Brain ischemia is one of the leading causes of disability and mortality worldwide. Nitric oxide (NO^•), a molecule that is involved in the regulation of proper blood flow, vasodilation, neuronal and glial activity constitutes the crucial factor that contributes to the development of pathological changes after stroke. One of the early consequences of a sudden interruption in the cerebral blood flow is the massive production of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (ROS/RNS) in neurons due to NO^• synthase uncoupling, which leads to neurotoxicity. Progression of apoptotic or necrotic neuronal damage activates reactive astrocytes and attracts microglia or lymphocytes to migrate to place of inflammation. Those inflammatory cells start to produce large amounts of inflammatory proteins, including pathological, inducible form of NOS (iNOS), which generates nitrosative stress that further contributes to brain tissue damage, forming vicious circle of detrimental processes in the late stage of ischemia. S-nitrosylation, hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF-1α) and HIF-1α-dependent genes activated in reactive astrocytes play essential roles in this process. The review summarizes the roles of NO^•-dependent pathways in the early and late aftermath of stroke and treatments based on the stimulation or inhibition of particular NO^• synthases and the stabilization of HIF-1α activity.

Rationale Several studies have suggested that modulation of the glutamatergic system via metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGlu) could be a new and efficient way to achieve antipsychotic-like activity. Objectives Here, we decided to investigate the possible role of the group III mGlu receptor ligands, LSP1-2111, the group III mGlu receptor orthosteric agonist, preferentially stimulating mGlu4 receptors especially in low doses, and AMN082, the mGlu7 receptor positive modulator. We used MK-801- and amphetamine-induced hyperactivity tests, as well as DOI-induced head twitches in mice as models for positive symptoms of psychosis. The C57Bl/6J mGlu7 receptor knockout mice were used to confirm that AMN082-induced effect was receptor specific. A non-selective antagonist of the group II/III mGlu receptors, LY341495, was used to block LSP1-2111-induced effects. Results LSP1-2111 (1, 2, and 5 mg kg⁻¹) dose dependently inhibited both MK-801- and amphetamine-induced hyperactivities. Moreover, the drug antagonized DOI-induced head twitches. The effects of the drug were antagonized by LY341495 administration (1.5 mg kg^-1, i.p.). In contrast, AMN082 (3 and 6 mg kg⁻¹) had no effect on amphetamine-induced hyperactivity but induced an enhancement of MK-801-induced hyperactivity and DOI-induced head twitches in mice. In C57Bl/6J mGlu7 receptor knockout animals (KO), those effects of AMN082 were not observed. Moreover, mGlu7 KO animals were less sensitive for DOI-induced effect than their wild type littermates. Conclusions Altogether, we propose that among group III mGlu receptors, mGlu4 receptor may be a promising target for the development of novel antipsychotic drugs.

Background and Purpose: Because agonists at metabotropic glutamate receptors exert beneficial effects in schizophrenia, we have assessed the actions of Lu AF21934 and Lu AF32615, two chemically distinct, selective and brain‐penetrant positive allosteric modulators (PAMs) of the mGlu₄ receptor, in several tests reflecting positive, negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia in rodents.Experimental Approach: Hyperactivity induced by MK‐801 or amphetamine and head twitches induced by 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐iodoamphetamine (DOI) in mice were used as models for positive symptoms. Disruption of social interaction and spatial delayed alternation tests induced by MK‐801 in rats were used as models for negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia, respectively.Key Results: Lu AF21934 (0.1–5 mg·kg⁻¹) and Lu AF32615 (2–10 mg·kg⁻¹) dose‐dependently inhibited hyperactivity induced by MK‐801 or amphetamine. They also antagonized head twitches and increased frequency of spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic currents (EPSCs) in brain slices, induced by DOI. In mice lacking the mGlu₄ receptor (mGlu₄^−/−) mice, Lu AF21934 did not antagonize DOI‐induced head twitches. MK‐801‐induced disruption in the social interaction test was decreased by Lu AF21934 at 0.5 mg·kg⁻¹ and by Lu AF32615 at 10 mg·kg⁻¹. In the delayed spatial alternation test, Lu AF21934 was active at 1 and 2 mg·kg⁻¹, while Lu AF32615 was active at 10 mg·kg⁻¹.Conclusions and Implications: We propose that activation by PAMs of the mGlu₄ receptor is a promising approach to the discovery of novel antipsychotic drugs.

Several lines of evidence indicate that inhibition of the metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptor 5 produces anxiolytic-like effects in rodents. Peptide neurotransmitter neuropeptide Y (NPY) produces an anxiolytic effect in rats after intraventricular or intra-amygdalar administration. Many classes of anxiolytic drugs exert their effect through the GABA–benzodiazepine (BZD) receptor complex. Therefore, in the present study we have investigated whether the anxiolytic action of MPEP (2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)pyridyne), an mGlu5 receptor antagonist, is mediated by a mechanism involving either the GABA–BZD receptor complex or NPY receptor. In the behavioral studies, the anxiolytic activity of MPEP (10 mg/kg, i.p.) was examined using plus-maze test. The BZD antagonist flumazenil (10 mg/kg, i.p.) was given to one group of rats and Y1 receptor antagonist BIBO 3304 (((R)-N-[[4-(aminocarbonylaminomethyl) phenyl] methyl]-N2-(diphenylacetyl)-argininamide trifluoroacetate)3304) (200 pmol/site, intra-amygdala) to the other. It was found that anxiolytic effects of MPEP were not changed by flumazenil, but were abolished by BIBO 3304. Immunohistochemical studies showed a high density of mGlu5 receptor immunoreactivity (IR) in the amygdala. The effect of MPEP on NPY expression in the amygdala was studied using immunohistochemistry (IH) and radioimmunoassay (RIA). Both methods showed a diminution of NPY IR expression, to about 43% (IH) or 81% (RIA) of the control level after multiple administrations, but we observed an increase up to 148% of the control after single MPEP administration. These effects may suggest a release of NPY from nerve terminals after MPEP administration. Our results indicate that the anxiolytic action of MPEP is conveyed through NPY neurons with the involvement of Y1 receptors in the amygdala and that BZD receptors do not significantly contribute to these effects.