavitation-triggered disruption.
The abstract explicitly links structural disruption to robust release of encapsulated exatecan.
- 3.Evaluate tolerated dose and antitumor activity in PANC-1 xenograft micetherapeutic formulation under test
Test whether IMP305 improves tolerated dose and antitumor efficacy in vivo.
After showing triggered release behavior, the study tests whether the formulation improves therapeutic performance in the disease model.
- 4.Combine IMP305 with focused ultrasound to test maximal therapeutic benefittherapeutic formulation activated by ultrasound
Determine whether focused ultrasound further improves therapeutic outcome beyond IMP305 alone.
The abstract identifies focused ultrasound combination as producing the most pronounced therapeutic benefit, making it a downstream activation condition after establishing baseline in vivo activity.
Responsive Focused Ultrasound for Facet Joint Back Pain: A Novel Noninvasive Therapeutic Approach
2025Objective: Develop and evaluate a feedback-controlled focused ultrasound approach for precise nerve ablation and neuromodulation in facet joint mediated back pain.
Why it works: The proposed approach combines resonance control and acoustic feedback so that energy delivery can be maintained and adjusted in real time, which the abstract argues should improve targeting precision and reduce undertreatment risk.
nerve ablationneuromodulationsustained ultrasonic resonanceacoustic-feedback-guided energy deliveryimage-guided focused ultrasoundmaximum power point trackingcavitation subharmonic feedbackbench testingliterature comparison
Stages
- 1.System integration and control design(library_design)
This stage exists to create the proposed feedback-controlled therapeutic system before testing its technical behavior.
Selection: Integration of MPPT and cavitation-subharmonic acoustic feedback into a focused ultrasound system for real-time controlled delivery
- 2.Bench testing(functional_characterization)
This stage exists to verify that the control and feedback components function robustly before therapeutic claims are emphasized.
Selection: Technical performance in frequency tracking, peak acoustic output stability, and cavitation onset detection
- 3.Literature comparison against radiofrequency neurotomy(secondary_characterization)
This stage exists to contextualize the proposed system against existing treatment modalities using reported literature outcomes.
Selection: Comparison of pain relief, safety, patient tolerance, and procedural repeatability relative to RF neurotomy
Steps
- 1.Integrate MPPT into the focused ultrasound systemcontrol component within the therapeutic system
Sustain ultrasonic resonance during operation
Resonance control must be built into the system before technical performance can be bench tested.
- 2.Add cavitation-subharmonic acoustic feedback for real-time controlfeedback modality within the therapeutic system
Guide real-time energy delivery and detect cavitation onset
Real-time feedback is incorporated during system design so that controlled delivery can be evaluated during bench testing.
- 3.Bench test frequency tracking, acoustic output stability, and cavitation detectionengineered system and embedded control/feedback components under test
Confirm technical robustness of the proposed control architecture
Bench testing is used before therapeutic positioning because it is the direct evidence provided for system performance in the abstract.
- 4.Compare focused ultrasound outcomes with radiofrequency neurotomy literature
Contextualize expected pain relief and procedural advantages relative to standard invasive treatment
Comparative literature analysis follows bench testing to position the proposed system within existing therapeutic evidence.
Objective: Define the quantitative membrane-tension response of mechanosensitive K2P channels TRAAK, TREK-1, and TREK-2 and relate this to ultrasound-linked activation.
Why it works: The study uses patch-clamp recording and imaging to directly define tension-response profiles, enabling quantitative comparison of mechanosensitive K2P channel activation and testing whether focused ultrasound increases membrane tension sufficiently to activate channels.
channel activation by membrane tensionmembrane-tension increase during focused ultrasoundpatch-clamp recordingimaging
A comprehensive review of advanced focused ultrasound (FUS) microbubbles-mediated treatment of Alzheimer's disease
2024Objective: Bypass the blood-brain barrier to deliver Alzheimer's disease therapeutics into brain tissue using focused ultrasound and microbubble-based carriers.
Why it works: The abstract states that focused ultrasound disrupts the BBB, allowing therapeutic agents to penetrate the brain, and that drug-encapsulated microbubbles can then pass through the ultrasound-disrupted BBB zone and diffuse into brain tissue.
focused ultrasound-mediated BBB disruptionmicrobubble-assisted carrier delivery through the ultrasound-disrupted BBB zonefocused ultrasoundmicrobubble-based delivery
Stages
- 1.BBB disruption with focused ultrasound(functional_characterization)
The abstract identifies the BBB as the main obstacle to AD drug delivery and states that focused ultrasound can disrupt it.
Selection: Create an ultrasound-disrupted BBB zone that permits therapeutic penetration into the brain.
- 2.Microbubble-mediated payload passage into brain tissue(confirmatory_validation)
After BBB disruption, the abstract describes drug-encapsulated microbubbles as the means by which active drug enters brain tissue.
Selection: Use drug-encapsulated microbubbles to pass through the ultrasound-disrupted BBB zone and diffuse into brain tissue.
Steps
- 1.Apply focused ultrasound to disrupt the blood-brain barrier
Open the BBB so therapeutic agents can penetrate the brain.
The abstract frames the BBB as the primary barrier limiting AD drug delivery, so BBB disruption comes before payload passage.
