Neuroprotection by adenosine in the brain: From A1 receptor activation to A2A receptor blockade

Adenosine is a neuromodulator that operates via the most abundant inhibitory adenosine A1 receptors (A1Rs) and the less abundant, but widespread, facilitatory A2ARs. It is commonly assumed that A1Rs play a key role in neuroprotection since they decrease glutamate release and hyperpolarize neurons. In fact, A1R activation at the onset of neuronal injury attenuates brain damage, whereas its blockade exacerbates damage in adult animals. However, there is a down-regulation of central A1Rs in chronic noxious situations. In contrast, A2ARs are up-regulated in noxious brain conditions and their blockade confers robust brain neuroprotection in adult animals. The brain neuroprotective effect of A2AR antagonists is maintained in chronic noxious brain conditions without observable peripheral effects, thus justifying the interest of A2AR antagonists as novel protective agents in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, ischemic brain damage and epilepsy. The greater interest of A2AR blockade compared to A1R activation does not mean that A1R activation is irrelevant for a neuroprotective strategy. In fact, it is proposed that coupling A2AR antagonists with strategies aimed at bursting the levels of extracellular adenosine (by inhibiting adenosine kinase) to activate A1Rs might constitute the more robust brain neuroprotective strategy based on the adenosine neuromodulatory system. This strategy should be useful in adult animals and especially in the elderly (where brain pathologies are prevalent) but is not valid for fetus or newborns where the impact of adenosine receptors on brain damage is different

Institutions and contracts: Franchising

Franchising, Institutions, Contracts, Legal systems,

Handedness in bipolar disorders is associated with specific neurodevelopmental features: results of the BD-FACE cohort

International audienceObjectives: High rates of non-right-handedness (NRH) and mixed-handedness exist in neurodevelopmental disorders. Dysfunctional neurodevelopmental pathways may be implicated in the underlying pathophysiology of bipolar disorders (BD), at least in some subgroups. Yet little is known about correlates of NRH and mixed-handedness in BD. The objectives of this national study are to determine (i) the prevalence of NRH and mixed-handedness in a well-stabilized sample of BD individuals; (ii) if NRH/mixed-handedness in BD is associated with a different clinical, biological and neurocognitive profile.Methods: We included 2174 stabilized individuals. Participants were tested with a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests. Handedness was assessed using a single oral question. Learning and/or language disorders and obstetrical complications were recorded using childhood records. Common environmental, clinical and biological parameters were assessed.Results: The prevalence of NRH and mixed-handedness were, respectively, 11.6 and 2.4%. Learning/language disorders were found in 9.7% out of the total sample and were associated with atypical handedness (only dyslexia for mixed-handedness (p < 0.01), and dyslexia and dysphasia for NRH (p = 0.01 and p = 0.04, respectively). In multivariate analyses, NRH was associated with a younger age of BD onset (aOR 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-0.99) and lifetime substance use disorder (aOR 1.40 (95% CI 1.03-1.82) but not with any of the cognitive subtasks. Mixed-handedness was associated in univariate analyses with lifetime substance use disorder, lifetime cannabis use disorder (all p < 0.01) and less mood stabilizer prescription (p = 0.028). No association was found between NRH or mixed-handedness and the following parameters: trauma history, obstetrical complications, prior psychotic symptoms, bipolar subtype, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, peripheral inflammation or body mass index.Conclusions: Handedness may be associated with specific features in BD, possibly reflecting a specific subgroup with a neurodevelopmental load

Comparative analysis of anticholinergic burden scales to explain iatrogenic cognitive impairment and self-reported side effects in the euthymic phase of bipolar disorders: Results from the FACE-BD cohort

Bipolar disorders (BD) are characterized by cognitive impairment during the euthymic phase, to which treatments can contribute. The anticholinergic properties of medications, i.e., the ability of a treatment to inhibit cholinergic receptors, are associated with cognitive impairment in elderly patients and people with schizophrenia but this association has not been well characterized in individuals with remitted BD. Moreover, the validity of only one anticholinergic burden scale designed to assess the anticholinergic load of medications has been tested in BD. In a literature review, we identified 31 existing scales. We first measured the associations between 27 out of the 31 scales and objective cognitive impairment in bivariable regressions. We then adjusted the bivariable models with covariates: the scales significantly associated with cognitive impairment in bivariable and multiple logistic regressions were defined as having good concurrent validity to assess cognitive impairment. In a sample of 2,031 individuals with euthymic BD evaluated with a neuropsychological battery, two scales had good concurrent validity to assess cognitive impairment, whereas chlorpromazine equivalents, lorazepam equivalents, the number of antipsychotics, or the number of treatments had not. Finally, similar analyses with subjective anticholinergic side-effects as outcome variables reported 14 scales with good concurrent validity to assess self-reported peripheral anticholinergic side-effects and 13 to assess self-reported central anticholinergic side-effects. Thus, we identified valid scales to monitor the anticholinergic burden in BD, which may be useful in estimating iatrogenic cognitive impairment in studies investigating cognition in BD