Semaglutide (SEM), a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, has garnered increasing interest for its potential therapeutic effects in neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). This review provides a comprehensive description of SEM’s mechanism of action and its effects in preclinical studies of these debilitating conditions. In animal models of AD, SEM has proved beneficial effects on multiple pathological hallmarks of the disease. SEM administration has been associated with reductions in amyloid-beta plaque deposition and mitigation of neuroinflammation. Moreover, SEM treatment has been shown to ameliorate behavioral deficits related to anxiety and social interaction. SEM-treated animals exhibit improvements in spatial learning and memory retention tasks, as evidenced by enhanced performance in maze navigation tests and novel object recognition assays. Similarly, in animal models of PD, SEM has demonstrated promising neuroprotective effects through various mechanisms. These include modulation of neuroinflammation, enhancement of mitochondrial function, and promotion of neurogenesis. Additionally, SEM has been shown to improve motor function and ameliorate dopaminergic neuronal loss, offering the potential for disease-modifying treatment strategies. Overall, the accumulating evidence from preclinical studies suggests that SEM holds promise as a novel therapeutic approach for AD and PD. Further research is warranted to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of SEM’s neuroprotective effects and to translate these findings into clinical applications for the treatment of these devastating neurodegenerative disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Deficiency in the aquaporin‐4 (AQP4) water channel has been linked to impaired amyloid beta (Aβ) clearance. However, a detailed morphopathological analysis of amyloid deposition following AQP4 therapeutic modulation remains unexplored.METHODS: Two‐month‐old amyloid precursor protein presenilin 1 (APPPS1) mice were treated daily for 28 days with either the AQP4 facilitator N‐(3‐(Benzyloxy)pyridin‐2‐yl) benzene‐sulfonamide (TGN‐073) or the AQP4 inhibitor N‐(1,3,4‐thiadiazol‐2‐yl)pyridine‐3‐carboxamide dihydrochloride (TGN‐020) (both at 200 mg/kg). Controls included vehicle‐treated APPPS1 and WT C57BL/6J mice. Comprehensive histopathological, biochemical, and behavioral analyses were conducted.RESULTS: Mice treated with AQP4 facilitator showed a significant reduction in total Aβ, fibrillar deposits, and soluble Aβ, while the AQP4 inhibitor caused a substantial increase in brain Aβ. AQP4‐facilitator treatment also reduced Aβ40 levels and Aβ40/Aβ42 ratio, whereas the inhibitor treatment increased both Aβ40 and Aβ42. Additionally, facilitator‐treated mice demonstrated reduced anxiety and improved memory performance.DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that AQP4 modulation is a promising strategy to enhance Aβ clearance and a potential therapeutic target in Alzheimer's disease.Highlights: Intramural periarterial drainage of the interstitial fluid mediated by aquaporin‐4 (AQP4) is a key element that ensures clearance of catabolites/Aβ peptide from within the brain parenchyma. Inhibition of AQP4 in an APPPS1 mouse model of AD leads to increased amyloid deposition and deficient behavior compared to untreated transgenic animals. Pharmaceutical facilitation of AQP4 in the same APPPS1 mouse model leads to a massive decrease in amyloid burden and improves the behavioral performance of the animals compared to untreated control APPPS1 mice.

Stroke remains one of the most important causes of death and disability. Preclinical research is a powerful tool for understanding the molecular and cellular response to stroke. However, a lack of standardization in animal evaluation does not always ensure reproducible results. In the present study, we wanted to identify the best strategy for evaluating animal behavior post-experimental stroke. As such, a meta-analysis was made, evaluating behavioral tests done on male C57BL/6 mice subjected to stroke or sham surgery. Overall, fifty-six studies were included. Our results suggest that different types of tests should be used depending on the post-stroke period one needs to analyze. In the hyper-acute, post-stroke period, the best quantifier will be animal examination scoring, as it is a fast and inexpensive way to identify differences between groups. When evaluating stoke mice in the acute phase, a mix of animal examination and motor tests that focus on movement asymmetry (foot-fault and cylinder testing) seem to have the best chance of picking up differences between groups. Complex tasks (the rotarod test and Morris water maze) should be used within the chronic phase to evaluate differences between the late-subacute and chronic phases.

The treatment of acute life-threatening events in patients suffering from chronic pathologies is problematic, as physicians need to consider multisystemic drug effects. Regarding Cerebrolysin, a Sonic Hedgehog signaling pathway amplifier and one of the few approved neurotrophic treatments for stroke patients, concerns of excessive Hedgehog pathway activation that could accelerate NAFLD progression to cirrhosis seem valid. We investigated stroke patients treated with Cerebrolysin that presented elevated levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and/or alanine aminotransferase (ALT). We also investigated the efficiency of Cerebrolysin in reversing the neurogenesis inhibition within the hippocampus in a mouse model of NAFLD by evaluating behavior and histological outcomes. NeuN, BrdU and Iba1 positive signals in the cortex and hippocampus of the animals were also observed. Clinically, Cerebrolysin improved AST levels in a majority of stroke patients with hepatic damage. The same treatment in an experimental setup was able to reverse anxiety-like behavior in MCD mice, reducing their freezing time from 333.61 ± 21.81 s in MCD animals to 229.17 ± 26.28 in treated ones. The use of Cerebrolysin did not improve short-term memory nor rescued cell multiplication in the hippocampus after MCD food intake. Understanding the neuroprotective and neurotrophic effects that drugs have on NAFLD patients can significantly contribute to a suitable therapeutic approach.

Melanoma, a deadly form of skin cancer, poses significant challenges to the host immune system, allowing tumor cells to evade immune surveillance and persist. This complex interplay between melanoma and the immune system involves a multitude of mechanisms that impair immune recognition and promote tumor progression. This review summarizes the intricate strategies employed by melanoma cells to evade the immune response, including defective immune recognition, immune checkpoint activation, and the role of regulatory T-cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and exosomes in suppressing anti-tumor immunity. Additionally, we discuss potential therapeutic targets aimed at reversing immune evasion in melanoma, highlighting the importance of understanding these mechanisms for developing more effective immunotherapies. Improved insights into the interactions between melanoma and the immune system will aid in the development of novel treatment strategies to enhance anti-tumor immune responses and improve patient outcomes.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a multifactorial metabolic disorder associated with systemic inflammation and vascular complications. Pentraxin-3 (PTX3) has emerged as a key biomarker of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction in DM. We aimed to examine the role of PTX3 in DM and assesses the impact of pharmacological interventions on its expression. The review included studies analyzing PTX3 modulation by antidiabetic therapies, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists (GLP-1a), and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), as well as the effects of lifestyle interventions. Clinical and experimental studies demonstrated a strong correlation between PTX3 levels and DM progression. Elevated PTX3 levels were associated with diabetic complications, including nephropathy, retinopathy, and cardiovascular diseases. Antidiabetic drugs showed differential effects on PTX3 expression, with GLP-1a and DPP-4i significantly reducing PTX3 levels, while SGLT-2i displayed a paradoxical increase. Lifestyle interventions, including dietary modifications and weight loss, yielded inconsistent effects, suggesting genetic and metabolic factors influence PTX3 regulation. While pharmacological therapies, particularly GLP-1a and DPP-4i, demonstrate anti-inflammatory effects, further research is needed to standardize PTX3 measurement and explore its potential as a therapeutic target. Personalized treatment strategies incorporating genetic profiling may optimize inflammation control and disease management in DM patients.