- 2.Deliver drug-encapsulated microbubbles through the ultrasound-disrupted BBB zonedrug carrier
Move active drug into brain tissue after BBB opening.
The abstract explicitly states that drug-encapsulated microbubbles pass through the ultrasound-disrupted BBB zone after FUS-mediated disruption.
Objective: Engineer and apply focused-ultrasound-inducible CRISPR regulatory tools for noninvasive, localized genome and epigenome control in cancer immunotherapy.
Why it works: The abstract states that focused ultrasound can penetrate deep and induce localized hyperthermia for transgene activation, enabling noninvasive spatial and temporal control of CRISPR-based genome and epigenome modulation.
focused ultrasound-induced localized hyperthermia for transgene activationtelomere disruptioninduced antigen expression in tumour-cell training centerssynNotch-triggered CAR production against a universal tumour antigenfocused ultrasound controlinducible CRISPR engineeringAAV in vivo deliverysynNotch CAR-T cell activation
Stages
- 1.Engineering of FUS-inducible CRISPR toolbox(library_design)
This stage establishes the core inducible CRISPR systems needed for downstream functional and therapeutic testing.
Selection: Creation of inducible CRISPR-based tools controllable by focused ultrasound.
- 2.Functional demonstration of genome and epigenome modulation(functional_characterization)
This stage verifies that the engineered ultrasound-inducible tools perform the intended regulatory functions before therapeutic deployment.
Selection: Demonstration of FUS-inducible CRISPR, CRISPRa, and CRISPRee capabilities in modulating the genome and epigenome.
- 3.Tumour priming by FUS-CRISPR telomere disruption(secondary_characterization)
This stage tests whether the genomic intervention creates a therapeutically useful tumour state for downstream cell therapy.
Selection: Assessment of whether FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption primes solid tumours for CAR-T therapy.
- 4.In vivo AAV delivery and FUS-triggered training-center activation(in_vivo_validation)
This stage validates that the inducible CRISPR system can be delivered in vivo and used to create localized tumour-cell training centers for downstream immunotherapy.
Selection: In vivo delivery of FUS-CRISPR using AAVs followed by FUS-induced telomere disruption and induced antigen expression in a tumour-cell subpopulation.
Steps
- 1.Engineer inducible CRISPR-based tools controllable by focused ultrasoundengineered system
Create CRISPR-based tools that can be activated noninvasively by focused ultrasound.
The inducible toolbox must be built before its genome, epigenome, and therapeutic functions can be tested.
- 2.Demonstrate genome and epigenome modulation by FUS-inducible CRISPR systemsengineered system under test
Verify that the ultrasound-inducible CRISPR toolbox can modulate genomic and epigenomic states.
Functional capability is demonstrated after engineering and before therapeutic application to establish that the toolbox works as intended.
- 3.Apply FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption to prime solid tumours for CAR-T therapytherapeutic genomic intervention
Test whether localized telomere disruption creates a tumour state more amenable to CAR-T therapy.
After establishing core CRISPR functionality, the authors test a specific therapeutic mechanism relevant to cancer immunotherapy.
- 4.Deliver FUS-CRISPR in vivo using AAVsdelivered inducible CRISPR system and delivery harness
Deploy the FUS-CRISPR system in vivo for localized tumour reprogramming.
In vivo delivery is required before ultrasound-triggered tumour-cell reprogramming and downstream synNotch CAR-T activation can occur.
- 5.Use focused ultrasound to induce telomere disruption and antigen expression in a tumour-cell subpopulationinducible tumour-cell reprogramming system
Generate localized tumour-cell training centers that can activate synNotch CAR-T cells.
This follows in vivo delivery because the tumour cells must first contain the inducible CRISPR system before FUS can trigger localized reprogramming.
- 6.Activate synNotch CAR-T cells to produce CARs against a universal tumour antigen and kill neighboring tumour cellscell therapy responder
Translate localized training-center induction into broader tumour-cell killing.
synNotch CAR-T activation depends on prior creation of tumour-cell training centers expressing the induced antigen.
Objective: Engineer a bacterial cancer immunotherapy platform that can be locally activated in tumors by ultrasound.
Why it works: The described control logic uses focused ultrasound to provide a local thermal input that activates a thermal gene switch in engineered bacteria, enabling localized tumor immunotherapy.
thermal gene-switch-mediated activationfocused ultrasound activationbacterial chassis engineering
Taxonomy & Function
Primary hierarchy
Mechanism Branch
Architecture: A delivery strategy grouped with the mechanism branch because it determines how a system is instantiated and deployed in context.
Mechanisms
acoustic mechanical modulationblood-brain barrier disruptionheat-induced gene activationlocalized mild hyperthermiaTranslation ControlTarget processes
editingrecombinationtranslationInput: Chemical
Implementation Constraints
cofactor dependency: cofactor requirement unknownencoding mode: externally suppliedimplementation constraint: context specific validationimplementation constraint: payload burdenoperating role: delivery
Implementation in the cited study required heat-sensitive genetic modules integrated with CRISPR, CRISPRa, or CRISPRi effectors for activation by FUS-induced mild hyperthermia. The evidence supports use in live cells and animals, but does not specify promoter identities, construct architectures, ultrasound settings, or delivery vehicles.
