Beneficial synergistic effects of concurrent treatment with theanine and caffeine against cerebral ischemia–reperfusion injury in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theanine and caffeine, 2 naturally occurring components in tea, have repeatedly been shown to deliver unique cognitive benefits when consumed in combination. In this study, we assessed the beneficial synergistic effects of concurrent treatment with theanine and caffeine against cerebral damage in rats. Theanine and caffeine had no effect on physiological variables, including pH, partial pressures of oxygen (PaO2) and carbon dioxide (PaCO2), mean arterial blood pressure, plasma glucose, or regional cerebral blood flow. Treatment with theanine (1 mg/kg body mass, intraperitoneal injection) alone significantly reduced cerebral infarction induced by cerebral ischemia-reperfusion, but caffeine (10 mg/kg, intravenous administration) alone only had a marginal effect. However, the combination of theanine plus caffeine resulted in a significant reduction of cerebral infarction and brain edema compared with theanine monotherapy. Meanwhile, increased malondialdehyde levels as well as decreased superoxide dismutase activity, glutathione peroxidase activity, and glutathione levels observed in the cerebral cortex after cerebral ischemia-reperfusion were significantly ameliorated by the combination therapy. Furthermore, the elevated inflammatory response levels observed in the cortex after cerebral ischemia-reperfusion were markedly attenuated by the combined treatment. Thus, it is suggested that the neuroprotective potential of a combination therapy with theanine and caffeine against cerebral ischemia-reperfusion is partly ascribed to their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".