Spinal interaction between the highly selective µ agonist DAMGO and several δ opioid receptor ligands in naive and morphine-tolerant mice.

Since the discovery of opioid receptor dimers their possible roles in opioid actions were intensively investigated. Here we suggest a mechanism that may involve the µ-δ opioid heterodimers. The exact role of δ opioid receptors in antinociception and in the development of opioid tolerance is still unclear. While receptor up-regulation can be observed during the development of opioid tolerance no µ receptor down-regulation could be detected within five days. In our present work we investigated how the selective δ opioid receptor agonists and antagonists influence the antinociceptive effect of the selective µ receptor agonist DAMGO in naïve and morphine-tolerant mice. We treated male NMRI mice with 200 µmol/kg subcutaneous (s.c.) morphine twice daily for three days. On the fourth day we measured the antinociceptive effect of DAMGO alone and combined with delta ligands: DPDPE, deltorphin II (agonists), TIPP and TICPψ (antagonists), respectively, administered intrathecally (i.t.) in mouse tail-flick test. In naive control mice none of the δ ligands caused significant changes in the antinociceptive action of DAMGO. The treatment with s.c. morphine resulted in approximately four-fold tolerance to i.t. DAMGO, i.e. the ED50 value of DAMGO was four times as high as in naive mice. 500 and 1000 pmol/mouse of the δ1 selective agonist DPDPE enhanced the tolerance to DAMGO while 1000 pmol/mouse of the δ2 selective agonist deltorphin II did not influence the degree of tolerance. However, both δ antagonists TIPP and TICPψ potentiated the antinociceptive effect of i.t. DAMGO, thus they restored the potency of DAMGO to the control level. The inhibitory action of DPDPE against the antinociceptive effect of DAMGO could be antagonized by TIPP and TICPψ. We hypothesize that during the development of morphine tolerance the formation of µÎ´ heterodimers may contribute to the spinal opioid tolerance. δ ligands may affect the dimer formation differently. Those, like DPDPE may facilitate the dimer formation hence inhibit the antinociceptive effect of DAMGO by causing virtual µ receptor down-regulation. Ligands that do not affect the dimer formation do not influence antinociception either but ligands with the presumed capability of disconnecting the dimers may decrease the spinal tolerance to DAMGO.

Binding of sodium channel inhibitors to hyperpolarized and depolarized conformations of the channel.

Sodium channels are inhibited by a chemically diverse group of compounds. In the last decade entirely new structural classes with superior properties have been discovered, and novel therapeutic uses of sodium channel inhibitors (SCIs) have been suggested. Many promising novel drug candidates have been described and characterized. Published structure-activity relationship studies, pharmacophore models, and mutagenesis studies seem to lag behind, dealing with only a limited group of inhibitor compounds. The abundance of novel compounds requires an organized comparison of drug potencies. The affinity of sodium channel inhibitors can vary typically ten- to thousand-fold depending on the voltage protocol; therefore comparison of electrophysiology data is difficult. In this study we describe a method for standardization of these data with the help of a simple model of state-dependence. We derived hyperpolarized (resting) and depolarized (generally termed "inactivated") state affinities for the studied drugs, which made the measurements comparable. We show a rank order of SCIs based on resting and inactivated affinity values. In an attempt to define basic chemical requirements for sodium channel inhibitor activity we investigated the dependence of both resting and inactivated state affinities on individual chemical descriptors. Lipophilicity (most often expressed by the logP value) is the single most important determinant of SCI potency. We investigated the independent impact of several other calculated chemical properties by standardizing drug potencies for logP values. By combining these two approaches: standardization of affinity values, and standardization of potencies, we concluded that while resting affinity is mostly determined by lipophilicity, inactivated state affinity is determined by a more complex interaction of chemical properties, including hydrogen bond acceptors, aromatic rings, and molecular weight.

The mechanism of activity-dependent sodium channel inhibition by the antidepressants fluoxetine and desipramine.

The effect of monoamine uptake inhibitor-type antidepressants on sodium channels of hippocampal neurons was investigated. Members of the tricyclic group of antidepressants are known to modify multiple targets, including sodium channels, whereas selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are regarded as highly selective compounds, and their effect on sodium channels was not investigated in detail. In this study, a representative member of each group was chosen: the tricyclic antidepressant desipramine and the SSRI fluoxetine. The drugs were roughly equipotent use-dependent inhibitors of sodium channels, with IC(50) values approximately 100 microM at -150 mV holding potential, and approximately 1 microM at -60 mV. We suggest that therapeutic concentrations of antidepressants affect neuronal information processing partly by direct, activity-dependent inhibition of sodium channels. As for the mechanism of inhibition, use-dependent inhibition by antidepressants was believed to be due to a preferential affinity to the fast-inactivated state. Using a voltage and perfusion protocol by which relative affinities to fast-versus slow-inactivated states could be assessed, we challenged this view and found that the affinity of both drugs to slowinactivated state(s) was higher. We propose a different mechanism of action for these antidepressants, in which slow rather than fast inactivation plays the dominant role. This mechanism is similar but not equivalent with the novel mechanism of usedependent sodium channel inhibition previously described by our group (Neuroscience 125:1019-1028, 2004; Neuroreport 14:1945-1949, 2003). Our results suggest that different drugs can produce use-dependent sodium channel inhibition by different mechanisms.