The evidence provided is limited to a single 2023 study and does not report independent replication. Practical performance details such as thermal dose windows, spatial resolution, ultrasound parameters, and comparative benchmarking against other control modalities are not provided in the supplied evidence.
Validation
Cell-freeBacteriaMammalianMouseHumanTherapeuticIndep. Replication
Observations
successPrimary Cellsapplication demoratprimary cortical neurons
MTS viability assay and Bradford total protein quantification
Inferred from claim c1 during normalization. Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound did not significantly alter viability or total protein concentration in DIV14 primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions. Derived from claim c1. Quoted text: FUS treatment produced no significant differences in viability or total protein concentration compared with the Control group.
Source:
exposure duration10 minultrasound frequency300 kHz
successPrimary Cellsapplication demoratprimary cortical neurons
Trypan Blue morphological assessment
Inferred from claim c2 during normalization. Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound preserved gross neuronal morphology in primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions. Derived from claim c2. Quoted text: Morphological observations confirmed healthy neuronal somata and intact neuritic networks across all groups, with no evidence of cell death or structural damage compared with controls.
Source:
successPrimary Cellsapplication demoratprimary cortical neurons
Fluo-3 AM confocal calcium imaging
Inferred from claim c3 during normalization. Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound increased intracellular calcium responsiveness in primary rat cortical cultures 24 h after exposure. Derived from claim c3. Quoted text: calcium imaging revealed a robust transient elevation in intracellular Ca²⁺ responsiveness when assessed 24 h after FUS exposure, with a significantly higher integrated area under the curve relative to Control.
Source:
assessment time after exposure24 hresponse metric(significantly higher integrated area under the curve relative to Control)
successPrimary Cellsapplication demoratprimary cortical neurons
Inferred from claim c4 during normalization. The reported low-intensity focused ultrasound conditions define a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation in the studied primary cortical culture system. Derived from claim c4. Quoted text: These findings demonstrate that low-intensity FUS safely enhances intracellular calcium signalling while preserving neuronal viability, protein integrity, and morphology, defining a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation
Source:
Supporting Sources
Source 2review2024MED
Source 3primary paper2025MED
Source 4review2025MED
Source 5primary paper2026MED
Source 6review2025MED
Source 7primary paper2025MED
Source 8primary paper2025MED
Source 9primary paper2024MED
Source 10primary paper2015Scientific Reports
Source 11primary paper2021Nature Communications
Source 12primary paper2025MED
Source 13primary paper2026MED
Source 14primary paper2025MED
Source 15primary paper2026MED
Source 16review2025MED
Source 17primary paper2023
Source 18primary paper2025MED
Source 19review2025MED
Source 20primary paper2025MED
Source 21review2025MED
Source 22primary paper2022Nature Communications
Ranked Claims
The reported low-intensity focused ultrasound conditions define a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation in the studied primary cortical culture system.
These findings demonstrate that low-intensity FUS safely enhances intracellular calcium signalling while preserving neuronal viability, protein integrity, and morphology, defining a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation
Focused ultrasound can precisely modulate the glioblastoma tumor microenvironment through acoustic waves.
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly advancing noninvasive energy delivery technology with the capacity to precisely modulate the tumor microenvironment (TME) through acoustic waves.
Clinical trials demonstrate the safety and feasibility of several focused ultrasound platforms in the glioblastoma context.
Clinical trials demonstrate the safety and feasibility of several FUS platforms.
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound increased intracellular calcium responsiveness in primary rat cortical cultures 24 h after exposure.
calcium imaging revealed a robust transient elevation in intracellular Ca²⁺ responsiveness when assessed 24 h after FUS exposure, with a significantly higher integrated area under the curve relative to Control.
assessment time after exposure 24 hresponse metric significantly higher integrated area under the curve relative to Control
ECT, rTMS, tES, and FUS are reviewed as plasticity-inducing non-surgical neuromodulations for late-life depression.
Focused ultrasound enables spatiotemporal control of thermal and mechanical effects in glioblastoma.
FUS enables spatiotemporal control of thermal and mechanical effects in GBM.
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound preserved gross neuronal morphology in primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions.
Morphological observations confirmed healthy neuronal somata and intact neuritic networks across all groups, with no evidence of cell death or structural damage compared with controls.
Modulating duty cycle, acoustic pressure, and exposure time allows focused ultrasound to operate across therapeutic regimes.
Modulation of duty cycle, acoustic pressure, and exposure time allows FUS to operate across therapeutic regimes.
Preclinical data support focused ultrasound for targeted drug delivery, immune cell repolarization, and synergistic effects with immunotherapies in glioblastoma-related studies.
Preclinical data support using FUS for targeted drug delivery, immune cell repolarization, and synergistic effects with immunotherapies.
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound did not significantly alter viability or total protein concentration in DIV14 primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions.
FUS treatment produced no significant differences in viability or total protein concentration compared with the Control group.
exposure duration 10 minultrasound frequency 300 kHz
Focused ultrasound is a tunable multimodal platform with potential to overcome core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma.
FUS offers a tunable multimodal platform with the potential to overcome core resistance mechanisms in GBM.
These neuromodulation strategies could promote cortical plasticity and improve network connectivity and prefrontal function, potentially reducing cognitive decline.
