4.4 Article

The Influence of the CB1 Receptor Ligands on the Schizophrenia-Like Effects in Mice Induced by MK-801

期刊

NEUROTOXICITY RESEARCH
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 658-676

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12640-016-9662-0

关键词

Schizophrenia; Endocannabinoid system; CB1 receptor ligands; NMDA receptor antagonist; Mice

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A growing body of psychiatric research has emerged, focusing on the role of endocannabinoid system in psychiatric disorders. For example, the endocannabinoid system, via cannabinoid CB (CB1 and CB2) receptors, is able to control the function of many receptors, such as N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors connected strictly with psychosis or other schizophrenia-associated symptoms. The aim of the present research was to investigate the impact of the CB1 receptor ligands on the symptoms typical for schizophrenia. We provoked psychosis-like effects in mice by an acute administration of NMDA receptor antagonist, MK-801 (0.1-0.6 mg/kg). An acute administration of MK-801 induced psychotic symptoms, manifested in the increase in locomotor activity (hyperactivity), measured in actimeters, as well as the memory impairment, assessed in the passive avoidance task. We revealed that an acute injection of CB1 receptor agonist, oleamide (5-20 mg/kg), had no influence on the short- and long-term memory-related disturbances, as well as on the hyperlocomotion in mice, provoking by an acute MK-801. In turn, an amnestic effects or hyperactivity induced by an acute MK-801 was attenuated by an acute administration of AM 251 (0.25-3 mg/kg), a CB1 receptor antagonist. The present findings confirm that endocannabinoid system is able to modify a variety of schizophrenia-like responses, including the cognitive disturbances and hyperlocomotion in mice. Antipsychotic-like effects induced by CB1 receptor antagonist, obtained in our research, confirm the potential effect of CB1 receptor blockade and could have important therapeutic implications on clinical settings, in the future.

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

4.4
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