4.7 Article

Treatment with edaravone, initiated at symptom onset, slows motor decline and decreases SOD1 deposition in ALS mice

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL NEUROLOGY
卷 213, 期 2, 页码 448-455

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2008.07.017

关键词

amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); edaravone; free-radical scavenger; treatment; superoxide dismutase; aggregation; immunohistochemistry; mouse model; motor function; anterior horn cell

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [15590917]
  2. Kansai Medical University [B, 2005]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15590917] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Edaravone is a free-radical scavenger, an agent being widely used for cerebral ischemia in Japan. To evaluate its efficacy for possible treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), we performed a randomized blind trial in ALS model mice. After identification of the clinical onset in each female G93A mutant SOD1 transgenic mouse, we intraperitoneally administered multiple doses of edaravone to the mice and observed their motor symptoms. We also counted the number of lumbar motoneurons, determined the 3-nitrotyrosine/tyrosine ratio, and evaluated the abnormal SOD1 aggregation in the spinal cord at the 10th day after the edaravone injection. Edaravone significantly slowed the motor decline of the transgenic mice. The remaining motoneurons were significantly preserved in the higher-dose edaravone-adiministered group, and the 3-nitrotyrosine/tyrosine ratios were reduced dose-dependently. Intriguingly, the area of abnormal SOD1 deposition in the spinal cord was significantly decreased in the higher-close edaravone-administered group. Our results indicate that edaravone was effective to slow symptom progression and motor neuron degeneration in the ALS model mice. These favorable actions might be attributable to the yet unidentified mechanism responsible for reducing the deposition Of mutant SOD1. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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