Anesthesiology · 2017
Competitive Antagonism of Anesthetic Action at the γ-Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptor by a Novel Etomidate Analog with Low Intrinsic Efficacy.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ma Celena, Pejo Ervin, McGrath Megan, Jayakar Selwyn S, Zhou Xiaojuan, Miller Keith W, Cohen Jonathan B, Raines Douglas E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The authors characterized the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor pharmacology of the novel etomidate analog naphthalene-etomidate, a potential lead compound for the development of anesthetic-selective competitive antagonists.
METHODS: The positive modulatory potencies and efficacies of etomidate and naphthalene-etomidate were defined in oocyte-expressed α1β3γ2L γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors using voltage clamp electrophysiology. Using the same technique, the ability of naphthalene-etomidate to reduce currents evoked by γ-aminobutyric acid alone or γ-aminobutyric acid potentiated by etomidate, propofol, pentobarbital, and diazepam was quantified. The binding affinity of naphthalene-etomidate to the transmembrane anesthetic binding sites of the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor was determined from its ability to inhibit receptor photoaffinity labeling by the site-selective photolabels [H]azi-etomidate and R-[H]5-allyl-1-methyl-5-(m-trifluoromethyl-diazirynylphenyl) barbituric acid.
RESULTS: In contrast to etomidate, naphthalene-etomidate only weakly potentiated γ-aminobutyric acid-evoked currents and induced little direct activation even at a near-saturating aqueous concentration. It inhibited labeling of γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors by [H]azi-etomidate and R-[H]5-allyl-1-methyl-5-(m-trifluoromethyl-diazirynylphenyl) barbituric acid with similar half-maximal inhibitory concentrations of 48 μM (95% CI, 28 to 81 μM) and 33 μM (95% CI, 20 to 54 μM). It also reduced the positive modulatory actions of anesthetics (propofol > etomidate ~ pentobarbital) but not those of γ-aminobutyric acid or diazepam. At 300 μM, naphthalene-etomidate increased the half-maximal potentiating propofol concentration from 6.0 μM (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.0 μM) to 36 μM (95% CI, 17 to 78 μM) without affecting the maximal response obtained at high propofol concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Naphthalene-etomidate is a very low-efficacy etomidate analog that exhibits the pharmacology of an anesthetic competitive antagonist at the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor.
METHODS: The positive modulatory potencies and efficacies of etomidate and naphthalene-etomidate were defined in oocyte-expressed α1β3γ2L γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors using voltage clamp electrophysiology. Using the same technique, the ability of naphthalene-etomidate to reduce currents evoked by γ-aminobutyric acid alone or γ-aminobutyric acid potentiated by etomidate, propofol, pentobarbital, and diazepam was quantified. The binding affinity of naphthalene-etomidate to the transmembrane anesthetic binding sites of the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor was determined from its ability to inhibit receptor photoaffinity labeling by the site-selective photolabels [H]azi-etomidate and R-[H]5-allyl-1-methyl-5-(m-trifluoromethyl-diazirynylphenyl) barbituric acid.
RESULTS: In contrast to etomidate, naphthalene-etomidate only weakly potentiated γ-aminobutyric acid-evoked currents and induced little direct activation even at a near-saturating aqueous concentration. It inhibited labeling of γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors by [H]azi-etomidate and R-[H]5-allyl-1-methyl-5-(m-trifluoromethyl-diazirynylphenyl) barbituric acid with similar half-maximal inhibitory concentrations of 48 μM (95% CI, 28 to 81 μM) and 33 μM (95% CI, 20 to 54 μM). It also reduced the positive modulatory actions of anesthetics (propofol > etomidate ~ pentobarbital) but not those of γ-aminobutyric acid or diazepam. At 300 μM, naphthalene-etomidate increased the half-maximal potentiating propofol concentration from 6.0 μM (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.0 μM) to 36 μM (95% CI, 17 to 78 μM) without affecting the maximal response obtained at high propofol concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Naphthalene-etomidate is a very low-efficacy etomidate analog that exhibits the pharmacology of an anesthetic competitive antagonist at the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor.