| Title |
Targeting the D1-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor complex reduces L-dopa-induced dyskinesia in 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned Parkinson’s rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s93487 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lu Song, Zhanzhao Zhang, Rongguo Hu, Jie Cheng, Lin Li, Qinyi Fan, Na Wu, Jing Gan, Mingzhu Zhou, Zhenguo Liu |
| Abstract |
L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (l-dopa) remains the most effective therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD), but its long-term administration is associated with the development of debilitating motor complications known as l-dopa-induced dyskinesia (LID). Enhanced function of dopamine D1 receptor (D1R) and N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) is believed to participate in the pathogenesis of LID. Given the existence of physical and functional interactions between D1R and NMDAR, we explored the effects of uncoupling D1R and NMDA GluN1 (GluN1) interaction on LID by using the Tat-conjugated interfering peptide (Tat-D1-t2). In this study, we demonstrated in 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA)-lesioned PD rat model that intrastriatal injection of Tat-D1-t2 alleviated dyskinetic behaviors and downregulated the phosphorylation of DARPP-32 at Thr34 induced by levodopa. Moreover, we also showed intrastriatal administration of Tat-D1-t2 elicited alterations in membranous GluN1 and D1R expression. These findings indicate that D1R/GluN1 complexes may be a molecular target with therapeutic potential for the treatment of dyskinesia in Parkinson's patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 6 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,750,899
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#231
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,909
of 406,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#8
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 406,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.