Effects of the DPP-4 inhibitor, linagliptin, in diet-induced obese rats: a comparison in naive and exenatide-treated animals.

BACKGROUND: To assess the chronic effect of the DPP-4 inhibitor, linagliptin, alone, in combination with exenatide, and during exenatide withdrawal, in diet-induced obese (DIO) rats. METHODS: Female Wistar rats were exposed to a cafeteria diet to induce obesity. Animals were then dosed with vehicle or linagliptin (3 mg/kg PO) orally once-daily for a 28 day period. In a subsequent study, rats received exenatide (either 3 or 30 microg/kg/day) or vehicle by osmotic mini-pump for 28 days. In addition, groups of animals were dosed orally with linagliptin either alone or in combination with a 3 microg/kg/day exenatide dose for the study duration. In a final study, rats were administered exenatide (30 microg/kg/day) or vehicle by osmotic mini-pump for eleven days. Subsequently, exenatide-treated animals were transferred to vehicle or continued exenatide infusion for a further ten days. Animals transferred from exenatide to vehicle were also dosed orally with either vehicle or linagliptin. In all studies, body weight, food and water intake were recorded daily and relevant plasma parameters and carcass composition were determined. RESULTS: In contrast to exenatide, linagliptin did not significantly reduce body weight or carcass fat in DIO rats versus controls. Linagliptin augmented the effect of exenatide to reduce body fat when given in combination but did not affect the body weight response. In rats withdrawn from exenatide, weight regain was observed such that body weight was not significantly different to controls. Linagliptin reduced weight regain after withdrawal of exenatide such that a significant difference from controls was evident. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that linagliptin does not significantly alter body weight in either untreated or exenatide-treated DIO rats, although it delays weight gain after exenatide withdrawal. This finding may suggest the utility of DPP-4 inhibitors in reducing body weight during periods of weight gain.

Novel, non-nitrocatechol catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors modulate dopamine neurotransmission in the frontal cortex and improve cognitive flexibility.

RATIONALE: Cognitive impairment is a primary feature of many neuropsychiatric disorders and there is a need for new therapeutic options. Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitors modulate cortical dopaminergic function and have been proposed as potential cognitive enhancers. Unfortunately, currently available COMT inhibitors are not good candidates due to either poor blood-brain barrier penetration or severe toxicity. OBJECTIVES: To address the need for safe, brain-penetrant COMT inhibitors, we tested multiple novel compounds in a set of preclinical in vivo efficacy assays in rats to determine their ability to inhibit COMT function and viability as potential clinical candidates. METHODS: We measured the change in concentration of dopamine (DA) metabolites in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from the cisterna magna and extracellular fluid (ECF) from the frontal cortex produced by our novel compounds. Additionally, we tested the effects of our brain-penetrant COMT inhibitors in an attentional set-shifting assay (ASST). We benchmarked the performance of the novel COMT inhibitors to the effects produced by the known COMT inhibitor tolcapone. RESULTS: We found that multiple COMT inhibitors, exemplified by LIBD-1 and LIBD-3, significantly modulated dopaminergic function measured as decreases in homovanillic acid (HVA) and increases in 3,4-Dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), two DA metabolites, in CSF and the frontal cortex. Additionally, we found that LIBD-1 significantly improved cognitive flexibility in the ASST, an effect previously reported following tolcapone administration. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that LIBD-1 is a novel COMT inhibitor with promising in vivo activity and the potential to serve as a new therapy for cognitive impairment.

The effects in rats of lisdexamfetamine in combination with olanzapine on mesocorticolimbic dopamine efflux, striatal dopamine D2 receptor occupancy and stimulus generalization to a D-amphetamine cue.

The etiology of schizophrenia is poorly understood and two principle hypotheses have dominated the field. Firstly, that subcortical dopamine function is enhanced while cortical dopamine function is reduced and secondly, that cortical glutamate systems are dysfunctional. It is also widely accepted that currently used antipsychotics have essentially no impact on cognitive deficits and persistent negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Reduced dopamine transmission via dopamine D1 receptors in the prefrontal cortex has been hypothesized to be involved in the aetiology of these symptom domains and enhancing cortical dopamine transmission within an optimal window has been suggested to be potentially beneficial. In these pre-clinical studies we have determined that combined administration of the d-amphetamine pro-drug, lisdexamfetamine and the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine increased dopamine efflux in the rat prefrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens to an extent greater than either drug given separately without affecting olanzapine's ability to block striatal dopamine D2 receptors which is important for its antipsychotic activity. Furthermore, in an established rodent model used to compare the subjective effects of novel compounds the ability of lisdexamfetamine to generalize to a d-amphetamine cue was dose-dependently attenuated when co-administered with olanzapine suggesting that lisdexamfetamine may produce less marked subjective effects when administered adjunctively with olanzapine.

Differences in the neurochemical and behavioural profiles of lisdexamfetamine methylphenidate and modafinil revealed by simultaneous dual-probe microdialysis and locomotor activity measurements in freely-moving rats.

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate is a novel prodrug approved in North America, Europe and Brazil for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It undergoes rate-limited hydrolysis by red blood cells to yield d-amphetamine. Following our previous work comparing lisdexamfetamine with d-amphetamine, the neurochemical and behavioural profiles of lisdexamfetamine, methylphenidate and modafinil were compared by dual-probe microdialysis in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and striatum of conscious rats with simultaneous locomotor activity measurement. We employed pharmacologically equivalent doses of all compounds and those that spanned the therapeutically relevant and psychostimulant range. Lisdexamfetamine (0.5, 1.5, 4.5 mg/kg d-amphetamine base, per os (po)), methylphenidate (3, 10, 30 mg/kg base, po) and modafinil (100, 300, 600 mg/kg base, po) increased efflux of dopamine and noradrenaline in PFC, and dopamine in striatum. Only lisdexamfetamine increased 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) efflux in PFC and striatum. Lisdexamfetamine had larger and more sustained effects on catecholaminergic neurotransmission than methylphenidate or modafinil. Linear correlations were observed between striatal dopamine efflux and locomotor activity for lisdexamfetamine and methylphenidate, but not modafinil. Regression slopes revealed greater increases in extracellular dopamine could be elicited without producing locomotor activation by lisdexamfetamine than methylphenidate. These results are consistent with clinical findings showing that lisdexamfetamine is an effective ADHD medication with prolonged duration of action and good separation between its therapeutic actions and stimulant side-effects.