Screening of gap junction antagonists on dye coupling in the rabbit retina.

Many cell types in the retina are coupled via gap junctions and so there is a pressing need for a potent and reversible gap junction antagonist. We screened a series of potential gap junction antagonists by evaluating their effects on dye coupling in the network of A-type horizontal cells. We evaluated the following compounds: meclofenamic acid (MFA), mefloquine, 2-aminoethyldiphenyl borate (2-APB), 18-alpha-glycyrrhetinic acid, 18-beta-glycyrrhetinic acid (18-beta-GA), retinoic acid, flufenamic acid, niflumic acid, and carbenoxolone. The efficacy of each drug was determined by measuring the diffusion coefficient for Neurobiotin (Mills & Massey, 1998). MFA, 18-beta-GA, 2-APB and mefloquine were the most effective antagonists, completely eliminating A-type horizontal cell coupling at a concentration of 200 muM. Niflumic acid, flufenamic acid, and carbenoxolone were less potent. Additionally, carbenoxolone was difficult to wash out and also may be harmful, as the retina became opaque and swollen. MFA, 18-beta-GA, 2-APB and mefloquine also blocked coupling in B-type horizontal cells and AII amacrine cells. Because these cell types express different connexins, this suggests that the antagonists were relatively non-selective across several different types of gap junction. It should be emphasized that MFA was water-soluble and its effects on dye coupling were easily reversible. In contrast, the other gap junction antagonists, except carbenoxolone, required DMSO to make stock solutions and were difficult to wash out of the preparation at the doses required to block coupling in A-type HCs. The combination of potency, water solubility and reversibility suggest that MFA may be a useful compound to manipulate gap junction coupling.

Pharmacological characterization of nipecotic acid ethyl ester: A novel cholinergic muscarinic agonist

The aim of this dissertation was to examine the hypothesis that (R)-nipecotic acid ethyl ester ((R)-NAEE) is a cholinergic agonist that is selective for a particular subclass (M$\sb1$ or M$\sb2$) of muscarinic receptors.^ Ligand binding studies indicated that like cholinergic agonists (R)-NAEE selectively interacts with rat heart (M$\sb2$) and brain (M$\sb1$) muscarinic binding sites. Physiological studies revealed that unlike cholinergic agonists (R)-NAEE stimulated only those responses coupled to M$\sb2$ muscarinic receptors (acid secretion, negative inotropic response, smooth muscle contraction). Moreover, in rat brain (R)-NAEE differentiated between M$\sb2$ receptors negatively coupled to adenylate cyclase activity and M$\sb1$ receptors mediating PI turnover, being a weak competitive antagonist at these latter sites. In isolated rat gastric mucosal cells (R)-NAEE also differentiated between two M$\sb2$ coupled responses where it potentiated acid secretion but could not stimulate PI turnover. Atropine, a selective antimuscarinic agent, competitively antagonized all agonist effects of (R)-NAEE.^ Unlike (R)-NAEE, the muscarinic agonist arecoline, which is structurally similar to (R)-NAEE, stimulates both M$\sb1$ and M$\sb2$ receptors. Structure activity studies revealed that saturation of the piperidine ring and the length of the ester side chain of (R)-NAEE are the most important determinants for both M$\sb2$ efficacy and selectivity.^ The results of this dissertation establish that (R)-NAEE is a cholinergic muscarinic receptor agonist that displays greater efficacy at M$\sb2$ than at M$\sb1$ receptors, being a weak antagonist at the M$\sb1$ site. With such selectivity, (R)-NAEE may be regarded as a prototype for a unique class of cholinergic muscarinic M$\sb2$ receptor agonists. Because of these unique properties, (R)-NAEE should be useful in the further characterization of muscarinic receptors, and could lead to the development of a new class of therapeutic agents. ^