ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2008
What systems can and can't do.
Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- 100 years of modelling ligand-receptor binding and response: A focus on GPCRs.British journal of pharmacology · 2020Review
- Angiotensin1-9 antagonises pro-hypertrophic signalling in cardiomyocytes via the angiotensin type 2 receptor.The Journal of physiology · 2011Article
- Different response patterns of several ligands at the sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor subtype 3 (S1P(3)).British journal of pharmacology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This commentary discusses a paper in this issue by Dr Jillian Baker on the antagonism of histamine H(2) receptors. It is an excellent example of the use of pharmacological principles to determine what systems can and can't do from the point of view of agonist-dependent antagonism. The most common model of antagonism, namely orthosteric, cannot discern agonist type; i.e. all agonists are blocked equally by a given orthosteric antagonist. Therefore, if quantitative assessment of antagonism unveils agonist dependence, then this is something an orthosteric mechanism cannot do and another mechanism must be considered. A simple alternative is a permissive allosteric model whereby the agonist and antagonist interact through conformational changes in the receptor protein. Under these circumstances, an agonist-antagonist dialogue can ensue whereby the nature of the agonist determines the magnitude of antagonist effect. Jillian Baker contrasts antagonist systems with historical data obtained for beta-adrenoceptors and the present data for histamine H(2) receptors where the simpler model of orthosteric antagonism suffices and thus shows how quantitative receptor pharmacology can be used to determine the molecular mechanism of antagonism.
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.