Peptides for Health Benefits 2019
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Endomorphins and Activation of the Hypothalamo–Pituitary–Adrenal Axis
185 Endomorphins and activation of the hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenal axis T L Coventry, D S Jessop, D P Finn, M D Crabb, H Kinoshita and M S Harbuz University Research Centre for Neuroendocrinology, University of Bristol, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Marlborough Street, Bristol BS2 8HW, UK (Requests for offprints should be addressed to M S Harbuz; Email: [email protected]) Abstract Endomorphin (EM)-1 and EM-2 are opioid tetrapeptides unaffected by either morphine or endomorphins. Since recently located in the central nervous system and immune release of other opioids are elevated in response to acute tissues with high selectivity and affinity for the µ-opioid stress, we exposed rats to a range of stressors to determine receptor. Intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) administration of whether plasma EM-1 and EM-2 can be stimulated by morphine stimulates the hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenal HPA axis activation. Plasma corticosterone, ACTH and (HPA) axis. The present study investigated the effect of -endorphin were elevated following acute restraint stress, centrally administered EM-1 and EM-2 on HPA axis but concentrations of plasma EM-1-immunoreactivity (ir) activation. Rats received a single i.c.v. injection of either and EM-2-ir did not change significantly. Corticosterone, EM-1 (0·1, 1·0, 10 µg), EM-2 (10 µg), morphine (10 µg), ACTH and -endorphin were further elevated in or vehicle (0·9% saline). Blood samples for plasma cortico- adjuvant-induced arthritis (AA) rats by a single injection of sterone determinations were taken immediately prior to lipopolysaccharide (LPS), but not by restraint stress. -
Principle of Pharmacodynamics
Principle of pharmacodynamics Dr. M. Emamghoreishi Full Professor Department of Pharmacology Medical School Shiraz University of Medical Sciences Email:[email protected] Reference: Basic & Clinical Pharmacology: Bertrum G. Katzung and Anthony J. Treveror, 13th edition, 2015, chapter 20, p. 336-351 Learning Objectives: At the end of sessions, students should be able to: 1. Define pharmacology and explain its importance for a clinician. 2. Define ―drug receptor‖. 3. Explain the nature of drug receptors. 4. Describe other sites of drug actions. 5. Explain the drug-receptor interaction. 6. Define the terms ―affinity‖, ―intrinsic activity‖ and ―Kd‖. 7. Explain the terms ―agonist‖ and ―antagonist‖ and their different types. 8. Explain chemical and physiological antagonists. 9. Explain the differences in drug responsiveness. 10. Explain tolerance, tachyphylaxis, and overshoot. 11. Define different dose-response curves. 12. Explain the information that can be obtained from a graded dose-response curve. 13. Describe the potency and efficacy of drugs. 14. Explain shift of dose-response curves in the presence of competitive and irreversible antagonists and its importance in clinical application of antagonists. 15. Explain the information that can be obtained from a quantal dose-response curve. 16. Define the terms ED50, TD50, LD50, therapeutic index and certain safety factor. What is Pharmacology?It is defined as the study of drugs (substances used to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease). Pharmacology is the science that deals with the interactions betweena drug and the bodyor living systems. The interactions between a drug and the body are conveniently divided into two classes. The actions of the drug on the body are termed pharmacodynamicprocesses.These properties determine the group in which the drug is classified, and they play the major role in deciding whether that group is appropriate therapy for a particular symptom or disease. -
Making Sense of Pharmacology: Inverse Agonism and Functional Selectivity Kelly A
International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2018) 21(10): 962–977 doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyy071 Advance Access Publication: August 6, 2018 Review review Making Sense of Pharmacology: Inverse Agonism and Functional Selectivity Kelly A. Berg and William P. Clarke Department of Pharmacology, University of Texas Health, San Antonio, Texas. Correspondence: William P. Clarke, PhD, Department of Pharmacology, Mail Stop 7764, UT Health at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX 78229 ([email protected]). Abstract Constitutive receptor activity/inverse agonism and functional selectivity/biased agonism are 2 concepts in contemporary pharmacology that have major implications for the use of drugs in medicine and research as well as for the processes of new drug development. Traditional receptor theory postulated that receptors in a population are quiescent unless activated by a ligand. Within this framework ligands could act as agonists with various degrees of intrinsic efficacy, or as antagonists with zero intrinsic efficacy. We now know that receptors can be active without an activating ligand and thus display “constitutive” activity. As a result, a new class of ligand was discovered that can reduce the constitutive activity of a receptor. These ligands produce the opposite effect of an agonist and are called inverse agonists. The second topic discussed is functional selectivity, also commonly referred to as biased agonism. Traditional receptor theory also posited that intrinsic efficacy is a single drug property independent of the system in which the drug acts. However, we now know that a drug, acting at a single receptor subtype, can have multiple intrinsic efficacies that differ depending on which of the multiple responses coupled to a receptor is measured. -
