Behavioural and neuroplastic effects of the new-generation antidepressant agomelatine compared to fluoxetine in glucocorticoid receptor-impaired mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Major depression is associated with reduced hippocampal volume linked to stress and high glucocorticoid secretion. Glucocorticoid receptor-impaired (GR-i) mice, a transgenic model for affective disorders with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis feedback control deficit, were used to assess the antidepressant-like effects of the mixed melatonin receptor agonist/5-HT(2C) receptor antagonist, agomelatine, compared to the selective 5-HT reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), fluoxetine, on hippocampal neurogenesis, GR and BDNF expression and antidepressant-responsive behaviour (tail suspension test, TST). GR-i and paired wild-type (WT) mice were given acute or chronic (21 d) treatment with these drugs. Both hippocampal cell proliferation and BDNF mRNA expression were down-regulated in GR-i mice, and these alterations were reversed by chronic agomelatine and fluoxetine treatments, whereas GR mRNA down-regulation was reversed only by agomelatine. Furthermore, chronic agomelatine, but not fluoxetine, increased survival of newly formed cells in the ventral part of the hippocampus without changing their phenotypic differentiation into neurons. In the TST, the enhanced immobility of GR-i mice was reduced to WT level by acute (but not chronic) fluoxetine and chronic (but not acute) agomelatine. These results indicate that agomelatine reversed the neuroplastic changes and helpless behaviour associated with HPA axis alterations in GR-i mice, suggesting neurobiological and behavioural effects mostly similar to those typically seen with classical antidepressants such as fluoxetine, but through clearly distinct mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".