The Relative Potencies of Cholinomimetics and Muscarinic Antagonists on the Rat Iris in Vivo: Effects of PH on Potency of Pirenzepine and Telenzepine

Overview

Journal Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol

Specialty Pharmacology

Date 1988 Nov 1

PMID 3244389

Citations 4

Authors

J J Hagan

B Van Der Heijden

C L Broekkamp

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The effects of cholinomimetics and muscarinic antagonists were compared following topical administration to the eyes of anaesthetized rats. For tests with cholinomimetics, clonidine (0.3 mg/kg) was used to induce mydriasis via central inhibition of parasympathetic tone. Full, dose-dependent miosis was induced by acetylcholinesterase inhibitors [physostigmine greater than neostigmine greater than tetrahydroaminoacridine (THA)] and by membrane channel blockers (4-aminopyridine greater than 3,4-diaminopyridine). Oxotremorine was the most potent direct agonist tested [oxotremorine greater than arecaidine propargylester (APE) greater than arecoline greater than carbachol greater than ethoxyethyltrimethyl-ammonium iodide (EOE) greater than RS 86]. Some putative M1 selective agonists were weakly active or behaved as partial agonists (pilocarpine greater than AH6405 greater than Mc-A-343 greater than isoarecoline). Of the antagonists, compared in non-clonidine treated rats, scopolamine hydrochloride was the most potent. Of the receptor selective antagonists the M2 (ileal) selective compounds hexahydrosiladifenidol and 4-DAMP were more potent than either M1 selective (pirenzepine, telenzepine) or M2 (atrial) selective (AF DX 116) drugs. These data tentatively suggest the involvement of an M2 (ileal) type muscarinic receptor. Potency was lower for quaternary structures, probably due to impaired corneal penetration. The potency of pirenzepine and telenzepine was increased 60-fold at low pH following topical administration. Acid induced corneal damage does not appear to account for this potency shift as the effects of scopolamine and several agonists (oxotremorine, pilocarpine and McNA-343) were not substantially altered by acid media. For pirenzepine the potency shift appears to be related to protonation of the second amino group (N1) in the piperazine tail (pKa = 2.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Citing Articles

Multiple functional defects in peripheral autonomic organs in mice lacking muscarinic acetylcholine receptor gene for the M3 subtype.

Matsui M, Motomura D, Karasawa H, Fujikawa T, Jiang J, Komiya Y Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000; 97(17):9579-84.

PMID: 10944224 PMC: 16907. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.97.17.9579.

Effects of disrupting the cholinergic system on short-term spatial memory in rats.

Andrews J, Jansen J, Linders S, Princen A Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1994; 115(4):485-94.

PMID: 7871093 DOI: 10.1007/BF02245572.

Different muscarine receptors mediate the prejunctional inhibition of [3H]-noradrenaline release in rat or guinea-pig iris and the contraction of the rabbit iris sphincter muscle.

Fuder H, Schopf J, Unckell J, Wesner M, Melchiorre C, Tacke R Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 1989; 340(6):597-604.

PMID: 2615852 DOI: 10.1007/BF00717733.

Hemicholinium-3 impairs spatial learning and the deficit is reversed by cholinomimetics.

Hagan J, Jansen J, Broekkamp C Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1989; 98(3):347-56.

PMID: 2526345 DOI: 10.1007/BF00451686.

References

GRASS G, Cooper E, Robinson J . Mechanisms of corneal drug penetration. III: Modeling of molecular transport. J Pharm Sci. 1988; 77(1):24-6. DOI: 10.1002/jps.2600770105. View

GRASS G, Robinson J . Mechanisms of corneal drug penetration. II: Ultrastructural analysis of potential pathways for drug movement. J Pharm Sci. 1988; 77(1):15-23. DOI: 10.1002/jps.2600770104. View

Hammer R, Berrie C, Birdsall N, BURGEN A, Hulme E . Pirenzepine distinguishes between different subclasses of muscarinic receptors. Nature. 1980; 283(5742):90-2. DOI: 10.1038/283090a0. View

