SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Antidyskinetic Treatment with MTEP Affects Multiple Molecular Pathways in the Parkinsonian Striatum.

Parkinsons Dis · 2017-10-30

DOI: 10.1155/2017/5798734PMID: 29209553

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Parkinson's disease is characterized by dopaminergic neuron loss and dopamine (DA) depletion in the striatum. Standard treatment is still focused on the restoration of dopamine with exogenous L-Dopa, which however causes L-Dopa-induced dyskinesia (LID). Several studies have shown that antagonism of the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 alleviates LID, but the underlying mechanisms have remained unclear. We set out to determine where this alleviation may depend on restoring the equilibrium between the two main striatofugal pathways. For this purpose, we examined molecular markers of direct and indirect pathway involvement (prodynorphin and proenkephalin, resp.) in a rat model of LID treated with the mGluR5 antagonist MTEP. Our results show that MTEP cotreatment significantly attenuates the upregulation of prodynorphin mRNA induced by L-Dopa while also decreasing the expression levels of proenkephalin mRNA. We also examined markers of the mGluR5-related PKC/MEK/ERK1/2 signaling pathway, finding that both the expression of PKC epsilon and the phosphorylation of MEK and ERK1/2 had decreased significantly in the MTEP-treated group. Taken together, our results show that pharmacological antagonism of mGluR5 normalizes several abnormal molecular responses in the striatum in this experimental model of LID.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.