4.7 Article

Caffeinol at the Receptor Level Anti-Ischemic Effect of N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Blockade Is Potentiated by Caffeine

Journal

STROKE
Volume 41, Issue 2, Pages 363-367

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.562900

Keywords

neuroprotection; excitotoxicity; NMDA antagonist; magnesium; ethanol; caffeine

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [1R01NS040974]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose-Although caffeinol (a combination of a low dose of caffeine and ethanol) was shown to robustly reduce stroke damage in experimental models and is now in clinical evaluation for treatment of ischemic stroke, little is known about the potential mechanism of its action. Methods-We used an in vivo excitotoxicity model based on intracortical infusion of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) and a model of reversible focal ischemia to demonstrate NMDA receptor inhibition as a potential mechanism of caffeinol anti-ischemic activity. Results-Caffeinol reduced the size of excitotoxic lesion, and substitution of ethanol in caffeinol with the NMDA antagonists CNS-1102 and MK-801 but not with MgSO4 produced treatment with strong synergistic effect that was at least as robust in reducing ischemic damage as caffeinol. This NMDA receptor antagonist and caffeine combination demonstrated a long window of opportunity, activity in spontaneously hypertensive rats, and, unlike caffeinol, was fully effective in animals chronically pretreated with ethanol. Conclusions-Our study suggests that antiexcitotoxic properties may underlie some of the anti-ischemic effect of caffeinol. This study provides strong evidence that the anti-ischemic effect of NMDA receptor blockers in general can be dramatically augmented by caffeine, thus opening a possibility for new use of NMDA-based pharmacology in the treatment of stroke. (Stroke. 2010; 41: 363-367.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available