Focused ultrasound neuromodulation offers deep penetration and precise targeting.
Focused ultrasound could enable non-pharmacological, spatially targeted control of mean arterial pressure.
FUS could enable non-pharmacological, spatially targeted MAP control, especially for impaired patients.
Targeted CNS drug delivery using focused-ultrasound-mediated blood-spinal cord barrier disruption has proven promising in neuro-oncology and neurotrauma contexts.
Clinical applications of focused ultrasound in psychiatry include focal lesioning, neurostimulation, and targeted drug delivery.
Focused ultrasound has been explored for spinal neuromodulation in managing neuropathic pain and spasticity.
Focused ultrasound is being evaluated across preclinical and clinical oncology trials for tumor ablation, therapeutic delivery, radiosensitization, sonodynamic therapy, and enhancement of tumor-specific immune responses.
this technology is now being evaluated across preclinical and clinical oncology trials for tumor ablation, therapeutic delivery, radiosensitization, sonodynamic therapy, and enhancement of tumor-specific immune responses
Focused ultrasound neuromodulation can be applied to the peripheral nerve system.
Transcranial focused ultrasound enables incisionless, spatially precise targeting of deep brain structures implicated in neuropsychiatric conditions.
Focused ultrasound is a rapidly emerging nonionizing, noninvasive intervention strategy with promise for multimodal treatment of solid cancers.
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly emerging strategy for nonionizing, noninvasive intervention that holds promise for the multimodal treatment of solid cancers.
AAV2-hAADC has shown early-phase safety and efficacy in Parkinson's disease but remains in early clinical stages.
ProSavin has shown early-phase safety and efficacy in Parkinson's disease but remains in early clinical stages.
Nanobodies offer engineering benefits over traditional antibodies and small molecules, including small size, stability, and specificity.
They offer distinct engineering benefits compared with traditional antibodies and small molecules, including small size, stability, and specificity.
Limited PNS studies have shown satisfactory performance of focused ultrasound compared with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.
The review comparatively analyzes biophysical, genetic, and biological neuromodulation approaches with emphasis on molecular targets and translational potential.
Integrating nanobodies with nanoparticles, dendrimers, liposomes, and viral vectors is being used to improve delivery precision, half-life, and efficacy.
Additionally, to improve nanobody delivery precision, half-life, and efficacy, strategies such as integrating nanobodies with nanoparticles, dendrimers, liposomes, and viral vectors are being employed.
Advanced engineering strategies including intranasal and intrathecal routes, receptor-mediated transport, albumin binding, and focused ultrasound are used to facilitate brain penetration of nanobody therapeutics.
Advanced engineering strategies, including intranasal and intrathecal routes, receptor-mediated transport, plasma protein binding with albumin, and focused ultrasound to facilitate brain penetration.
Focused ultrasound neuromodulation and drug delivery applications in psychiatry remain at an early stage of development but have promising potential.
The reviewed neuromodulation methods were assessed based on specificity, safety, reversibility, and mechanistic clarity.
Across newer neurosurgical and gene therapy approaches for Parkinson's disease, larger-scale controlled trials are still required to establish long-term safety and efficacy.
Research on therapeutic focused ultrasound applications within the spinal cord is less prevalent than analogous brain applications and faces multiple challenges, while human trials remain limited.
Deep brain stimulation is the most established neurosurgical technique for Parkinson's disease and has strong evidence for improving motor symptoms.
Focused ultrasound provides a noninvasive option for Parkinson's disease, but most related studies lack long-term data.
A critical gap in commonly used neuromodulation methods is incomplete mechanistic understanding, and identifying molecular targets may improve therapeutic precision.
Research on focused ultrasound neuromodulation in the peripheral nerve system is less developed than in the central nervous system.
Low-intensity focused ultrasound stimulation of exposed rat spinal cord modulates mean arterial pressure.
We found that LIFU stimulation on exposed rat spinal cord could modulate MAP
Advancements in microbubble-assisted lesioning techniques and target mapping are expected to expand targeting possibilities and improve treatment efficacy.
Future MRgFUS developments may include frameless technology, staged bilateral procedures, and integration of neuromodulation to enable more precise adaptive therapies.
Therapeutic efficacy in glioblastoma remains unsatisfactory because of the blood-brain barrier, tumor heterogeneity, and treatment resistance.
therapeutic efficacy remains unsatisfactory due to challenges such as the blood-brain barrier, tumor heterogeneity, and treatment resistance
Botulinum neurotoxins provide long-lasting yet reversible inhibition through well-characterized molecular pathways but require stereotaxic injections and remain invasive.
MRgFUS uses phased ultrasound arrays to focus energy at intracranial targets and allows real-time visualization and monitoring, improving safety and efficacy.
Focused ultrasound may alleviate neuropathic pain through thermal, mechanical, and neuromodulatory pathways, including modulation of inhibitory neurotransmission, suppression of neuroinflammation, and regulation of ionic homeostasis.
In preclinical Alzheimer's disease models, nanobodies have been shown to neutralize toxic amyloid-β oligomers, inhibit tau generation and aggregation, and modulate neuroinflammation.
In AD, nanobodies have been shown in preclinical models to neutralize toxic amyloid-β oligomers, inhibit tau generation and aggregation, and modulate neuroinflammation, thereby demonstrating significant therapeutic potential.
