Evaluation of semaglutide treatment effects on spatial memory and anhedonia in diabetes type 2 rat model of both sexes
Le résumé fourni par la source
Spatial memory could be compromised in diabetes type 2 (T2D) patients even at early stages of the disease. In addition, anhedonia can co-occur in T2D patients and negatively impact quality of life. The glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist semaglutide has demonstrated advanced clinical efficacy in glycemic regulation, but recent literature suggests its effects may extend beyond this. This study therefore aimed to assess the effects of semaglutide treatment on spatial memory and anhedonia in type 2 diabetes and obesity model in aging rats of both sexes. After validation of the T2D model, middle-aged Sprague-Dawley rats of both sexes, fed a high-fat diet and treated with streptozotocin, were used. They received either vehicle or semaglutide and underwent an extensive behavioral battery, including the sucrose preference test (SPT) and Morris water maze (MWM). Semaglutide treatment did not affect the latency to reach the platform zone in MWM probe test, but main effect of sex was identified, with females having higher values than males. In T2D females, semaglutide increased sucrose preference compared to vehicle. Semaglutide treatment was associated with increased sucrose preference, which could be relevant for T2D patients experiencing mood changes, and this model may serve for further investigation of underlying mechanisms.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Evaluation of semaglutide treatment effects on spatial memory and anhedonia in diabetes type 2 rat model of both sexes
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Savez farmaceutskih udruženja Srbije
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.