Novel Neurovascular Protective Agents: Effects of INV-155, INV-157, INV-159, and INV-161 versus Lipoic Acid and Captopril in a Rat Stroke Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Lipoic acid (LA), which has significant antioxidant properties, may also function as a potent neuroprotectant. The synthetic compounds INV-155, INV-157, INV-159, and INV-161 are physiochemical combinations of lipoic acid and captopril. We sought to determine if these compounds have neuroprotective potential following middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) in rats. Methods. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were injected intravenously with captopril (1-50 mg/kg) 30 minutes prior to MCAO. Blood pressure, heart rate, baroreceptor reflex sensitivity, and infarct size were measured. In addition, dose response effect on infarct size and cardiovascular parameters was determined using INV-155, INV-157, INV-159, and INV-161 and compared to captopril and LA. Results. Pretreatment with captopril and LA at all doses tested was neuroprotective. The compounds INV-159 (0.5-10 mg/kg) and INV-161 (1-10 mg/kg) produced a significant,dose-dependent decrease in infarct size. In contrast, INV-155 and INV-157 had no effect on infarct size. Conclusions. Combined pretreatment with captopril potentiated the neuroprotective benefit observed following LA alone. Both INV-159 and INV-161 were also neuroprotective. These results suggest that patients taking combinations of captopril and LA, either as combination therapy or in the form of INV-159 or INV-161, may also benefit from significant protection against cerebral infarction.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it