The review frames focused ultrasound action in terms of thermal and mechanical bioeffects.
outlining physical principles of FUS-mediated thermal and mechanical bioeffects
Biophysical neuromodulation methods are widely used in clinical practice but often rely on empirical outcomes because their molecular targets are undefined.
Focused ultrasound to the spinal cord may provide anti-inflammatory effects and alter the local cellular response to injury.
A 30 second LIFU stimulation period is more effective than a 90 second period for inducing a decrease in mean arterial pressure.
shorter stimulation periods (30 s) were more effective in inducing a decrease in MAP than more extended stimulation periods (90 s)
stimulation duration compared 30 s versus 90 s
Nanobodies are used beyond monotherapy across multiple technological platforms to optimize brain delivery and target multiple targets.
In fact, nanobodies are applied beyond monotherapy across multiple technological platforms to optimize brain delivery and target multiple targets. Nanobodies have been used on bispecific and trispecific antibody platforms, as well as in CRISPR/Cas9 editing and AI-driven technologies, to expand their applications.
Genetic neuromodulation tools offer cell-type precision in experimental systems but face translational barriers related to delivery and safety.
Preclinical evidence indicates nanobodies can clear amyloid-β and tau, preserve synapses, and normalize biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease-related settings.
Recently, preclinical evidence has been mounting on the efficacy of nanobodies in clearing Aβ and tau, preserving synapses, and normalizing biomarkers.
Current preclinical studies indicate that spinal cord focused ultrasound has potential applications in blood-spinal cord barrier disruption, neuromodulation, and inflammatory regulation after spinal cord injury.
This review identified 28 preclinical studies of focused ultrasound in animal or cell-based neuropathic pain models.
Focused ultrasound provides a noninvasive, safe, and effective modality for neurotherapeutics.
Lower thoracic spinal LIFU decreases mean arterial pressure, whereas lumbosacral spinal LIFU increases mean arterial pressure in rats.
causing a decrease when applied at a lower thoracic level and an increase when applied at a lumbosacral level
Skull density ratio and energy efficiency are crucial factors affecting MRgFUS treatment outcomes.
The time for mean arterial pressure to return to baseline increases with subsequent periods of focused ultrasound stimulation.
The time required to return to baseline for MAP was shown to increase with subsequent periods of FUS stimulation.
Across various nerve injury models, both HIFU and LIFU were associated with behavioral improvements indicative of pain reduction, partial restoration of nerve function, and modulation of inflammatory cytokine profiles.
The article proposes neuromodulation approaches targeting the dorsal raphe nucleus as a novel treatment strategy for chronic insomnia.
Our objective in the current article is to provide a conceptual model for the exploitation of neuromodulation approaches targeting the DRN as a novel treatment strategy for chronic insomnia.
MRgFUS has emerged as a leading noninvasive therapy for tremor and offers a precise lesion-based alternative to deep brain stimulation and traditional lesioning techniques.
High-intensity focused ultrasound lesioning targeting the anterior limb of the internal capsule shows promise for major depressive disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Focused ultrasound psychiatry faces barriers in optimizing treatment parameters and developing clinical protocols, motivating standardized reporting, protocol harmonization, and real-time monitoring of target engagement.
Comparison with FDA-approved anti-amyloid-β monoclonal antibodies highlights translational gaps for Alzheimer's nanobody therapeutics including safety testing, half-life extension, and delivery optimization.
Comparison with FDA-approved anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (aducanumab, lecanemab, and donanemab) highlights opportunities and current translational gaps, including safety testing, half-life extension, and delivery optimization.
Nanobody applications in Alzheimer's disease remain preclinical and direct clinical evidence in patients is lacking.
However, all nanobody applications in AD are discussed strictly as preclinical therapeutic potential rather than established clinical therapies, and direct clinical evidence in patients with AD is still lacking.
Clinical translation of focused ultrasound for neuropathic pain remains uncertain despite encouraging preclinical evidence.
DRN-targeted interventions may offer personalized, biologically informed treatments for individuals with chronic insomnia.
discusses how DRN-targeted interventions may offer personalized, biologically informed treatments for individuals with chronic insomnia.
FUS-enabled layered technology can overcome the need for bulky invasive implants and often improve the spatiotemporal precision of light, heat, electrical fields, or other techniques alone.
This layered technology, first enabled by noninvasive FUS, overcomes the need for bulky invasive implants and also often improves the spatiotemporal precision of light, heat, electrical fields, or other techniques alone.
Focused ultrasound has precision and penetration depth that make it a foundation for many neuromodulation techniques.
Energy delivery facilitated by FUS has been the foundation for many neuromodulation techniques, owing to its precision and penetration depth. FUS possesses the potential to penetrate deeply (∼centimeters) into tissue while maintaining relatively precise spatial resolution
penetration depth ∼centimeters
When combined with focused ultrasound, drug-encapsulated microbubbles can pass through the ultrasound-disrupted blood-brain barrier zone and diffuse into brain tissue.
Microbubbles are described as lipophilic carriers that can penetrate across the blood-brain barrier and deliver active drug into brain tissue.
Focused ultrasound can disrupt the blood-brain barrier and thereby allow therapeutic agents to penetrate the brain.
