Cited by 22Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorTreatment of Major DepressionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Memantine improves memory impairment and depressive-like behavior induced by amphetamine withdrawal in rats

Marszalek-Grabska, M., Gibula-Bruzda, E., Jenda, M., Gawel, K., Kotlinska, J.H.·2016·Brain Research

Abstract

Amphetamine (AMPH) induces deficits in cognition, and depressive-like behavior following withdrawal. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether pre-treatment with memantine (5mg/kg, i.p.), a noncompetitive N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, attenuates memory impairment induced by withdrawal from a 1 day binge regimen of AMPH (2mg/kg, four times every 2h, i.p.), in the novel object recognition test in rats. Herein, the influence of scopolamine (0.1mg/kg), an antagonist of the muscarinic cholinergic receptors, and the impact of MK-801 (0.1mg/kg), an antagonist of the NMDA receptors, on the memantine effect, were ascertained. Furthermore, the impact of memantine (5; 10; 20mg/kg, i.p.) was measured on depression-like effects of abstinence, 14 days after the last AMPH treatment (2mg/kg×1×14 days), in the forced swim test. In this test, the efficacy of memantine was compared to that of tricyclic antidepressant imipramine (10; 20; 30mg/kg, i.p.). Our study indicated that withdrawal from a binge regimen of AMPH impaired recognition memory. This effect was attenuated by administration of memantine at both 72h and 7 days of withdrawal. Moreover, prior administration of scopolamine, but not MK-801, decreased the memantine-induced recognition memory improvement. In addition, memantine reversed the AMPH-induced depressive-like behavior in the forced swim test in rats. The antidepressant-like effects of memantine were stronger than those of imipramine. Our study…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brainres.2016.04.026

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marszalek-Grabska, M., Gibula-Bruzda, E., Jenda, M., Gawel, K., & Kotlinska, J. H.
Affiliations
Medical University of Lublin (PL)
Corresponding author
Kotlinska, J.H.
Venue
Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
1642
Pages
389-396
ISSN
0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2338117572
Cited by
22
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Statutory Funds of the Medical University of Lublin (DS 22/15)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
memantine, amphetamine withdrawal, memory impairment, depression-like behavior, NMDA receptor antagonists, recognition memory, scopolamine, MK-801, imipramine, antidepressant-like effects, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Amphetamine, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Animals, Antidepressive Agents, Depression, Disease Models, Animal, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Imipramine, Male, Memantine, Memory Disorders, Scopolamine, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate, Dizocilpine Maleate, Rats, Wistar, Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists, Nootropic Agents, Muscarinic Antagonists, Amphetamine-Related Disorders, Recognition, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review