Tag: neuroscience

  • STAT+: In small trial, optogenetics restores some vision lost to retinitis pigmentosa

    STAT+: In small trial, optogenetics restores some vision lost to retinitis pigmentosa

    Nobel-recognized technology is being explored for safety and clinical potential

    Optogenetics involves genetically engineering specific brain cells to increase their sensitivity to light.CAROL AND MIKE WERNER/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY

    Annalisa (Nalis) Merelli is focused on boys’ and men’s health: She looks into reproductive health, trending treatments, screening approaches, mental health, and everything in between.

    Retinitis pigmentosa is a genetic disorder that causes degeneration of the light-sensing cells in the retina. Generally diagnosed in childhood or early adolescence, patients gradually lose peripheral and night vision, often becoming legally blind by young adulthood. 

    With the exception of a subset of patients who present a specific genetic mutation and can be treated with gene therapy, there is no cure for the condition. Cases are addressed by measures to slow degeneration and preserve what is left of the vision.

    Optogenetics  — the technology just recognized with a Nobel Prize — could offer hope, according to a new paper published on Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

    1. Annalisa (Nalis) Merelli is focused on boys’ and men’s health: She looks into reproductive health, trending treatments, screening approaches, mental health, and everything in between.

  • STAT+: Nobel-winning optogenetics research has led to experimental treatments for blindness and Alzheimer’s

    STAT+: Nobel-winning optogenetics research has led to experimental treatments for blindness and Alzheimer’s

    Annalisa (Nalis) Merelli is focused on boys’ and men’s health: She looks into reproductive health, trending treatments, screening approaches, mental health, and everything in between.

    It is probably impossible to overstate how complex a brain is: A network of billions of intertwined neurons forming an intricate anatomy, capable of working on the millisecond scale to perceive reality, detect sensations, create plans, and take actions. 

    “All of this is incredibly complicated, and so of course the challenge that we face as neuroscientists and as physicians treating brain disorders is how can we hope to make headway without tools that match the complexity and the precision of the brain?” said Karl Deisseroth, a Stanford University and Howard Hughes Medical Institute researcher who on Monday won the 2026 Nobel Prize for Medicine, alongside German colleagues Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel, for work developing such tools. 

    “Our perception of reality and all our inner subjective states come from cells, and so the appropriate tool that would be matched to how the brain works would be something that was fast and could be targeted to individual cells or individual types of cells,” he said in an interview after the announcement. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • 2026 Nobel Prize in Medicine awarded for brain research tool called optogenetics

    2026 Nobel Prize in Medicine awarded for brain research tool called optogenetics

    Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann, and Georg Nagel are the joint recipients of the 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine “for their discoveries concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics,” the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden announced on Monday. 

    Deisseroth, 55, a professor at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Stanford University; Hegemann, 72, a professor at Humboldt University in Berlin; and Nagel, 73, a professor at the University of Würzburg, Germany, developed a method that uses light, combined with genetic modifications of neurons, to switch on or off individual cells in a living brain. This makes it possible to show how nerve cells shape memories, feelings and behavior in the brain, and is being studied as a treatment for disease. 

    The work started in the early 1990s at the Max Planck Institute, when Hegemann wondered how a single-cell green alga called Chlamydomonas could swim toward light. Teaming up with Nagel, they discovered the answer: a protein called channelrhodopsin, a light-sensitive ion channel in the cell membrane that rapidly opened when exposed to light. They found that this protein worked in any cell they injected it in.

    Deisseroth then introduced the gene for the protein into nerve cells from rats, making it possible to trigger a nerve signal in the living brain with blue light and enabling scientists to identify what cells are responsible for what functions, and which are connected to one another. 

    “Optogenetics provides opportunities for mapping the brain in a way that we could once only dream of,” said Per Svenningsson, chair of the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine. 

    Deisseroth spoke with STAT shortly after the announcement. “When you think about light in science or light in medicine, you think of it as an observational tool. It’s a way to collect information. But with optogenetics, it’s the complete opposite of that,” he said. “We’re not using light to collect information, we’re using light to cause things to happen … it’s using light to turn cells on or off with that millisecond precision and the cellular resolution that is essential to brain function.”

    The committee was able to reach all three winners. “It was after midnight, and I was just drifting off to sleep. It was a very unexpected, but of course very delightful call,” said Deisseroth, who was the first of the three recipients to be notified of the award. He said he hasn’t yet had a chance to speak with the others, though he “really look forward to seeing my co-laureates and talking with them.”

