Abstract:1 The effects of muscarinic receptor antagonists considered to be selective for Ml receptors (pirenzepine; PZ), M2 receptors (AFDX-1 16), and for M3 receptors (4-diphenyl acetoxy N-methylpiperidine (4-DAMP)) were used to investigate the existence of muscarinic receptor subtypes in murine airways. Atropine was used as a nonselective antagonist. The effects of these antagonists were studied upon tracheal contractions induced either by EFS (electric field stimulation) or by application of an exogenous cholinocept… Show more
“…In our study AF-DX 116 had at least a 100 fold lower affinity than 4-DAMP for muscarinic receptors in CM (7.36) and LM (6.44). The pA2 value in LM is similar to the low affinity of AF-DX 116 for the muscarinic receptor subtype in the guineapig ileum (Giachetti et al, 1986) but the higher value for CM is more similar to that observed in guinea-pig atrium (Giachetti et al, 1986). It is unclear at this time why there is a difference for AF-DX 116 between the CM and LM muscle coats as this was not observed with the other muscarinic antagonists.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…AF-DX 116 has an affinity proffile of M2 > M 1> M4 > M3 in functional pharmacological studies (Hammer et al, 1986;Giachetti et al, 1986;Giraldo et al, 1987) and a similar profile in human cloned muscarinic receptors (Dorje et al, 1991). In our study AF-DX 116 had at least a 100 fold lower affinity than 4-DAMP for muscarinic receptors in CM (7.36) and LM (6.44).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pirenzepine is a relatively high affinity antagonist for Ml muscarinic receptors with intermediate affinity for M4 muscarinic receptors and lower affinity for the M2 and M3 muscarinic receptors (Lambrecht et al, 1989;Caulfield & Brown, 1991;Dorje et al, 1991;Grimm et al, 1994). (11-[[[2 -(diethylamino)methyl] -l-piperidinyl]acetyl] -5,1 1-dihydro-6H-pyridol [2,3,-b][1,4]benzodiazepine-6-one) has high affinity for the M2 muscarinic receptor, but also has affinity for the Ml muscarinic receptor with lower affinity for the M3 and M4 muscarinic receptors (Birdsall & Hulme, 1983;Giachetti et al, 1986;Hammer et al, 1986). 4-DAMP has a relatively high affinity for M3 muscarinic receptors but also has affinity at Ml and M4 muscarinic receptor subtypes (Dodds et al, 1987;Eltze & Figala, 1988;Eltze et al, 1993;Grimm et al, 1994).…”
“…In our study AF-DX 116 had at least a 100 fold lower affinity than 4-DAMP for muscarinic receptors in CM (7.36) and LM (6.44). The pA2 value in LM is similar to the low affinity of AF-DX 116 for the muscarinic receptor subtype in the guineapig ileum (Giachetti et al, 1986) but the higher value for CM is more similar to that observed in guinea-pig atrium (Giachetti et al, 1986). It is unclear at this time why there is a difference for AF-DX 116 between the CM and LM muscle coats as this was not observed with the other muscarinic antagonists.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…AF-DX 116 has an affinity proffile of M2 > M 1> M4 > M3 in functional pharmacological studies (Hammer et al, 1986;Giachetti et al, 1986;Giraldo et al, 1987) and a similar profile in human cloned muscarinic receptors (Dorje et al, 1991). In our study AF-DX 116 had at least a 100 fold lower affinity than 4-DAMP for muscarinic receptors in CM (7.36) and LM (6.44).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pirenzepine is a relatively high affinity antagonist for Ml muscarinic receptors with intermediate affinity for M4 muscarinic receptors and lower affinity for the M2 and M3 muscarinic receptors (Lambrecht et al, 1989;Caulfield & Brown, 1991;Dorje et al, 1991;Grimm et al, 1994). (11-[[[2 -(diethylamino)methyl] -l-piperidinyl]acetyl] -5,1 1-dihydro-6H-pyridol [2,3,-b][1,4]benzodiazepine-6-one) has high affinity for the M2 muscarinic receptor, but also has affinity for the Ml muscarinic receptor with lower affinity for the M3 and M4 muscarinic receptors (Birdsall & Hulme, 1983;Giachetti et al, 1986;Hammer et al, 1986). 4-DAMP has a relatively high affinity for M3 muscarinic receptors but also has affinity at Ml and M4 muscarinic receptor subtypes (Dodds et al, 1987;Eltze & Figala, 1988;Eltze et al, 1993;Grimm et al, 1994).…”
