Effects of D-cycloserine and Aniracetam on Spatial Learning in Rats with Entorhinal Cortex Lesions

Abstract

A great body of behavioural and neurophysiological evidence suggests that excitatory amino acids are involved in mechanisms of learning and memory. Moreover, degeneration of glutamatergic pathways may underlie the cognitive deficits seen in various disorders such as Alzheimer's dementia. As direct stimulation of glutamatergic receptors with agonists may increase the risk of toxicity and accelerate neuropathological changes, a more valid approach seems to be positive modulation of glutamatergic receptors that may reverse the symptoms with a lower risk of excitotoxic effects. Such a possibility offered by partial agonists of the strychnine-insensitive glycine site of the NMDA receptor (Gly-B site) or positive modulators of AMPA receptors, such as aniracetam. In the present study, the effects of d-cycloserine and aniracetam were tested in two animal models of cognitive deficits (entorhinal cortex lesion-induced deficits evaluated in the radial maze and scopolamine-induced amnesia evaluated in passive avoidance test). D-cycloserine (6 mg/kg, for 10 days) had no effect on spatial working memory deficit induced by entorhinal cortex lesions. It did, however, reverse scopolamine-induced deficits in the passive avoidance test when given acutely at the same dose. In contrast, aniracetam (50 mg/kg, for 10 days) produced beneficial effects in the radial maze test in rats with entorhinal cortex lesions, but given at the same dose acutely did not influence scopolamine-induced amnesia. The positive effect of d-cycloserine against scopolamine-induced amnesia may be probably related to the cholinergic-glutamatergic interaction in the hippocampus. The negative data obtained with d-cycloserine in the model of entorhinal cortex lesions-induced cognitive deficits could be taken as a hint that it is probably not suitable for the symptomatological therapy of Alzheimer's disease. The mechanism of positive action of aniracetam cannot be explained on the basis of AMPA receptor modulation, as the dose used (50 mg/kg) is well below that required for the effect at AMPA receptors. Other actions such as peripheral effects or modulation of metabotropic receptors seem more likely.