The review describes microbubbles as carriers that can deliver active drug into brain tissue and as components of focused-ultrasound-enabled Alzheimer's drug delivery strategies.
The review presents focused ultrasound as a method to disrupt the blood-brain barrier and thereby enable therapeutic agents to penetrate the brain in Alzheimer's disease.
The review covers recent advances in FUS-mediated microbubble-based carriers for delivering Alzheimer's disease-related drugs and highlights sonogenetics-based FUS/microbubble approaches.
The review covers recent advances in various focused-ultrasound-mediated microbubble-based carriers developed for delivering Alzheimer's disease-related drugs and highlights sonogenetics-based FUS/MB approaches.
Focused ultrasound can synergize with ultrasound-responsive nanotransducers or devices to generate secondary energy such as light, heat, or electric fields in the target region.
FUS may work synergistically with ultrasound-responsive nanotransducers or devices to produce a secondary energy, such as light, heat, or an electric field, in the target region.
Focused ultrasound exhibits a trade-off between penetration depth and spatial resolution.
FUS possesses the potential to penetrate deeply (∼centimeters) into tissue while maintaining relatively precise spatial resolution, although there exists a trade-off between the penetration depth and spatial resolution.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
Targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells induced telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and enhanced tumor susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
We further targeted FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells to induce telomere disruption, inhibiting tumor growth and enhancing tumor susceptibility to killing by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
The authors engineered FUS-controllable CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules for regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
FUS-CRISPR(a/i) can upregulate, repress, and knock out exogenous and/or endogenous genes in different cell types.
We demonstrated the capabilities of FUS-inducible CRISPRa, CRISPRi, and CRISPR (FUS-CRISPR(a/i)) to upregulate, repress, and knockout exogenous and/or endogenous genes, respectively, in different cell types.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox enables remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo.
The FUS-CRISPR(a/i) toolbox allows the remote, noninvasive, and spatiotemporal control of genomic and epigenomic reprogramming in vivo, with extended applications in cancer treatment.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption combined with CAR-T therapy showed synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
FUS-CRISPR-mediated telomere disruption for tumor priming combined with CAR-T therapy demonstrated synergistic therapeutic effects in xenograft mouse models.
Focused ultrasound activates engineered Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 through a thermal gene switch for localized tumor immunotherapy.
The paper reports engineered bacteria that are controllable by ultrasound for cancer immunotherapy.
This paper studies intrinsic functional neuron-type selectivity in transcranial focused ultrasound neuromodulation.
Image-guided transcranial focused ultrasound stimulates the human primary somatosensory cortex.
Image-Guided Transcranial Focused Ultrasound Stimulates Human Primary Somatosensory Cortex
The reported transcranial focused ultrasound setup used a 250 kHz pulsed transducer.
using MRI/CT-guided targeting, EEG/SEP readouts, and a 250 kHz pulsed transducer
transducer frequency 250 kHz
The study used EEG and somatosensory evoked potentials as readouts for image-guided transcranial focused ultrasound stimulation of human primary somatosensory cortex.
using MRI/CT-guided targeting, EEG/SEP readouts, and a 250 kHz pulsed transducer
Approval Evidence
17 sources48 linked approval claimsfirst-pass slugs focused-ultrasound, focused-ultrasound-neuromodulation, low-intensity-pulsed-focused-ultrasound
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly advancing noninvasive energy delivery technology with the capacity to precisely modulate the tumor microenvironment (TME) through acoustic waves.
Source:
These neuromodulations include ... focused ultrasound (FUS).
Source:
Cells were exposed to low-intensity pulsed FUS (300 kHz, 10 min) using a vertically mounted transducer positioned 5 mm above the culture dish.
Source:
Despite the advancement of modalities such as immunotherapy, targeted therapy, gene therapy, focused ultrasound, and tumor-treating fields, therapeutic efficacy remains unsatisfactory due to challenges such as the blood-brain barrier, tumor heterogeneity, and treatment resistance.
Source:
The review incorporates data from both preclinical and clinical studies covering... focused ultrasound...
Source:
Noninvasive focused ultrasound (FUS) has been applied in the treatment of various targets. Neuromodulation using FUS is emerging as a promising therapeutic modality.
Source:
Advanced engineering strategies, including intranasal and intrathecal routes, receptor-mediated transport, plasma protein binding with albumin, and focused ultrasound to facilitate brain penetration.
Source:
presents current methodologies for neuromodulation approaches (including transcranial magnetic stimulation, focused ultrasound, and deep brain stimulation paradigms)
Source:
Focused ultrasound (FUS) technology provides unique advantages as a therapy targeting the central nervous system (CNS). Current preclinical studies indicate the potential use of spinal cord FUS in blood-spinal cord barrier (BSCB) disruption, neuromodulation, and inflammatory regulation following spinal cord injury.
Source:
Focused ultrasound (FUS) provides a noninvasive option, but the majority of studies related to it still lack long-term data.
Source:
This narrative review aimed to synthesize preclinical evidence on the therapeutic effects and underlying mechanisms of focused ultrasound (FUS) in neuropathic pain models.
Source:
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly emerging strategy for nonionizing, noninvasive intervention that holds promise for the multimodal treatment of solid cancers.
