SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Development of PPARγ Agonists for the Treatment of Neuroinflammatory and Neurodegenerative Diseases: Leriglitazone as a Promising Candidate.

Int J Mol Sci · 2023-02-06

DOI: 10.3390/ijms24043201PMID: 36834611

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Increasing evidence suggests that the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ), a member of the nuclear receptor superfamily, plays an important role in physiological processes in the central nervous system (CNS) and is involved in cellular metabolism and repair. Cellular damage caused by acute brain injury and long-term neurodegenerative disorders is associated with alterations of these metabolic processes leading to mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, and neuroinflammation. PPARγ agonists have demonstrated the potential to be effective treatments for CNS diseases in preclinical models, but to date, most drugs have failed to show efficacy in clinical trials of neurodegenerative diseases including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, and Alzheimer's disease. The most likely explanation for this lack of efficacy is the insufficient brain exposure of these PPARγ agonists. Leriglitazone is a novel, blood-brain barrier (BBB)-penetrant PPARγ agonist that is being developed to treat CNS diseases. Here, we review the main roles of PPARγ in physiology and pathophysiology in the CNS, describe the mechanism of action of PPARγ agonists, and discuss the evidence supporting the use of leriglitazone to treat CNS diseases.

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.