| Literature DB >> 23936214 |
Rupinder K Sodhi1, Nirmal Singh.
Abstract
The present study investigates the potential of lansoprazole (a proton pump inhibitor and agonist of liver x receptors) in experimental dementia of AD type. Streptozotocin [STZ, 3 mg/kg, injected intracerebroventricular (i.c.v), and high fat diet (HFD, administered for 90 days)] were used to induce dementia in separate groups of Swiss mice. Morris water maze (MWM) test was performed to assess learning and memory of the animals. A battery of biochemical and histopathological studies were also performed. Extent of oxidative stress was measured by estimating the levels of brain reduced glutathione (GSH) and thiobarbituric acid reactive species (TBARS). Brain acetylcholinestrase (AChE) activity and serum cholesterol levels were also estimated. The brain level of myeloperoxidase (MPO) was measured as a marker of inflammation. STZ and HFD produced a marked decline in MWM performance of the animals, reflecting impairment of learning and memory. STZ/HFD treated mice exhibited a marked accentuation of AChE activity, TBARS and MPO levels along with a fall in GSH levels. Further, the stained micrographs of STZ/HFD treated mice indicated pathological changes, severe neutrophilic infiltration and amyloid deposition. Lansoprazole treatment significantly attenuated STZ and HFD -induced memory deficits, biochemical and histopathological alterations. It also prevented HFD-induced rise in the cholesterol level. Therefore, the findings demonstrate potential of lansoprazole in memory dysfunctions which may probably be attributed to its anti-cholinesterase, anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory effects. Moreover, both cholesterol-dependent as well as cholesterol-independent effects of lansoprazole appear to play a role. In addition study indicates the role of liver x receptors in dementia.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23936214 PMCID: PMC3729942 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070487
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Composition of High Fat Diet (HFD).
| Feed contents | Mass (g) | ||
| Powdered pellets diet | 365 | ||
| Lard | 310 | ||
| Casein | 250 | ||
| Cholestrol | 10 | ||
| Sodium cholate | 5 | ||
| DL-methionine | 3 | ||
| Yee-sac powder | 1 | ||
|
| 55 | ||
| Sodium chloride | 1 | ||
| Total | 1000 |
Composition of vitamins and mineral mixture per kg of HFD : vitamin A (120000 I.U), vitamin D3 (24000 I.U), vitamin B2 (48 mg), vitamin E (18 units), vitamin K (24 units), calcium pantothenate (60 mg), nicotinamide (240 mg), vitamin B12 (144 mg), calcium (18 g), magnesium (660 mg), iodine (24 mg), iron (180 mg), zinc (360 mg), copper (48 mg), cobalt (108 mg).
Sequence of training trials on Morris water-maze.
| Day 1 | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 |
| Day 2 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q1 |
| Day 3 | Q3 | Q4 | Q1 | Q2 |
| Day 4 | Q4 | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 |
Effect of various therapeutic interventions on Escape latency time Day 1 and Day 4 on Morris water maze (in seconds).
| Group | Treatment | day1 ELT (seconds) | day 4 ELT (seconds) |
| I | Control (untreated) | 83±2.3 | 38±2.8a |
| II | ACSF control | 85±3.2 | 35±3.5 |
| III | DMSO control | 82±2.5 | 35±2.4 |
| IV | Streptozotocin (STZ) | 107±2.3 | 84±3.2b |
| V | High Fat diet (HFD) | 108±2.4 | 85±2.7b |
| VI | Lansoprazole per se | 86±4.1 | 34±2.9 |
| VII | STZ+ Lansoprazole (Low dose) | 85±2.0 | 40±2.4c |
| VIII | STZ+ Lansoprazole (High dose) | 86±3.2 | 34±2.2c |
| IX | HFD+ Lansoprazole (Low dose) | 85±2.8 | 37±3.2d |
| X | HFD+ Lansoprazole (High dose) | 83±2.3 | 33±2.6d |
Each group (n = 10) represents mean±S.E.M. a = p<0.05 as compared to the day 1 ELT in control, b = p<0.05 as compared to the day 4 ELT, in control, c = p<0.05 as compared to the day 4 ELT, in STZ control, d = p<0.05 as compared to the day 4 ELT, in HFD control ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple range test.
Figure 2Effect of pharmacological interventions on Total time spent in the target quadrant in seconds (TSTQ) using Morris water maze test.
Each group (n = 10) represents mean±S.E.M. a = p<0.05 Vs time in other quadrants in control group, b = p<0.05 Vs time spent in target quadrant in control group, c = p<0.05 Vs time spent in target quadrant in STZ control group, d = p<0.05 Vs time spent in target quadrant in HFD control group. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple range test. LD = low dose, HD = high dose.