Source:
application scopesupports
The reported low-intensity focused ultrasound conditions define a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation in the studied primary cortical culture system.
These findings demonstrate that low-intensity FUS safely enhances intracellular calcium signalling while preserving neuronal viability, protein integrity, and morphology, defining a safe acoustic window for non-destructive neuromodulation
Source:
capabilitysupports
Focused ultrasound can precisely modulate the glioblastoma tumor microenvironment through acoustic waves.
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly advancing noninvasive energy delivery technology with the capacity to precisely modulate the tumor microenvironment (TME) through acoustic waves.
Source:
clinical translationsupports
Clinical trials demonstrate the safety and feasibility of several focused ultrasound platforms in the glioblastoma context.
Clinical trials demonstrate the safety and feasibility of several FUS platforms.
Source:
functional effectsupports
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound increased intracellular calcium responsiveness in primary rat cortical cultures 24 h after exposure.
calcium imaging revealed a robust transient elevation in intracellular Ca²⁺ responsiveness when assessed 24 h after FUS exposure, with a significantly higher integrated area under the curve relative to Control.
Source:
mechanism of actionsupports
ECT, rTMS, tES, and FUS are reviewed as plasticity-inducing non-surgical neuromodulations for late-life depression.
Source:
mechanistic capabilitysupports
Focused ultrasound enables spatiotemporal control of thermal and mechanical effects in glioblastoma.
FUS enables spatiotemporal control of thermal and mechanical effects in GBM.
Source:
morphology preservationsupports
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound preserved gross neuronal morphology in primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions.
Morphological observations confirmed healthy neuronal somata and intact neuritic networks across all groups, with no evidence of cell death or structural damage compared with controls.
Source:
parameter tunabilitysupports
Modulating duty cycle, acoustic pressure, and exposure time allows focused ultrasound to operate across therapeutic regimes.
Modulation of duty cycle, acoustic pressure, and exposure time allows FUS to operate across therapeutic regimes.
Source:
preclinical supportsupports
Preclinical data support focused ultrasound for targeted drug delivery, immune cell repolarization, and synergistic effects with immunotherapies in glioblastoma-related studies.
Preclinical data support using FUS for targeted drug delivery, immune cell repolarization, and synergistic effects with immunotherapies.
Source:
safetysupports
Low-intensity pulsed focused ultrasound did not significantly alter viability or total protein concentration in DIV14 primary rat cortical cultures under the reported conditions.
FUS treatment produced no significant differences in viability or total protein concentration compared with the Control group.
Source:
therapeutic potentialsupports
Focused ultrasound is a tunable multimodal platform with potential to overcome core resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma.
FUS offers a tunable multimodal platform with the potential to overcome core resistance mechanisms in GBM.
Source:
therapeutic rationalesupports
These neuromodulation strategies could promote cortical plasticity and improve network connectivity and prefrontal function, potentially reducing cognitive decline.
Source:
advantage statementsupports
Focused ultrasound neuromodulation offers deep penetration and precise targeting.
Source:
application promisesupports
Targeted CNS drug delivery using focused-ultrasound-mediated blood-spinal cord barrier disruption has proven promising in neuro-oncology and neurotrauma contexts.
Source:
application scopesupports
Focused ultrasound has been explored for spinal neuromodulation in managing neuropathic pain and spasticity.
Source:
application scopesupports
Focused ultrasound is being evaluated across preclinical and clinical oncology trials for tumor ablation, therapeutic delivery, radiosensitization, sonodynamic therapy, and enhancement of tumor-specific immune responses.
this technology is now being evaluated across preclinical and clinical oncology trials for tumor ablation, therapeutic delivery, radiosensitization, sonodynamic therapy, and enhancement of tumor-specific immune responses
Source:
application scopesupports
Focused ultrasound neuromodulation can be applied to the peripheral nerve system.
Source:
capability scopesupports
Focused ultrasound is a rapidly emerging nonionizing, noninvasive intervention strategy with promise for multimodal treatment of solid cancers.
Focused ultrasound (FUS) is a rapidly emerging strategy for nonionizing, noninvasive intervention that holds promise for the multimodal treatment of solid cancers.
Source:
comparative performancesupports
Limited PNS studies have shown satisfactory performance of focused ultrasound compared with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.
Source:
comparative review scopesupports
The review comparatively analyzes biophysical, genetic, and biological neuromodulation approaches with emphasis on molecular targets and translational potential.
Source:
Comparisons
Source-stated alternatives
The abstract does not directly compare FUS against other neuromodulation modalities. It only contrasts FUS-exposed groups with untreated control cultures.; The abstract contrasts FUS with ECT, rTMS, and tES.; The abstract contrasts FUS-enabled adjunct treatment with emerging immunotherapies and targeted drug delivery systems as combination partners rather than replacements.; The abstract does not name direct alternative technologies, but it contrasts FUS conceptually with more invasive or ionizing cancer-management options.; The abstract mentions that neuropathic pain is managed with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment approaches, but it does not name specific alternatives. It also distinguishes HIFU and LIFU as modality variants within focused ultrasound.; The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.; The abstract contrasts spinal applications with therapeutic FUS ablation of brain structures, which has been more extensively studied. It does not provide a broader alternative-method comparison.; The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.; The abstract explicitly contrasts FUS with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.; The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.; The abstract contrasts it with immunotherapy, targeted therapy, gene therapy, tumor-treating fields, and nanotechnology-enabled delivery strategies.; The abstract contrasts force-based approaches with light, electrical, and magnetic field neuromodulation, and also contrasts primary-force FUS with approaches where other modalities generate mechanical force secondarily.; The abstract does not name direct alternative BBB-bypass methods. It contrasts standard drug delivery limitations with FUS-enabled BBB disruption.; The abstract frames BBB bypass as the key need but does not explicitly compare FUS against other BBB-crossing methods.; The summary contrasts this modality with other externally controlled bacterial systems and points to tunable thermal bioswitches as the directly enabling control component.
