Home › Research › Treatments
Calcineurin inhibitors improve memory loss and neuropathological changes in mouse model of dementia
Kumar A, Singh N.. Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior, 2017-01-04
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Aim The present study was designed to investigate the potential of Cyclosporine (CsA) and Tacrolimus, the inhibitors of calcineurin (CaN) in cognitive deficits of mice. Methods Streptozotocin [STZ, 3mg/kg, injected intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.)] was used to induce memory deficits in NIH mice, while aged mice separately taken served as a natural model of dementia. Morris water maze (MWM) test was employed to evaluate learning and memory of the animals. A battery of biochemical and histopathological studies was also performed. Extent of oxidative stress was measured by estimating the levels of brain glutathione (GSH) and thiobarbituric acid reactive species (TBARS). Brain acetylcholinestrase (AChE) activity was estimated to assess cholinergic activity. The brain level of myeloperoxidase (MPO) was measured as a marker of inflammation. Results STZ i.c.v. and aging results in marked decline in MWM performance of the animals, reflecting impairment of learning and memory. STZ i.c.v. treated mice and aged mice exhibited a marked accentuation of AChE activity, TBARS and MPO levels along with a fall in GSH level. Further the stained micrographs of STZ treated mice and aged mice indicate pathological changes, severe neutrophilic infiltration and amyloid deposition. Cyclosporine and Tacrolimus treatment significantly attenuated STZ induced and age related memory deficits, biochemical and histopathological alterations. Conclusion The findings demonstrate the potential of CaN inhibitors Cyclosporine and Tacrolimus in memory dysfunctions which may probably be attributed to anti-cholinesterase, anti-amyloid, anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory effects. It is concluded that CaN can be explored as a potential therapeutic target in dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Kumar, A., & Singh, N. (2017). Calcineurin inhibitors improve memory loss and neuropathological changes in mouse model of dementia. Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2016.12.018
Vancouver
Kumar A, Singh N. Calcineurin inhibitors improve memory loss and neuropathological changes in mouse model of dementia. Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2016.12.018. PMID: 28063945.
BibTeX
@article{kumar2017-28063945,
author = {Kumar, A. and Singh, N.},
title = {{Calcineurin inhibitors improve memory loss and neuropathological changes in mouse model of dementia}},
journal = {Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1016/j.pbb.2016.12.018},
pmid = {28063945},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2016.12.018}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results STZ i.c.v. and aging results in marked decline in MWM performance of the animals, reflecting impairment of learning and memory.
- Cyclosporine and Tacrolimus treatment significantly attenuated STZ induced and age related memory deficits, biochemical and histopathological alterations.
- It is concluded that CaN can be explored as a potential therapeutic target in dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Laboratory or animal study (title names “mouse”) — scores zero |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28063945) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.