Eberlein W, Trummlitz G, Engel W, Schmidt G, Pelzer H, Mayer N . Tricyclic compounds as selective antimuscarinics. 1. Structural requirements for selectivity toward the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor in a series of pirenzepine and imipramine analogues. J Med Chem. 1987; 30(8):1378-82. DOI: 10.1021/jm00391a019. View

Eltze M, Gonne S, Riedel R, Schlotke B, Schudt C, Simon W . Pharmacological evidence for selective inhibition of gastric acid secretion by telenzepine, a new antimuscarinic drug. Eur J Pharmacol. 1985; 112(2):211-24. DOI: 10.1016/0014-2999(85)90498-4. View

THESLEFF S . Aminopyridines and synaptic transmission. Neuroscience. 1980; 5(8):1413-9. DOI: 10.1016/0306-4522(80)90002-0. View

Yeh J, Oxford G, Wu C, Narahashi T . Dynamics of aminopyridine block of potassium channels in squid axon membrane. J Gen Physiol. 1976; 68(5):519-35. PMC: 2228444. DOI: 10.1085/jgp.68.5.519. View

Sieg J, Robinson J . Vehicle effects on ocular drug bioavailability II: Evaluation of pilocarpine. J Pharm Sci. 1977; 66(9):1222-8. DOI: 10.1002/jps.2600660905. View

Barlow R, Weston-Smith P . The relative potencies of some agonists at M2 muscarinic receptors in guinea-pig ileum, atria and bronchi. Br J Pharmacol. 1985; 85(2):437-40. PMC: 1916586. DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1985.tb08879.x. View

10.

Koss M . Pupillary dilation as an index of central nervous system alpha 2-adrenoceptor activation. J Pharmacol Methods. 1986; 15(1):1-19. DOI: 10.1016/0160-5402(86)90002-1. View

11.

Stevens D, Cotman C . Excitatory actions of tetrahydro-9-aminoacridine (THA) on hippocampal pyramidal neurons. Neurosci Lett. 1987; 79(3):301-5. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3940(87)90448-4. View

12.

Eglen R, Whiting R . Competitive and non-competitive antagonism exhibited by 'selective' antagonists at atrial and ileal muscarinic receptor subtypes. Br J Pharmacol. 1987; 90(4):701-7. PMC: 1917216. DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1987.tb11223.x. View

13.

Gower A, Broekkamp C, Rijk H, Van Delft A . Pharmacological evaluation of in vivo tests for alpha 2-adrenoceptor blockade in the central nervous system and the effects of the enantiomers of mianserin and its aza-analog ORG 3770. Arch Int Pharmacodyn Ther. 1988; 291:185-201. View

14.

Black J, Shankley N . Pharmacological analysis of muscarinic receptors coupled to oxyntic cell secretion in the mouse stomach. Br J Pharmacol. 1985; 86(3):601-7. PMC: 1916722. DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1985.tb08936.x. View

15.

Fuder H, Kilbinger H, Muller H . Organ selectivity of hexahydrosiladifenidol in blocking pre- and postjunctional muscarinic receptors studied in guinea-pig ileum and rat heart. Eur J Pharmacol. 1985; 113(1):125-7. DOI: 10.1016/0014-2999(85)90352-8. View

16.

Schauf C, Sattin A . Tetrahydroaminoacridine blocks potassium channels and inhibits sodium inactivation in Myxicola. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1987; 243(2):609-13. View

17.

Hammer R, Giachetti A . Muscarinic receptor subtypes: M1 and M2 biochemical and functional characterization. Life Sci. 1982; 31(26):2991-8. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3205(82)90066-2. View

18.

Anthony B, Aronstam R . High-affinity agonist binding to rat brainstem muscarinic receptors is eliminated by low pH. Neurosci Lett. 1986; 69(1):84-8. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3940(86)90419-2. View

19.

Barlow R, Chan M . The effects of pH on the affinity of pirenzepine for muscarinic receptors in the guinea-pig ileum and rat fundus strip. Br J Pharmacol. 1982; 77(3):559-63. PMC: 2044615. DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1982.tb09331.x. View

20.

ROSZKOWSKI A . An unusual type of sympathetic ganglionic stimulant. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1961; 132:156-70. View