↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacological Treatments Inhibiting Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesias in MPTP-Lesioned Monkeys: Brain Glutamate Biochemical Correlates

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pharmacological Treatments Inhibiting Levodopa-Induced Dyskinesias in MPTP-Lesioned Monkeys: Brain Glutamate Biochemical Correlates
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00144
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolas Morin, Thérèse Di Paolo

Abstract

Anti-glutamatergic drugs can relieve Parkinson's disease (PD) symptoms and decrease l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (l-DOPA)-induced dyskinesias (LID). This review reports relevant studies investigating glutamate receptor subtypes in relation to motor complications in PD patients and 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-lesioned monkeys. Antagonists of the ionotropic glutamate receptors, such as N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) and α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors, display antidyskinetic activity in PD patients and animal models such as the MPTP monkey. Metabotropic glutamate 5 (mGlu5) receptor antagonists were shown to reduce the severity of LID in PD patients as well as in already dyskinetic non-human primates and to prevent the development of LID in de novo treatments in non-human primates. An increase in striatal post-synaptic NMDA, AMPA, and mGlu5 receptors is documented in PD patients and MPTP monkeys with LID. This increase can be prevented in MPTP monkeys with the addition of a specific glutamate receptor antagonist to the l-DOPA treatment and also with drugs of various pharmacological specificities suggesting multiple receptor interactions. This is yet to be well documented for presynaptic mGlu4 and mGlu2/3 and offers additional new promising avenues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Italy 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 31 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Neuroscience 5 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 10 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 August 2014.
All research outputs
#20,233,547
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,668
of 11,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,601
of 230,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#50
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.