Home › Research › Drug development
Potential neuroprotective and autophagy-enhancing effects of alogliptin on lithium/pilocarpine-induced seizures in rats: Targeting the AMPK/SIRT1/Nrf2 axis
El-Sayed SS, Ali SO, Ibrahim WW.. Life sciences, 2024-07-15
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Background Status epilepticus (SE) as a severe neurodegenerative disease, greatly negatively affects people's health, and there is an urgent need for innovative treatments. The valuable neuroprotective effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) in several neurodegenerative diseases have raised motivation to investigate the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor; alogliptin (ALO), an oral antidiabetic drug as a potential treatment for SE. ALO has shown promising neuroprotective effects in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, but its impact on SE has not yet been studied. Aim The present study aimed to explore the repurposing potential for ALO in a lithium/pilocarpine (Li/Pil)-induced SE model in rats. Main methods ALO (30 mg/kg/day) was administered via gavage for 14 days, and SE was subsequently induced in the rats using a single dose of Li/Pil (127/60 mg/kg), while levetiracetam was used as a standard antiepileptic drug. Key findings The results showed that ALO reduced seizure severity and associated hippocampal neurodegeneration. ALO also increased γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) levels, diminished glutamate spikes, and corrected glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) changes. At the molecular level, ALO increased GLP-1 levels and activated its downstream signaling pathway, AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK)/sirtuin-1 (SIRT1). ALO also dampened the brain's pro-oxidant response, curbed neuroinflammation, and counteracted hippocampal apoptosis affording neuroprotection. In addition, it activated autophagy as indicated by Beclin1 elevation. Significance This study suggested that the neuroprotective properties and autophagy-enhancing effects of ALO make it a promising treatment for SE and can potentially be used as a management approach for this condition.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
El-Sayed, S. S., Ali, S. O., & Ibrahim, W. W. (2024). Potential neuroprotective and autophagy-enhancing effects of alogliptin on lithium/pilocarpine-induced seizures in rats: Targeting the AMPK/SIRT1/Nrf2 axis. Life sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122917
Vancouver
El-Sayed SS, Ali SO, Ibrahim WW. Potential neuroprotective and autophagy-enhancing effects of alogliptin on lithium/pilocarpine-induced seizures in rats: Targeting the AMPK/SIRT1/Nrf2 axis. Life sciences. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122917. PMID: 39019341.
BibTeX
@article{elsayed2024-39019341,
author = {El-Sayed, S. S. and Ali, S. O. and Ibrahim, W. W.},
title = {{Potential neuroprotective and autophagy-enhancing effects of alogliptin on lithium/pilocarpine-induced seizures in rats: Targeting the AMPK/SIRT1/Nrf2 axis}},
journal = {Life sciences},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122917},
pmid = {39019341},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122917}
}
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
- Key findings The results showed that ALO reduced seizure severity and associated hippocampal neurodegeneration.
- Significance This study suggested that the neuroprotective properties and autophagy-enhancing effects of ALO make it a promising treatment for SE and can potentially be used as a management approach for this condition.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Life sciences) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 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 “rats”) — scores zero |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39019341) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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.
Related studies in Drug development
Also in Drug development
106 studies in the library are filed under Drug development with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Drug development hub.