Biopharmacy Practice
University of Szeged Biopharmacy practice Editor: Árpád Márki, Ph.D. Authors: Árpád Márki, Ph.D. Adrienn Seres, Ph.D. Anita Sztojkov-Ivanov, Ph.D. Reviewed by: Szilárd Pál, Ph.D. Szeged, 2015. This work is supported by the European Union, co-financed by the European Social Fund, within the framework of "Coordinated, practice-oriented, student-friendly modernization of biomedical education in three Hungarian universities (Pécs, Debrecen, Szeged), with focus on the strengthening of international competitiveness" TÁMOP-4.1.1.C-13/1/KONV-2014-0001 project. The curriculum cannot be sold in any form! Contents Contents ...................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Definitions, routes of drug administration ............................................................................. 6 1.1. Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 6 1.2. Routes of drug administration ......................................................................................... 7 1.3. Questions ....................................................................................................................... 10 2. Receptors .............................................................................................................................. 11 2.1. Definitions .................................................................................................................... -
Neurotransmitter and Neuropeptide Regulation of Mast Cell Function
Xu et al. Journal of Neuroinflammation (2020) 17:356 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-020-02029-3 REVIEW Open Access Neurotransmitter and neuropeptide regulation of mast cell function: a systematic review Huaping Xu1, Xiaoyun Shi2, Xin Li3, Jiexin Zou4, Chunyan Zhou5, Wenfeng Liu5, Huming Shao5, Hongbing Chen5 and Linbo Shi4* Abstract The existence of the neural control of mast cell functions has long been proposed. Mast cells (MCs) are localized in association with the peripheral nervous system (PNS) and the brain, where they are closely aligned, anatomically and functionally, with neurons and neuronal processes throughout the body. They express receptors for and are regulated by various neurotransmitters, neuropeptides, and other neuromodulators. Consequently, modulation provided by these neurotransmitters and neuromodulators allows neural control of MC functions and involvement in the pathogenesis of mast cell–related disease states. Recently, the roles of individual neurotransmitters and neuropeptides in regulating mast cell actions have been investigated extensively. This review offers a systematic review of recent advances in our understanding of the contributions of neurotransmitters and neuropeptides to mast cell activation and the pathological implications of this regulation on mast cell–related disease states, though the full extent to which such control influences health and disease is still unclear, and a complete understanding of the mechanisms underlying the control is lacking. Future validation of animal and in vitro models also is needed, which incorporates the integration of microenvironment-specific influences and the complex, multifaceted cross-talk between mast cells and various neural signals. Moreover, new biological agents directed against neurotransmitter receptors on mast cells that can be used for therapeutic intervention need to be more specific, which will reduce their ability to support inflammatory responses and enhance their potential roles in protecting against mast cell–related pathogenesis. -
When Simple Agonism Is Not Enough: Emerging Modalities of GPCR Ligands Nicola J
When simple agonism is not enough: emerging modalities of GPCR ligands Nicola J. Smith, Kirstie A. Bennett, Graeme Milligan To cite this version: Nicola J. Smith, Kirstie A. Bennett, Graeme Milligan. When simple agonism is not enough: emerging modalities of GPCR ligands. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology, Elsevier, 2010, 331 (2), pp.241. 10.1016/j.mce.2010.07.009. hal-00654484 HAL Id: hal-00654484 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00654484 Submitted on 22 Dec 2011 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Accepted Manuscript Title: When simple agonism is not enough: emerging modalities of GPCR ligands Authors: Nicola J. Smith, Kirstie A. Bennett, Graeme Milligan PII: S0303-7207(10)00370-9 DOI: doi:10.1016/j.mce.2010.07.009 Reference: MCE 7596 To appear in: Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology Received date: 15-1-2010 Revised date: 15-6-2010 Accepted date: 13-7-2010 Please cite this article as: Smith, N.J., Bennett, K.A., Milligan, G., When simple agonism is not enough: emerging modalities of GPCR ligands, Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology (2010), doi:10.1016/j.mce.2010.07.009 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. -
Drug Action-Receptor Theory
