Abstract P746: Sex Differences in Cognitive and Psychological Outcomes of Stroke: Impact of Diabetes

Abstract

Diabetes increases risk and severity of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI), a major cause of disability worldwide. While it is known that females suffer more from PSCI, psychological outcomes and underlying reasons are poorly understood. From a preclinical perspective, potential explanations include 1) use of otherwise healthy animals in experimental stroke research without integration of common comorbid diseases like diabetes into the study design, and 2) optimization of most behavioral tests for sensorimotor and cognitive functions using only male animal models. Our hypothesis is that post-stroke outcomes are sex and comorbid disease-dependent. To test this, we validated the Novel Object Recognition (NOR), Y-maze, and Passive Avoidance (PAT) behavioral paradigms in Ctrl and Diabetic (DM) male (M) and female (F) rats pre- and post-stroke (S) via 60 min. middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO). We tested the PAT paradigm with a multi-trial method where the animals were habituated to the dark/light chambers without foot shock and then trained in 3 trials where they received foot shock upon entering the dark. We then tested retention following MCAO for their memory of foot shock 2 weeks prior. Multitrial results suggested that there was no difference between groups in learning to associate the dark chamber with the shock, so we revised the multitrial method into a single-trial method for ongoing retention tests to compare the impact of stroke on shock memory recall. PAT revealed (Table 1) disease- and sex-dependent responses to aversive stimulus. NOR revealed that M-DM-S and F-DM-S rats have decreased exploration time, suggesting that they are unmotivated or depressed. Y-maze indicated that males displayed spatial memory recovery, while females remained impaired. In summary, we have observed numerous sex- and disease-dependent post-stroke outcomes with standard behavioral paradigms, causing us to carefully consider how we evaluate preclinical outcomes.