The DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin counteracts stroke in the normal and diabetic mouse brain: A comparison with glimepiride

137Citations
Citations of this article
96Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes is a strong risk factor for stroke. Linagliptin is a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor in clinical use against type 2 diabetes. The aim of this study was to determine the potential antistroke efficacy of linagliptin in type 2 diabetic mice. To understand whether efficacy was mediated by glycemia regulation, a comparison with the sulfonylurea glimepiride was done. To determine whether linagliptin-mediated efficacy was dependent on a diabetic background, experiments in nondiabetic mice were performed. Type 2 diabetes was induced by feeding the mice a high-fat diet for 32 weeks. Mice were treated with linagliptin/glimepiride for 7 weeks. Stroke was induced at 4 weeks into the treatment by transient middle cerebral artery occlusion. Blood DPP-4 activity, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) levels, glucose, body weight, and food intake were assessed throughout the experiments. Ischemic brain damage was measured by determining stroke volume and by stereologic quantifications of surviving neurons in the striatum/ cortex. We show pronounced antistroke efficacy of linagliptin in type 2 diabetic and normal mice, whereas glimepiride proved efficacious against stroke in normal mice only. These results indicate a linagliptin-mediated neuroprotection that is glucoseindependent and likely involves GLP-1. The findings may provide an impetus for the development of DPP-4 inhibitors for the prevention and treatment of stroke in diabetic patients. © 2013 by the American Diabetes Association.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Darsalia, V., Ortsäter, H., Olverling, A., Darlöf, E., Wolbert, P., Nyström, T., … Patrone, C. (2013). The DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin counteracts stroke in the normal and diabetic mouse brain: A comparison with glimepiride. Diabetes, 62(4), 1289–1296. https://doi.org/10.2337/db12-0988

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free