Ramipril mitigates radiation-induced impairment of neurogenesis in the rat dentate gyrus

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Sublethal doses of whole brain irradiation (WBI) are commonly administered therapeutically and frequently result in late delayed radiation injuries, manifesting as severe and irreversible cognitive impairment. Neural progenitors within the subgranular zone (SGZ) of the dentate gyrus are among the most radiosensitive cell types in the adult brain and are known to participate in hippocampal plasticity and normal cognitive function. These progenitors and the specialized SZG microenvironment required for neuronal differentiation are the source of neurogenic potential in the adult dentate gyrus, and provide a continuous supply of immature neurons which may then migrate into the adjacent granule cell layer to become mature granule cell neurons. The extreme radiosensitivity of these progenitors and the SGZ microenvironment suggests the hippocampus as a prime target for radiation-induced cognitive impairment. The brain renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has previously been implicated as a potent modulator of neurogenesis within the SGZ and selective RAS inhibitors have been implicated as mitigators of radiation brain injury. Here we investigate the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor, ramipril, as a mitigator of radiation injury in this context.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Adult male Fisher 344 rats received WBI at doses of 10 Gy and 15 Gy. Ramipril was administered beginning 24 hours post-WBI and maintained continuously for 12 weeks.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ramipril produced small but significant reductions in the deleterious effects of radiation on progenitor proliferation and neuronal differentiation in the rat dentate gyrus following 10 Gy-WBI, but was not effective following 15 Gy-WBI. Ramipril also reduced the basal rate of neurogenesis within the SGZ in unirradiated control rats.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results indicate that chronic ACE inhibition with ramipril, initiated 24 hours post-irradiation, may reduce apoptosis among SGZ progenitors and/or inflammatory disruption of neurogenic signaling within SGZ microenvironment, and suggest that angiotensin II may participate in maintaining the basal rate of granule cell neurogenesis.</p

Cognitive Dysfunction in Huntington's Disease: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Strategies Beyond BDNF

One of the main focuses in Huntington's disease (HD) research, as well as in most of the neurodegenerative diseases, is the development of new therapeutic strategies, as currently there is no treatment to delay or prevent the progression of the disease. Neuronal dysfunction and neuronal death in HD are caused by a combination of interrelated pathogenic processes that lead to motor, cognitive and psychiatric symptoms. Understanding how mutant huntingtin impacts on a plethora of cellular functions could help to identify new molecular targets. Although HD has been classically classified as a neurodegenerative disease affecting voluntary movement, lately cognitive dysfunction is receiving increased attention as it is very invalidating for patients. Thus, an ambitious goal in HD research is to find altered molecular mechanisms that contribute to cognitive decline. In this review we have focused on those findings related to corticostriatal and hippocampal cognitive dysfunction in HD, as well as on the underlying molecular mechanisms, which constitute potential therapeutic targets. These include alterations in synaptic plasticity, transcriptional machinery, and neurotrophic and neurotransmitter signaling. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease

The recommendations listed in this document are, whenever possible, evidence based. An extensive evidence review was conducted as the document was compiled through December 2008. Repeated literature searches were performed by the guideline development staff and writing committee members as new issues were considered. New clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals and articles through December 2011 were also reviewed and incorporated when relevant. Furthermore, because of the extended development time period for this guideline, peer review comments indicated that the sections focused on imaging technologies required additional updating, which occurred during 2011. Therefore, the evidence review for the imaging sections includes published literature through December 2011