    When informed of the shared award, “all three said the same thing, that they thought it was absolutely wonderful to receive the prize with the other two; they called them ‘my friends,’” said Thomas Perlmann, secretary for the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine. 

    “These are two people who have been frequent collaborators of mine,” Deisseroth said. “We’ve written multiple papers together, and sort of shared this journey of discovery over many years. We met at conferences, met each other’s families, shared beers at meetings and talked — as scientists do — about the things that interest them, the things that are surprising, big picture details and everything in between. I couldn’t be happier than to share this with these two friends.”

    As often happens in science, others contributed to the creation of optogenetics, though were not named by the committee.The Nobel rules limit the award to no more than three collaborators. Deisseroth nodded to the community of scientists who worked with him and his co-laureates to make their advances possible. “We have so many collaborators, colleagues, and students and postdoctoral fellows in the lab over the years,” said Deisseroth. “It’s been a very broad community, and so many things had to be solved to make everything work and to make the discoveries happen.”

    On social media, many commentators noted Ed Boyden, who was the first author on Deisseroth’s landmark 2005 paper and a Ph.D. student in his lab, should not have been excluded. Boyden, now at MIT, didn’t respond to requests for comment. The Nobel committee mentioned several other researchers in its background information, including Austrian neurophysiologist Gero Miesenböck, who achieved the first genetic sensitization to light of nonphotoreceptive neurons in 2002, and Zhuo-Hua Pan a vision scientist at Wayne State University in Detroit, who in 2004 successfully tried channelrhodopsin in ganglion cells, which became responsive to the light. 

    His work was recognized through a $300,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health, with the comment that it was a “quite an unprecedented, highly innovative proposal, bordering on the unknown.”  But a paper showing the outcome of his research, initially submitted by the end of  2004, didn’t find a publication until 2006, when Deisseroth and Boyden’s paper had already made waves.  

    The committee chair declined to comment on the reasons behind selecting the winners. 

    Jeremy Berg, former editor-in-chief of the journal Science and a former NIH institute director, told STAT, “I have followed Karl Deisseroth’s career since he received an NIH Director’s Pioneer Award as an assistant professor in 2005. He proposed a vision for optogenetics that was quite compelling and he has developed his ideas remarkably ever since. His work displays the power of engineering approaches with a deep knowledge of human physiology.”

    Berg added, “I am not at all surprised that his work has ended up with a Nobel Prize. That seemed plausible even during his Pioneer interview in 2005.” 

    Don Hilgemann, a biophysicist at the UT Southwestern, mentored Nagel in 1991 and 1992. “Georg showed real pioneer spirit in applying the methods I had developed. He was an extremely adventurous experimenter who could quickly master difficult, technically challenging methods,” he said in a note to STAT.

    There have been 235 award winners since the first medicine prize was awarded in 1901, of which 14 have been women. The youngest recipient was 31, the oldest 87. 

    The award has been given 117 times: 40 times to a single individual, and has been shared among two winners 36 times, and among three (the maximum allowed by the Nobel statute) 41 times.

    The winners will receive 12 million Swedish Kronor (SEK), or roughly $1.2 million.  

    This story has been updated with comments from Karl Deisseroth.

  • STAT+: Scientists made mice with half a brain. Then they filled them with human organoids

    STAT+: Scientists made mice with half a brain. Then they filled them with human organoids

    For the last decade, scientists have been steadily getting better at growing “cerebral organoids,”  miniature, three-dimensional brain-like structures, from human stem cells in the lab. Now, a group from Stanford University has found a way to advance their usefulness for studying brain development and disease — by instead growing them inside mice that have had large parts of their own brains genetically removed. 

    Neuroscientists say these “neuro-chimeric” mice, whose brains are half-human — by volume, not by number of neurons — are an important innovation for a field hampered by longstanding challenges in accessing human brain tissue for research. But such models also raise a host of ethical questions that will get thornier the more advanced they become. 

    In a study published Wednesday in Nature, the Stanford team reported finding types of human cells inside the brains of 3-month-old chimeric mouse pups that are very hard to obtain in a dish. They included pyramidal projection neurons that had wound their way into some of the animals’ spinal cords. The scientists also found evidence of specialized, super-sized neurons involved in social cognition only found in large-brain mammals like elephants, whales, and primates, including humans. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe