Home › Research › Biomarkers
Integrated transcriptome and metabolome analysis to investigate the mechanism of intranasal insulin treatment in a rat model of vascular dementia
Tang L, Wang Y, Gong X, Xiang J, Zhang Y, Xiang Q, Li J.. Frontiers in pharmacology, 2023-05-15
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Insulin significantly improved cognitive and memory functions in VD model rats ( p < 0.05). Compared with the VD group, the insulin + VD group exhibited significantly reduced the number of Nissl's bodies numbers, apoptosis level, GFAP-positive cell numbers, apoptosis rates, and p-tau and tau levels in the hippocampal CA1 region ( p < 0.05). Transcriptomic analysis found 1,257 and 938 DEGs in the VD vs. CK and insulin + VD vs. VD comparisons, respectively. The DEGs were mainly enriched in calcium signaling, cAMP signaling, axon guidance, and glutamatergic synapse signaling pathways. In addition, metabolomic analysis identified 1 and 14 DEMs between groups in negative and positive modes, respectively. KEGG pathway analysis indicated that DEGs and DEMs were mostly enriched in metabolic pathway. Insulin could effectively improve cognitive function in VD model rats by downregulating tau and p-tau expression, inhibiting astrocyte inflammation and neuron apoptosis, and regulating genes involved in calcium signaling, cAMP signaling, axon guidance, and glutamatergic synapse pathways, as well as metabolites involved in metabolic pathway.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Tang, L., Wang, Y., Gong, X., Xiang, J., Zhang, Y., Xiang, Q., et al. (2023). Integrated transcriptome and metabolome analysis to investigate the mechanism of intranasal insulin treatment in a rat model of vascular dementia. Frontiers in pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1182803
Vancouver
Tang L, Wang Y, Gong X, Xiang J, Zhang Y, Xiang Q, et al. Integrated transcriptome and metabolome analysis to investigate the mechanism of intranasal insulin treatment in a rat model of vascular dementia. Frontiers in pharmacology. 2023. doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1182803. PMID: 37256231.
BibTeX
@article{tang2023-37256231,
author = {Tang, L. and Wang, Y. and Gong, X. and Xiang, J. and Zhang, Y. and Xiang, Q. and Li, J.},
title = {{Integrated transcriptome and metabolome analysis to investigate the mechanism of intranasal insulin treatment in a rat model of vascular dementia}},
journal = {Frontiers in pharmacology},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.3389/fphar.2023.1182803},
pmid = {37256231},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1182803}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Insulin significantly improved cognitive and memory functions in VD model rats ( p < 0.05).
- Compared with the VD group, the insulin + VD group exhibited significantly reduced the number of Nissl's bodies numbers, apoptosis level, GFAP-positive cell numbers, apoptosis rates, and p-tau and tau levels in the hippocampal CA1 region ( p < 0.05).
- Transcriptomic analysis found 1,257 and 938 DEGs in the VD vs.
- The DEGs were mainly enriched in calcium signaling, cAMP signaling, axon guidance, and glutamatergic synapse signaling pathways.
- In addition, metabolomic analysis identified 1 and 14 DEMs between groups in negative and positive modes, respectively.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
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 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in pharmacology) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 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 “rat”) — 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 37256231) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 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 Biomarkers
Also in Biomarkers
224 studies in the library are filed under Biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Biomarkers hub.