4.6 Article

Meloxicam Blocks Neuroinflammation, but Not Depressive-Like Behaviors, in HIV-1 Transgenic Female Rats

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108399

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Physiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
  2. Creative and Novel Ideas in HIV Research Program (CNIHR) [P30 AI027767-24]
  3. Office of AIDS Research
  4. National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases
  5. International AIDS Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adolescents living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) comprise approximately 12% of the HIV-positive population worldwide. HIV-positive adolescents experience a higher rate of clinical depression, a greater risk of sexual and drug abuse behaviors, and a decreased adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapies (HAART). Using adolescent HIV-1 transgenic rats (HIV-1 tg) that display related immune response alterations and pathologies, this study tested the hypothesis that developmental expression of HIV-1-related proteins induces a depressive-like phenotype that parallels a decrease in hippocampal cell proliferation and an increase in pro-inflammatory cytokine expression in the hippocampus. Consistent with this hypothesis, adolescent HIV-1 tg rats demonstrated a depressive-like behavioral phenotype, had decreased levels of cell proliferation, and exhibited elevated expression of monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (Mcp-1) in the hippocampus relative to controls. Subsequently, we tested the ability of meloxicam, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, to attenuate behavioral deficits via inflammatory mechanisms. Daily meloxicam treatments did not alter the behavioral profile despite effectively reducing hippocampal inflammatory gene expression. Together, these data support a biological basis for the co-morbid manifestation of depression in HIV-positive patients as early as in adolescence and suggest that modifications in behavior manifest independent of inflammatory activity in the hippocampus.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据