Effects of lithium and valproate on amphetamineinduced oxidative stress generation in an animal model of mania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have suggested that oxidative stress may play a role in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder (BD). Moreover, recent studies indicate that lithium and valproate exert neuroprotective effects against oxidative stress. We studied the effects of the mood stabilizers lithium and valproate on amphetamine-induced oxidative stress in an animal model of mania. METHODS: In the first model (reversal treatment), adult male Wistar rats received d-amphetamine or saline for 14 days, and between the 8th and 14th days, they were treated with lithium, valproate or saline. In the second model (prevention treatment), rats were pretreated with lithium, valproate or saline, and between the 8th and 14th days, they received d-amphetamine or saline. We assessed locomotor activity with the open-field task. We measured thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and protein carbonyl formation, as parameters of oxidative stress, and superoxide dismutase (SOD) and catalase (CAT), the major antioxidant enzymes, in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. RESULTS: Lithium and valproate reversed (reversal treatment model) and prevented (prevention treatment model) amphetamine-induced hyperactivity and reversed and prevented amphetamine-induced TBARS formation in both experiments. However, the co-administration of lithium or valproate with amphetamine increased lipid peroxidation, depending on the brain region and treatment regimen. No changes in protein carbonyl formation were observed. SOD activity varied with different treatment regimens, and CAT activity increased when the index of lipid peroxidation was more robust. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that lithium and valproate exert protective effects against amphetamine-induced oxidative stress in vivo, further supporting the hypothesis that oxidative stress may be associated with the pathophysiology of BD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".