ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2005
An investigation of whether agonist-selective receptor conformations occur with respect to M2 and M4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor signalling via Gi/o and Gs proteins.
Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fine Tuning Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Signaling Through Allostery and Bias.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Review
- Superagonism at G protein-coupled receptors and beyond.British journal of pharmacology · 2016Review
- Agonists with supraphysiological efficacy at the muscarinic M2 ACh receptor.British journal of pharmacology · 2013Article
- Quantitative analysis reveals multiple mechanisms of allosteric modulation of the mGlu5 receptor in rat astroglia.Molecular pharmacology · 2011Article
- Lack of association of a spontaneous mutation of the Chrm2 gene with behavioral and physiologic phenotypic differences in inbred mice.Comparative medicine · 2010Article
- Contrasting effects of allosteric and orthosteric agonists on m1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor internalization and down-regulation.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2009Article
- Muscarinic inhibition of hippocampal and striatal adenylyl cyclase is mainly due to the M(4) receptor.Neurochemical research · 2009Article
- Membrane cholesterol content influences binding properties of muscarinic M2 receptors and differentially impacts activation of second messenger pathways.European journal of pharmacology · 2009Article
- Selectivity of agonists for the active state of M1 to M4 muscarinic receptor subtypes.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2009Article
- G alpha(q)-coupled muscarinic acetylcholine receptors enhance nicotinic acetylcholine receptor signaling in Caenorhabditis elegans mating behavior.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
1. A range of muscarinic acetylcholine (mACh) receptor agonists (methacholine (MCh), oxotremorine-M (OXO-M), oxotremorine (OXO), arecoline (AREC), bethanechol (BETH), pilocarpine (PILO)) have been investigated with respect to their binding to, and activation of, M(2) and M(4) mACh receptors, recombinantly expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells, to explore the possibility that these agonists may differentially affect mACh receptor-G(i/o) and -G(s) coupling. 2. M(2)/M(4) mACh receptor coupling to the adenylyl cyclase/cyclic AMP signalling pathway has been explored in intact cells. G(i/o)-mediated negative coupling to adenylyl cyclase was explored functionally by assessing the ability of the mACh receptor agonists to inhibit forskolin-stimulated enzymic activity. Following pertussis toxin treatment (100 ng ml(-1), 18-20 h) to inactivate G(i/o) proteins, each agonist caused a G(s)-mediated enhancement of forskolin-stimulated adenylyl cyclase activity. 3. At both M(2) and M(4) mACh receptors, all agonists tested were more potent in mediating G(i/o)- versus G(s)-coupled responses. This difference (determined as the pIC(50) (G(i/o) coupling) minus pEC(50) (G(s) coupling) value) was greatest for AREC (65-75-fold) and least for BETH and PILO (</=10-fold). 4. Using apparent binding affinities (pK(B)), and potency (EC(50)/IC(50)) and responsiveness (E(max)/I(max)) estimates, relative efficacy (e(rel)) values for each agonist with respect to M(2) and M(4) mACh receptor coupling to G(i/o)- and G(s)-mediated signalling were also calculated. While the e(rel) values obtained for MCh and OXO-M in CHO-m2 cells were similar, OXO-M behaved as a 'super-agonist' at the M(4) mACh receptor giving greater e(rel) values for both G(i/o) and G(s) coupling relative to MCh. 5. The experimental data indicate that while interesting differences between agonists with respect to M(2)/M(4) mACh receptor activation and receptor-G(i/o) and -G(s) coupling can be discerned, no clear examples of agonist trafficking of signal have emerged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.