ArticleMolecular pharmacology2009
Site selectivity of competitive antagonists for the mouse adult muscle nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.
Article in Molecular pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Rocuronium: A Randomized Controlled Trial.The Kobe journal of medical sciences · 2025Trial
- On the relationship between inhibition and receptor occupancy by nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs.Theoretical biology & medical modelling · 2021Article
- High-Throughput Patch Clamp Screening in Human α6-Containing Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors.SLAS discovery : advancing life sciences R & D · 2017Article
- Simulation of the kinetics of neuromuscular block: implications for speed of onset.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2013Article
- Post-junctional interactions between neuromuscular blocking agents and ethanol at the mouse neuromuscular junction.British journal of pharmacology · 2010Article
- Monte Carlo simulation of buffered diffusion into and out of a model synapse.Biophysical journal · 2010Article
- Complete resistance after maximal dose of rocuronium.Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeuticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The muscle-type nicotinic acetylcholine receptor has two nonidentical binding sites for ligands. The selectivity of acetylcholine and the competitive antagonists (+)-tubocurarine and metocurine for adult mouse receptors is known. Here, we examine the site selectivity for four other competitive antagonists: cisatracurium, pancuronium, vecuronium, and rocuronium. We rapidly applied acetylcholine to outside-out patches from transfected BOSC23 cells and measured macroscopic currents. We have reported the IC(50) of the antagonists individually in prior publications. Here, we determined inhibition by pairs of competitive antagonists. At least one antagonist was present at a concentration producing > or =67% receptor inhibition. Metocurine shifted the apparent IC(50) of (+)-tubocurarine in quantitative agreement with complete competitive antagonism. The same was observed for pancuronium competing with vecuronium. However, pancuronium and vecuronium each shifted the apparent IC(50) of (+)-tubocurarine less than expected for complete competition but more than expected for independent binding. The situation was similar for cisatracurium and (+)-tubocurarine or metocurine. Cisatracurium did not shift the apparent IC(50) of pancuronium or vecuronium, indicating independent binding of these two pairs. The data were fit to a two-site, two-antagonist model to determine the antagonist binding constants for each site, L(alphaepsilon) and L(alphadelta). We found L(alphaepsilon)/L(alphadelta) = 0.22 (range, 0.14-0.34), 20 (9-29), 21 (4-36), and 1.5 (0.3-2.9) for cisatracurium, pancuronium, vecuronium, and rocuronium, respectively. The wide range of L(alphaepsilon)/L(alphadelta) for some antagonists may reflect experimental uncertainties in the low affinity site, relatively poor selectivity (rocuronium), or possibly that the binding of an antagonist at one site affects the affinity of the second site.
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.