Protective effects of Auranofin on the 6-hydroxydopamine model of Parkinson's disease in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auranofin (AU) presents anti-inflammatory effects and was shown to have a neuroprotective action. The objectives were to investigate the actions of AU in the 6-OHDA model of Parkinson’s disease (PD). Methods: Male Wistar rats were distributed into sham-operated (SO, control), untreated 6-OHDA lesioned and 6-OHDA lesioned, and treated with AU (3 and 10 mg/kg, p.o. for 2 weeks) groups. Then, animals were euthanized, the striatum dissected and processed for measurements of dopamine (DA) and its metabolite, 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), as well as immunohistochemical assays for inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and the Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2). The influence of AU on the activation of the brain NrF2 was also pursued by molecular docking experiments. Results: While the 6-OHDA lesioned rats presented a decrease in the striatal DA and DOPAC concentrations, these effects were prevented after AU treatment. The 6-OHDA group showed increased expressions of iNOS and COX-2 and these effects were highly prevented by AU. While Nrf2 expression was significantly decreased in the 6-OHDA lesioned animals, values came back to those close to the SO group after AU treatment. Auranofin may bind to the Kelch domain of the Kelch-like ECH-associated Protein 1 (Keap1) and possibly inhibit Keap1/Nrf2 interaction. Significance: AU by decreasing iNOS and COX-2 expressions and by increasing the expression of Nrf2, emerge as a potential neuroprotective drug for the treatment of PD.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".