4.7 Article

Effects of non-competitive AMPA receptor antagonists injected into some brain areas of WAG/Rij rats, an animal model of generalized absence epilepsy

Journal

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 6, Pages 1058-1067

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2006.06.014

Keywords

absence seizures; AMPA receptor antagonists; CFM-2; THIQ-10c; WAG/Rij rat; thalamus; primary somatosensory cortex

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CFM-2 [1-(4-aminophenyl)-3,5-dihydro-7,8-dimethoxy-4H-2,3-benzodiazepin-4-one] and THIQ-10c [N-acetyl-1-(4-chlorophenyl)-6,7-dimethoxy-1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline], are two non-competitive 2-amino-3-(3-hydroxy-5-methylisoxazol-4-yl) propionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonists, which demonstrated to antagonize generalized tonic-clonic seizures in different animal models. We have evaluated the effects of such compounds in a genetic animal model of absence epilepsy, the WAG/Rij rat. Animals were focally microinjected into specific brain areas of the cortico-thalamic circuit in order to evaluate the effects of these compounds on the number and duration of epileptic spike-wave discharges (SWDs) and better characterize the role of AMPA neurotransmission in this animal model. The focal microinjection of the two AMPA antagonists into some thalamic nuclei (ventralis posteromedialis (VPM), reticularis (NRT), ventralis posterolateralis (VPL) and the primary somatosensory forelimb region (S1FL)) was, generally, not able to significantly modify the occurrence of SWDs. Whereas, both compounds were able to reduce the number and duration of SWDs dose-dependently when microinjected into the peri-oral region of the primary somatosensory cortex (S1po). These findings suggest that AMPA receptor antagonists might play a role in absence epilepsies and that it might depend on the involvement of specific neuronal areas. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available