Source:
The abstract does not directly compare FUS against other neuromodulation modalities. It only contrasts FUS-exposed groups with untreated control cultures.
Source:
The abstract contrasts FUS with ECT, rTMS, and tES.
Source:
The abstract contrasts FUS-enabled adjunct treatment with emerging immunotherapies and targeted drug delivery systems as combination partners rather than replacements.
Source:
The abstract does not name direct alternative technologies, but it contrasts FUS conceptually with more invasive or ionizing cancer-management options.
Source:
The abstract mentions that neuropathic pain is managed with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment approaches, but it does not name specific alternatives. It also distinguishes HIFU and LIFU as modality variants within focused ultrasound.
Source:
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Source:
The abstract contrasts spinal applications with therapeutic FUS ablation of brain structures, which has been more extensively studied. It does not provide a broader alternative-method comparison.
Source:
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Source:
The abstract explicitly contrasts FUS with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Source:
The abstract contrasts it with immunotherapy, targeted therapy, gene therapy, tumor-treating fields, and nanotechnology-enabled delivery strategies.
Source:
The abstract contrasts force-based approaches with light, electrical, and magnetic field neuromodulation, and also contrasts primary-force FUS with approaches where other modalities generate mechanical force secondarily.
Source:
The abstract does not name direct alternative BBB-bypass methods. It contrasts standard drug delivery limitations with FUS-enabled BBB disruption.
Source:
The abstract frames BBB bypass as the key need but does not explicitly compare FUS against other BBB-crossing methods.
Source:
The summary contrasts this modality with other externally controlled bacterial systems and points to tunable thermal bioswitches as the directly enabling control component.
Source-backed strengths
The reported strengths are deep tissue penetration, confined induction of mild hyperthermia, and compatibility with CRISPR, CRISPRa, and CRISPRi architectures. In the cited application, targeting FUS-CRISPR to telomeres in tumor cells caused telomere disruption, inhibited tumor growth, and increased susceptibility to CAR-T-cell killing.
Source:
Here we engineer a set of CRISPR(a/i) tools containing heat-sensitive genetic modules controllable by FUS for the regulation of genome and epigenome in live cells and animals.
Compared with AAV2-hAADC
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Compared with brain stimulation
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Compared with chemogenetics
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with Deep Brain Stimulation
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Compared with gene therapy
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.; The abstract contrasts it with immunotherapy, targeted therapy, gene therapy, tumor-treating fields, and nanotechnology-enabled delivery strategies.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Source:
The abstract contrasts it with immunotherapy, targeted therapy, gene therapy, tumor-treating fields, and nanotechnology-enabled delivery strategies.
Compared with magnetogenetics
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with optogenetic functional interrogation
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with optogenetic membrane potential perturbation
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with ProSavin
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Compared with thermal gene switch
The summary contrasts this modality with other externally controlled bacterial systems and points to tunable thermal bioswitches as the directly enabling control component.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The summary contrasts this modality with other externally controlled bacterial systems and points to tunable thermal bioswitches as the directly enabling control component.
Compared with toxin-based neuromodulation
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The abstract mentions transcranial magnetic stimulation and deep brain stimulation paradigms as alternative neuromodulation approaches, alongside CBT-I and medications as standard treatments.
Compared with ultrasonography
The abstract mentions that neuropathic pain is managed with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment approaches, but it does not name specific alternatives. It also distinguishes HIFU and LIFU as modality variants within focused ultrasound.; The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.; The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The abstract mentions that neuropathic pain is managed with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment approaches, but it does not name specific alternatives. It also distinguishes HIFU and LIFU as modality variants within focused ultrasound.
Source:
The review contrasts focused ultrasound with DBS and gene therapy strategies including AAV2-hAADC and ProSavin.
Source:
The review compares focused ultrasound with DBS, transcranial electrical and magnetic stimulation, chemogenetics, optogenetics, magnetogenetics, and toxin-based neuromodulation.
Compared with vagal stimulation
The abstract explicitly contrasts FUS with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.
Shared frame: source-stated alternative in extracted literature
Strengths here: non-invasive; enhanced intracellular calcium responsiveness without significant viability or protein loss in the reported culture system; explicitly included as a plasticity-inducing neuromodulation modality in the review scope.
Relative tradeoffs: mechanism of calcium elevation is not dissected in the abstract; evidence is limited to primary cortical cultures rather than in vivo systems; abstract does not provide protocol details or modality-specific outcome data.
Source:
The abstract explicitly contrasts FUS with FDA-approved implanted devices, especially vagus nerve stimulation.
Ranked Citations
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.