Effect of therapeutic interventions on various biochemical parameters.
| Group | Treatment | Brain AchE activity (µMof Ach hydrolysed/min/mgof protein) | Brain TBARS(nM/mg protein) | Brain GSH(µM/mg protein) | Brain MPO (U/mgof protein) | Serumcholesterol(mg/dl) |
| I | Control | 1.5±0.5 | 5.2±0.88 | 26.8±2.9 | 0.05±0.01 | 120±2.6 |
| II | ACSF control | 1.45±0.043 | 4.8±0.9 | 21.6±2.7 | 0.04±0.015 | 123±3.4 |
| III | DMSO control | 1.46±0.07 | 4.9±0.98 | 22.2±1.8 | 0.03±0.01 | 118±2.0 |
| IV | Streptozotocin (STZ) | 3.2±0.08 | 18.8±1.3 | 7.8±1.5 | 0.32±0.8 | 121±1.3 |
| V | High Fat diet (HFD) | 2.9±0.05 | 19.2±0.8 | 8.3±2.3 | 0.35±0.015 | 224±3.2 |
| VI | Lansoprazole per se | 1.5±0.07 | 5.7±1.4 | 25.2±1.8 | 0.05±0.02 | 119±1.8 |
| VII | STZ+ Lansoprazole(low dose) | 1.46±0.06 | 9.3±1.1 | 12.5±1.7 | 0.13±0.017 | 119±1.9 |
| VIII | STZ+ Lansoprazole(high dose) | 1.42±0.08 | 8.6±0.97 | 22.4±1.4 | 0.09±0.02 | 121±2.2 |
| IX | HFD+ Lansoprazole(low dose) | 1.43±0.06 | 10.9±1.3 | 14.3±1.6 | 0.08±0.01 | 137±1.8 |
| X | HFD+ Lansoprazole(high dose) | 1.40±0.05 | 8.2±2.1 | 18±1.8 | 0.06±0.02 | 125±2.1 |
Each group (n = 10) represents mean ±S.E.M.
= p<0.05 Vs control,
= p<0.05 Vs STZ control,
= p<0.05 Vs HFD control. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple range test.
Effect of therapeutic interventions on body weight of mice.
| Group | Treatment | Body weight (g) Basal value | Body weight (g) Final value |
| I | Control | 24.0±0.25 | 24.68±0.29 |
| II | ACSF control | 24.13±0.37 | 24.22±0.26 |
| III | DMSO control | 24.20±0.28 | 24.36±0.22 |
| IV | Streptozotocin (STZ) | 24.33±0.26 | 24.15±0.31 |
| V | High Fat diet (HFD) | 23.36±0.21 | 31.34±0.26 |
| VI | Lansoprazole per se | 23.92±0.41 | 24.10±0.39 |
| VII | STZ+ Lansoprazole (low dose) | 24.81±0.33 | 24.79±0.40 |
| VIII | STZ+ Lansoprazole (high dose) | 24.75±0.25 | 24.95±0.27 |
| IX | HFD+ Lansoprazole (low dose) | 24.19±0.21 | 27.3±0.50 |
| X | HFD+ Lansoprazole (high dose) | 24.27±0.26 | 28.2±0.29 |
Each group (n = 10) represents mean ± S.E.M.
= p<0.05 Vs body weight in control,
= p<0.05 Vs body weight in HFD treated group. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple range test.
Figure 3Microscopic study of mice brain.
Histological sections of brain were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and Congo red. Control (A) showing normal histological features. STZ-treated and HFD mice (B and C) showing focal as well as diffuse severe neutrophilic infiltration. Lansoprazole (20 mg/kg, 40 mg/kg) treated STZ mice (D and E) and Lansoprazole (20 mg/kg, 40 mg/kg) treated HFD mice (F and G) featuring mild neutrophilic infiltration and pericellular edema (A–G, HE staining, grossly ×400). Control (H) Congo red deposition was not detected. STZ-treated and HFD mice (I and J) showing orange-red deposits of Congo red. Lansoprazole (20 mg/kg, 40 mg/kg) treated STZ (K and L) and HFD mice (M and N) showing mild Congo red deposits (F–I, Congo red staining, grossly ×1000). Scale bar 35 µm.
Figure 4Effect of pharmacological interventions on neutrophil infiltration.
Each group (n = 10) represents mean±S.E.M. a = p<0.05 Vs control group, b = p<0.05 Vs STZ control group, c = p<0.05 Vs HFD control group. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple range test. Lan = Lansoprazole, LD = low dose, HD = high dose.
Figure 5Proposed mechanism for neuroprotective effect of lansoprazole.