ArticlePsychopharmacology2015
Distinct pro-vigilant profile induced in rats by the mGluR5 potentiator LSN2814617.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Amphetamine improves mouse and human attention in the 5-choice continuous performance test.Neuropharmacology · 2018Trial
- Sleep Disruption Impairs Sustained Attention in Food-Restricted Rats Using a Food-Reinforced Rodent Psychomotor Vigilance Test.Nature and science of sleep · 2024Article
- Article
- Alterations in sleep, sleep spindle, and EEG power in mGluR5 knockout mice.Journal of neurophysiology · 2020Article
- Homer1a and mGluR1/5 Signaling in Homeostatic Sleep Drive and Output.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2019Review
- Discovery and Preclinical Evaluation of BMS-955829, a Potent Positive Allosteric Modulator of mGluR5.ACS medicinal chemistry letters · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While treatment options are available, excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) remains a significant unmet medical need for many patients. Relatively little rodent behavioural pharmacology has been conducted in this context to assess potential pro-vigilant compounds for their ability to restore functional capacity following experimentally induced sleep loss. Male Wistar rats were prepared for electroencephalographic (EEG) recording and subject to 11 h of sleep restriction using a biofeedback-induced cage rotation protocol. A simple response latency task (SRLT) was used to behaviourally index sleep restriction and the effects of pro-vigilant compounds: modafinil, D-amphetamine, caffeine, and the mGlu5-positive allosteric modulator LSN2814617. Sleep restriction resulted in a consistent, quantified loss of non-rapid eye movement (NREM) and REM sleep that impaired SRLT performance in a manner suggestive of progressive task disengagement. In terms of EEG parameters, all compounds induced wakefulness. Amphetamine treatment further decreased SRLT performance capacity, whereas the other three compounds decreased omissions and allowed animals to re-engage in the task. Caffeine and modafinil also significantly increased premature responses during this period, an effect not observed for LSN2814617. While all compounds caused compensatory sleep responses, the magnitude of compensation observed for LSN2814617 was much smaller than would be predicted to result from the prolongation of wakefulness exhibited. Using simple response latencies to index performance, an mGlu5 PAM dramatically increased wakefulness and improved functional capacity of sleep-restricted animals, without eliciting a proportionate compensatory sleep response. This effect was qualitatively distinct from that of amphetamine, caffeine and modafinil.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.