“…This suggested that the response via M 3 muscarinic receptors and the number of M 3 muscarinic receptors might be greater in BHS than in BHR. After treatment with 4-DAMP (10 -5 M), no contraction was observed in either BHS or BHR, because it nonselectively blocked muscarinic receptors [8,11] and inhibited CCh-induced smooth muscle contraction.…”
Abstract:The expression balance of M 2 and M 3 muscarinic receptor subtypes on the pathogenesis of airway hyperresponsiveness was investigated by using two congenitally related strains of guinea pigs, bronchial-hypersensitive (BHS) and bronchial-hyposensitive (BHR). CCh-induced airway responses in vivo and in vitro were investigated by comparing the effects of muscarinic receptor subtype antagonists, and the relative amounts of M 2 and M 3 muscarinic receptor mRNA in tracheal smooth muscle and lung tissue were investigated. After treatment with muscarinic receptor subtype antagonists, the ventilatory mechanics (V T , R aw , and C dyn ) of response to CCh aerosol inhalation were measured by the bodyplethysmograph method. The effects of these antagonists on CCh-induced tracheal smooth muscle contraction were also investigated. The effects of M 2 muscarinic receptor blockade were less but the effects of M 3 muscarinic receptors blockade on the airway contractile responses were greater in BHS than in BHR. In M 3 muscarinic receptor blockades, CCh-induced tracheal contractions in BHS were significantly greater than those in BHR. In tracheal smooth muscle from BHS, the relative amount of M 2 muscarinic receptors mRNA was less but that of M 3 muscarinic receptor mRNA was more than those in BHR. These results suggest that the high ACh level as a consequence of dysfunction of M 2 muscarinic autoreceptors and the excessive effect of M 3 muscarinic receptors on the airway smooth muscle may play an important role in the pathogenesis of airway hyperresponsiveness.
“…Moreover, also in other species, including humans, the comparison of the pre-and postjunctional potencies of the M1-, M2-and M3-selective antagonists has suggested that autoinhibition of acetylcholine release is mediated via an 'M2-like' receptors (22)(23)(24)(25). In any case, even thought the muscarinic autoreceptors may be a different receptor subtype to the classical M2, the results that we obtained with pilocarpine and methoctramine were not unexpected because these drugs are receptor selective rather the receptor specific (12).…”
A c c e p t e d m a n u s c r i p t
AbstractIt has been demonstrated in mammals that the airway hyperresponsiveness which accompanies viral infections is the result of increased reflex bronchoconstriction due to inhibition of muscarinic prejunctional receptors, which belong to M2 subtypes. Multiple mechanisms account for virus-induced M2 receptor dysfunction. Viral neuraminidase may deglycosylate the M2 receptor, decreasing acetylcholine affinity. Equine influenza remains a common viral respiratory disease of horses worldwide, which results in loss to the equine industry, by decreasing performance, convalescence time and loss of peak performance due to chronic sequelae, such as airway hyperresponsiveness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of neuraminidase on equine isolated bronchi, assessed in equine bronchial smooth muscle rings, derived from five healthy equine male lungs. A pretreatment with vehicle did not modify contraction induced by EFS at each frequency tested. A pretreatment with pilocarpine (1 to 100 μM) significantly reduced, while methoctramine (1 to 100 μM) significantly increased contraction induced by EFS. Finally neuraminidase (0.5 Ul) significantly increased contraction induced by EFS. These results suggest that airway hyperresponsiveness that follows a viral influenza infection might be related to a dysfunction of muscarinic prejunctional receptors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.