0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Differential Protective Properties of Estradiol and Tamoxifen against Methamphetamine-Induced Nigrostriatal Dopaminergic Toxicity in Mice

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Mechanisms implicated in protective potential of estrogens are poorly understood. Tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), presents a neuroprotective effect against methamphetamine (MA)- and methoxy-phenyltetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-induced toxicity when used alone but abolishes estrogen’s positive effects when combined with this hormone. In order to understand tamoxifen’s protective properties, the present study compared it to estradiol on several markers of dopaminergic neurons to achieve a relatively comprehensive comparison between these two agents. Estradiol benzoate (E) or tamoxifen were used at different concentrations (E: 1, 10 or 40 µg; tamoxifen: 12.5, 125 or 500 µg) 24 h prior to a MA injection in ovariectomized CD-1 mice. The effects of the lesion and treatments were studied on striatal dopamine (DA) concentrations, dopamine and monoamine vesicular transporters (DAT and VMAT2), and preproenkephalin (PPE) mRNA levels. Both treatments, at all concentrations, prevented the MA-induced decrease of striatal DA concentrations and VMAT2 binding. Only E was able to prevent loss of DAT binding in the lateral striatum and to attenuate the MA-induced increase in striatal PPE mRNA levels (at 1 or 40 µg). Therefore, in this paradigm, E and tamoxifen differentially modulated MA-induced neuronal damages. While both treatments prevented the DA decrease, E protected more efficiently other dopaminergic parameters suggesting that overall E is more effective than tamoxifen as a neuroprotectant of the nigrostriatal dopaminergic system.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Coregulator function: a key to understanding tissue specificity of selective receptor modulators.

          Ligands for the nuclear receptor superfamily control many aspects of biology, including development, reproduction, and homeostasis, through regulation of the transcriptional activity of their cognate receptors. Selective receptor modulators (SRMs) are receptor ligands that exhibit agonistic or antagonistic biocharacter in a cell- and tissue context-dependent manner. The prototypical SRM is tamoxifen, which as a selective estrogen receptor modulator, can activate or inhibit estrogen receptor action. SRM-induced alterations in the conformation of the ligand-binding domains of nuclear receptors influence their abilities to interact with other proteins, such as coactivators and corepressors. It has been postulated, therefore, that the relative balance of coactivator and corepressor expression within a given target cell determines the relative agonist vs. antagonist activity of SRMs. However, recent evidence reveals that the cellular environment also plays a critical role in determining SRM biocharacter. Cellular signaling influences the activity and subcellular localization of coactivators and corepressors as well as nuclear receptors, and this contributes to gene-, cell-, and tissue-specific responses to SRM ligands. Increased understanding of the effect of cellular environment on nuclear receptors and their coregulators has the potential to open the field of SRM discovery and research to many members of the nuclear receptor superfamily.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Differential Ligand Activation of Estrogen Receptors ER and ER at AP1 Sites

             K Paech (1997)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of estrogen plus progestin on global cognitive function in postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study: a randomized controlled trial.

               S Rapp,  Jon Lane,  R Brunner (2003)
              Observational studies have suggested that postmenopausal hormone treatment may improve cognitive function, but data from randomized clinical trials have been sparse and inconclusive. The Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) is an ancillary study of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) hormone therapy trials. On July 8, 2002, the estrogen plus progestin therapy in the WHI trial was discontinued because of certain increased health risks for women. To determine whether estrogen plus progestin therapy protects global cognitive function in older postmenopausal women. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, WHIMS is an ancillary study of geographically diverse, community-dwelling women aged 65 years or older from 39 of 40 clinical centers within the WHI estrogen plus progestin trial that started in June 1995. Of 4894 eligible postmenopausal women aged 65 years or older and free of probable dementia at baseline, 4532 (92.6%) were enrolled in the estrogen plus progestin component of WHIMS. A total of 4381 participants (96.7%) provided at least 1 valid cognitive function score between June 1995 and July 8, 2002. Participants received either 1 daily tablet containing 0.625 mg of conjugated equine estrogen with 2.5 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate (n = 2145) or matching placebo (n = 2236). Global cognitive function measured annually with the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. The Modified Mini-Mental State Examination mean total scores in both groups increased slightly over time (mean follow-up of 4.2 years). Women in the estrogen plus progestin group had smaller average increases in total scores compared with women receiving placebo (P =.03), but these differences were not clinically important. Removing women by censoring them after adjudicated dementia, mild cognitive impairment, or stroke, and nonadherence to study protocol, did not alter the findings. Prior hormone therapy use and duration of prior use did not affect the interpretation of the results, nor did timing of prior hormone therapy initiation with respect to the final menstrual period. More women in the estrogen plus progestin group had a substantial and clinically important decline (> or =2 SDs) in Modified Mini-Mental State Examination total score (6.7%) compared with the placebo group (4.8%) (P =.008). Among postmenopausal women aged 65 years or older, estrogen plus progestin did not improve cognitive function when compared with placebo. While most women receiving estrogen plus progestin did not experience clinically relevant adverse effects on cognition compared with placebo, a small increased risk of clinically meaningful cognitive decline occurred in the estrogen plus progestin group.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                NEN
                Neuroendocrinology
                10.1159/issn.0028-3835
                Neuroendocrinology
                S. Karger AG
                0028-3835
                1423-0194
                2005
                February 2006
                22 February 2006
                : 82
                : 2
                : 111-120
                Affiliations
                aMolecular Endocrinology and Oncology Research Center, Laval University Medical Center, CHUL, and Faculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada, and bDepartment of Anatomy, Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine (NEOUCOM), Rootstown, Ohio, USA
                Article
                91206 Neuroendocrinology 2005;82:111–120
                10.1159/000091206
                16446547
                © 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 5, References: 52, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Comments

                Comment on this article