Antiepileptogenic and antiictogenic effects of retigabine under conditions of rapid kindling: An ontogenic study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine antiepileptogenic and antiictogenic potential of retigabine (RTG) under conditions of rapid kindling epileptogenesis during different stages of development. METHODS: The experiments were performed in postnatal day 14 (P14), P21, and P35 male Wistar rats. After stereotaxic implantation of hippocampal stimulating and recording electrodes, the effects of RTG on baseline afterdischarge (AD) properties were studied. Next, the animals underwent rapid kindling (sixty 10 s trains, bipolar 20 Hz square wave pulses delivered every 5 min). The progression of seizures (kindling acquisition), and responses to test stimulations after kindling (retention) were compared between RTG and vehicle-treated rats. Additionally, the effects of RTG on the severity of seizures in previously kindled animals were examined. RESULTS: When administered intraperitoneally in doses that induced only mild, or no motor deficits, RTG significantly dampened brain excitability, evident as the increase of AD threshold and shortening of AD duration. During kindling, RTG delayed the development of focal seizures in P14 rats, and prevented the occurrence of full limbic seizures at all three ages. At P14 and P21, but not at P35, pretreatment with RTG prevented the establishment of kindling-induced enhanced seizure susceptibility. Administration of RTG to kindled animals decreased the severity of seizures induced by test stimulation. The effect was most prominent at P14. DISCUSSION: RTG exerted both antiepileptogenic and antiictogenic effects under conditions of rapid kindling model. These effects were apparent during postneonatal, early childhood, and adolescent stages of development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".