Figure 4

Nilotinib (Tasigna™) is ineffective in rescuing the motor functions and improving the survival rate in R6/2. (A) Line graph showing no effect of Tasigna on weight gain in R6/2, and wild-type control mice across different stages of disease progression. R6/2-Saline: N = 12 (M); R6/2-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); WT-Saline: N = 12 (M); WT-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); Age x Treatment x Genotype (F _{(8, 8)} = 2.079, p = 0.03). (B) Kaplan–Meier survival curve showing no increase in life span in Tasigna treated R6/2 mice compared to saline-treated mice (R6/2—Saline: N = 12 (M); R6/2-Tasigna: N = 12 (M)). (C) Representative traces showing no significant improvement in the distance travelled in Open-Field test in Tasigna treated group in R6/2 compared to the saline-treated group from 6 to 11 weeks. WT-Saline and WT-Tasigna groups also showing no significant difference in the distance travelled. (D) Line graph depicting total distance travelled in Open-field test from 6 to 11 weeks in Tasigna and saline-treated ones in both the genotypes. R6/2-Saline: N = 12 (M); R6/2-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); WT-Saline: N = 12 (M); WT-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); Age x Treatment x Genotype (F _{(5, 5)} = 0.560, p = 0.73). (E) Line graph showing no significant improvement in latency to fall in Rotarod test in R6/2 from 6 to 11 weeks in Tasigna-treated group compared to saline-treated. Tasigna does not affect WT control mice from 6 to 11 weeks. R6/2-Saline: N = 12 (M); R6/2-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); WT-Saline: N = 12 (M); WT-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); Age x Treatment x Genotype (F _{(5, 5)} = 0.5618, p = 0.72). (F) Line graph showing Tasigna having no significant effect in delaying the onset of hind-limb clasping symptom in R6/2 from 6 to 11 weeks. WT control mice were showing no effect on Tasigna treatment. Scores were plotted based on the Racine scale from 0–5, as explained in the methods section. R6/2-Saline: N = 12 (M); R6/2-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); WT-Saline: N = 12 (M); WT-Tasigna: N = 12 (M); Age x Treatment x Genotype (F _{(5, 5)} = 0.4634, p = 0.80). Error bars indicate ± SEM. (Mean and ± SEM values are represented in supplementary Tables 3A: Bodyweight, 3B: Open-Field test, 3C: Rotarod test, 3D: Hind-limb clasping test). N = number of mice, M = Males. Statistical analysis was done by 3-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post-hoc test.