Search

The interaction of (-)-reboxetine, a non-tricyclic norepinephrine selective reuptake inhibitor, with muscle-type nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (AChRs) in different conformational states was studied by functional and structural approaches. The results established that (-)-reboxetine: (a) inhibits (±)-epibatidine-induced Ca(2+) influx in human (h) muscle embryonic (hα1β1γδ) and adult (hα1β1εδ) AChRs in a non-competitive manner and with potencies IC50=3.86±0.49 and 1.92±0.48 μM, respectively, (b) binds to the [(3)H]TCP site with ~13-fold higher affinity when the Torpedo AChR is in the desensitized state compared to the resting state, (c) enhances [(3)H]cytisine binding to the resting but activatableTorpedo AChR but not to the desensitized AChR, suggesting desensitizing properties, (d) overlaps the PCP luminal site located between rings 6' and 13' in the Torpedo but not human muscle AChRs. In silico mutation results indicate that ring 9' is the minimum structural component for (-)-reboxetine binding, and (e) interacts to non-luminal sites located within the transmembrane segments from the Torpedo AChR γ subunit, and at the α1/ε transmembrane interface from the adult muscle AChR. In conclusion, (-)-reboxetine non-competitively inhibits muscle AChRs by binding to the TCP luminal site and by inducing receptor desensitization (maybe by interacting with non-luminal sites), a mechanism that is shared by tricyclic antidepressants., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The interaction of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) with the human (h)alpha3beta4 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (AChR) in different conformational states was compared with that for mecamylamine by using functional and structural approaches including, Ca(2+) influx, radioligand binding, and molecular docking. The results established that: (a) [(3)H]imipramine binds to a single site with relatively high affinity (K(d) = 0.41 +/- 0.04 microM), (b) imipramine inhibits [(3)H]imipramine binding to the resting/kappa-bungarotoxin-bound AChR (K(i) = 0.68 +/- 0.08 microM) with practically the same affinity as to the desensitized/epibatidine-bound AChR (K(i) = 0.83 +/- 0.08 microM), suggesting that TCAs do not discriminate between these conformational states, and (c) although TCAs (IC(50) approximately 1.8-2.7 microM) and mecamylamine (IC(50) = 3.3 +/- 0.4 microM) inhibit (+/-)-epibatidine-induced Ca(2+) influx with potencies in the same concentration range, TCAs (K(i) approximately 1-3.6 microM), but not mecamylamine (apparent IC(50) approximately 0.2 mM), inhibit [(3)H]imipramine binding to halpha3beta4 AChRs in different conformational states. This is explained by our docking results where imipramine, in the neutral and protonated states, interacts with the leucine (position 9') and valine/phenylalanine (position 13') rings, whereas protonated mecamylamine (>99% at physiological pH) interacts with the outer ring (position 20'). Our data indicate that TCAs bind to overlapping sites located between the serine and valine/phenylalanine rings in the halpha3beta4 AChR ion channel, whereas protonated mecamylamine can be attracted to the channel mouth before blocking ion flux by interacting with a luminal site in its neutral state., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)