کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
2013977 | 1067138 | 2008 | 18 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

The promise of subtype-selective GABAA receptor drugs with anxiolytic properties but with a much reduced side-effect burden (compared to benzodiazepines) is an attainable goal. However, its achievement necessitates the availability of in vivo preclinical assays capable of demonstrating differences as well as similarities between subtype-selective agents and non-selective benzodiazepines. In this study, we have compared three mouse strains (NMRI, C57BL/6J and DBA/2) in four models of anxiety-like behaviour (plus-maze, zero-maze, light–dark, and Vogel conflict). Furthermore, in each model, we have contrasted in detail the behavioural responses of each strain to the non-selective benzodiazepine chlordiazepoxide (CDP; 5–20 mg/kg), and the subtype-selective agents L-838,417 (GABAA-α2/3/5; 3–30 mg/kg) and zolpidem (GABAA-α1; 0.3–3.0 mg/kg). The data show a complex mouse strain × model × pharmacological agent interaction. Most importantly, not all mouse strain × model test systems showed a positive response to CDP or predicted the response to L-838,417. This dissociation between CDP and L-838,417 opens up opportunities for preclinical test systems that differentiate subtype-selective and non-selective GABAA receptor agents, an attribute that might well be important in providing the necessary confidence for further drug development. Present findings suggest the need for a much greater focus on defining test systems appropriate for screening novel chemical entities, rather than self-selection of models or genotypes based on responses to known pharmacological agents. For example, if current data with L-838,417 are confirmed with compounds showing similar selectivity profiles, such agents may in future be best identified and characterised using test systems comprising NMRI mice in the zero-maze and/or C57 mice in the Vogel conflict and/or light–dark tests.
Journal: Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior - Volume 90, Issue 1, July 2008, Pages 19–36