Tetrahydroaminoacridine and other allosteric antagonists of hippocampal M1 muscarine receptors

LT Potter, CA Ferrendelli, HE Hanchett, MA Hollifield and MV Lorenzi

Department of Pharmacology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Florida 33133.

Tetrahydroaminoacridine (THA) and a variety of other nonclassical antagonists of muscarine receptors were studied for their ability to bind to primary and allosteric sites on muscarine receptors in rabbit hippocampal membranes. Competition curves between 13 antagonists and 1 nM [3H]pirenzepine (Kd = 3 nM) were simple mass action curves, but THA produced steeper curves, indicating positive cooperativity. Nonetheless, THA inhibited the binding of low concentrations of [3H]pirenzepine, [3H]N-methylscopolamine, and [3H]oxotremorine-M to M1 receptors with similar IC50 values, indicating competition for primary sites. Antagonists were also compared for their ability to bind to allosteric sites and to slow the dissociation of [3H]pirenzepine from primary sites. THA was 6-8-fold more potent than verapamil, d- tubocurare, quinidine, and secoverine, the next most effective allosteric agents, and THA was more effective. McN-A-343, gallamine, pancuronium, and pirenzepine showed weaker allosteric effects. The large size and considerable rigidity of these compounds suggest large allosteric sites. The Hill coefficient for the allosteric effects of THA was 1.7, indicating more than one allosteric site. Solubilization of receptors did not alter steep inhibition curves between THA and [3H]quinuclidinyl benzilate or THA-induced slowing of the dissociation of this ligand. Hence, cooperative allosteric effects of THA are probably exerted on receptor monomers. Inhibition curves between THA and [3H]oxotremorine-M were not steep, and THA had no (allosteric) effect on the dissociation of this ligand from M1 or M2 receptors. Thus, the high affinity agonist conformation of muscarine receptors, once formed, may not bind THA readily. The present results indicate that compounds that can act allosterically may compete with acetylcholine for primary receptor sites but that allosteric effects of these drugs on muscarine receptors are not likely to be important clinically.

Volume 35, Issue 5, pp. 652-660, 05/01/1989
Copyright © 1989 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

This article has been cited by other articles:

				X.-P. Huang and J. Ellis Mutational Disruption of a Conserved Disulfide Bond in Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors Attenuates Positive Homotropic Cooperativity between Multiple Allosteric Sites and Has Subtype-Dependent Effects on the Affinities of Muscarinic Allosteric Ligands Mol. Pharmacol., March 1, 2007; 71(3): 759 - 768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Fruchart-Gaillard, G. Mourier, C. Marquer, A. Menez, and D. Servent Identification of Various Allosteric Interaction Sites on M1 Muscarinic Receptor Using 125I-Met35-Oxidized Muscarinic Toxin 7 Mol. Pharmacol., May 1, 2006; 69(5): 1641 - 1651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Trankle, A. Dittmann, U. Schulz, O. Weyand, S. Buller, K. Johren, E. Heller, N. J. M. Birdsall, U. Holzgrabe, J. Ellis, et al. Atypical Muscarinic Allosteric Modulation: Cooperativity between Modulators and Their Atypical Binding Topology in Muscarinic M2 and M2/M5 Chimeric Receptors Mol. Pharmacol., December 1, 2005; 68(6): 1597 - 1610. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Wess Allosteric Binding Sites on Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors Mol. Pharmacol., December 1, 2005; 68(6): 1506 - 1509. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X.-P. Huang, S. Prilla, K. Mohr, and J. Ellis Critical Amino Acid Residues of the Common Allosteric Site on the M2 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor: More Similarities than Differences between the Structurally Divergent Agents Gallamine and Bis(ammonio)alkane-Type Hexamethylene-bis-[dimethyl-(3-phthalimidopropyl)ammonium]dibromide Mol. Pharmacol., September 1, 2005; 68(3): 769 - 778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Lazareno, V. Dolezal, A. Popham, and N. J. M. Birdsall Thiochrome Enhances Acetylcholine Affinity at Muscarinic M4 Receptors: Receptor Subtype Selectivity via Cooperativity Rather than Affinity Mol. Pharmacol., January 1, 2004; 65(1): 257 - 266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Trankle, O. Weyand, U. Voigtlander, A. Mynett, S. Lazareno, N. J. M. Birdsall, and K. Mohr Interactions of Orthosteric and Allosteric Ligands with [3H]Dimethyl-W84 at the Common Allosteric Site of Muscarinic M2 Receptors Mol. Pharmacol., July 1, 2003; 64(1): 180 - 190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Christopoulos and T. Kenakin G Protein-Coupled Receptor Allosterism and Complexing Pharmacol. Rev., June 1, 2002; 54(2): 323 - 374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Ellis and M. Seidenberg Interactions of Alcuronium, TMB-8, and Other Allosteric Ligands with Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors: Studies with Chimeric Receptors Mol. Pharmacol., April 13, 2001; 58(6): 1451 - 1460. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				S. Lazareno, A. Popham, and N. J. M. Birdsall Allosteric Interactions of Staurosporine and Other Indolocarbazoles with N-[methyl-3H]Scopolamine and Acetylcholine at Muscarinic Receptor Subtypes: Identification of a Second Allosteric Site Mol. Pharmacol., July 1, 2000; 58(1): 194 - 207. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				C. Tränkle and K. Mohr Divergent Modes of Action among Cationic Allosteric Modulators of Muscarinic M2 Receptors Mol. Pharmacol., April 1, 1997; 51(4): 674 - 682. [Abstract] [Full Text]