Drug action-Receptor Theory Molecules (eg, drugs, hormones, neurotransmitters) that bind to a receptor are called ligands. The binding can be specific and reversible. A ligand may activate or inactivate a receptor; activation may increase or decrease a particular cell function. Each ligand may interact with multiple receptor subtypes. Few if any drugs are absolutely specific for one receptor or subtype, but most have relative selectivity. Selectivity is the degree to which a drug acts on a given site relative to other sites; selectivity relates largely to physicochemical binding of the drug to cellular receptors. A drug’s ability to affect a given receptor is related to the drug’s affinity (probability of the drug occupying a receptor at any given instant) and intrinsic efficacy (intrinsic activity—degree to which a ligand activates receptors and leads to cellular response). A drug’s affinity and activity are determined by its chemical structure. The pharmacologic effect is also determined by the duration of time that the drug-receptor complex persists (residence time). The lifetime of the drug-receptor complex is affected by dynamic processes (conformation changes) that control the rate of drug association and dissociation from the target. A longer residence time explains a prolonged pharmacologic effect. Drugs with long residence times include finasteride and darunavir. A longer residence time can be a potential disadvantage when it prolongs a drug's toxicity. For some receptors, transient drug occupancy produces the desired pharmacologic effect, whereas prolonged occupancy causes toxicity. Ability to bind to a receptor is influenced by external factors as well as by intracellular regulatory mechanisms. -
Biased Receptor Functionality Versus Biased Agonism in G-Protein-Coupled Receptors Journal Xyz 2017; 1 (2): 122–135
BioMol Concepts 2018; 9: 143–154 Review Open Access Rafael Franco*, David Aguinaga, Jasmina Jiménez, Jaume Lillo, Eva Martínez-Pinilla*#, Gemma Navarro# Biased receptor functionality versus biased agonism in G-protein-coupled receptors Journal xyz 2017; 1 (2): 122–135 https://doi.org/10.1515/bmc-2018-0013 b-arrestins or calcium sensors are also provided. Each of receivedThe FirstJuly 19, Decade 2018; accepted (1964-1972) November 2, 2018. the functional GPCR units (which are finite in number) has Abstract:Research Functional Article selectivity is a property of G-protein- a specific conformation. Binding of agonist to a specific coupled receptors (GPCRs) by which activation by conformation, i.e. GPCR activation, is sensitive to the differentMax Musterman, agonists leads Paul to differentPlaceholder signal transduction kinetics of the agonist-receptor interactions. All these mechanisms. This phenomenon is also known as biased players are involved in the contrasting outputs obtained agonismWhat and Is has So attracted Different the interest Aboutof drug discovery when different agonists are assayed. programsNeuroenhancement? in both academy and industry. This relatively recent concept has raised concerns as to the validity and Keywords: conformational landscape; GPCR heteromer; realWas translational ist so value anders of the results am showing Neuroenhancement? bias; firstly cytocrin; effectors; dimer; oligomer; structure. biased agonism may vary significantly depending on the cellPharmacological type and the experimental and Mental constraints, -
The Opioid-Pain Nexus: Safe Opioid Prescribing at This Cultural Moment October 4, 2019
The Opioid-Pain Nexus: Safe Opioid Prescribing at this Cultural Moment October 4, 2019 Daniel L. Millspaugh, MD Nothing to Disclose Director, Opioid Stewardship Program Director, Comprehensive Pain Management US Opioid Prescribing ~30% of World’s Opioids, ~5% World’s Population FDA and IQVIA 2018 ✓ Poor Illicit Quality Control Prescriptions ✓ Also Cocaine & Meth in 2010 ✓ Polypharmacy ✓ Life Expectancy (3 yrs.) Polypharmacy Alcohol in 7-22% also Warner et al. National Vitals Statistics Report 2016; 65:10 Regional Variation in Overdose Deaths 2014-2016 c/w 2002-2004 Economic Distress + Opioid OD Deaths Monnat 6/20/19. Institute for New Economic Thinking Motivation & Reward Mesocorticolimbic Circuitry (ACC) PRIORITIZING • Natural Rewards • Addiction • Mood • Chronic Pain • Sleep Hedonic Valuation Hedonostat Opioids LIKING Dopamine WANTING (drive) Hyman et al. 2006, modified AN RV278-N E29-20 ARI 9 M ay 2006 14:29 Neurocircuitry of Addiction Nicotine, + alcohol Opiates Opioid Glutamate inputs peptides – (e.g. from cortex) Alcohol VTA Opiates GABA interneuron ? – PCP – Alcohol ? Stimulants NMDAR + DA D1R + CREB Nicotine NAChR DA or ΔFosB D2R g r – o + Cannabinoids . s Glutamate y l w e n inputs i o v e (e.g. from e r s l VTA NAc u amygdala) a l u a n n n o a Hyman et al. 2006 s . Figure 4 r s l e a p n Actions of opiates, nicotine, alcohol, and phencycline (PCP) in reward circuits. Ventral tegmental area r r o u F bottom left bottom right o (VTA) dopamine neurons ( ) project to the nucleus accumbens (N Ac) ( ). Different j . r 8 a interneurons, schematically diagrammed above, interact with VTA neurons and N Ac neurons. -
International Union of Pharmacology Committee on Receptor Nomenclature and Drug Classification
0031-6997/03/5504-597–606$7.00 PHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEWS Vol. 55, No. 4 Copyright © 2003 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 30404/1114803 Pharmacol Rev 55:597–606, 2003 Printed in U.S.A International Union of Pharmacology Committee on Receptor Nomenclature and Drug Classification. XXXVIII. Update on Terms and Symbols in Quantitative Pharmacology RICHARD R. NEUBIG, MICHAEL SPEDDING, TERRY KENAKIN, AND ARTHUR CHRISTOPOULOS Department of Pharmacology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (R.R.N.); Institute de Recherches Internationales Servier, Neuilly sur Seine, France (M.S.); Systems Research, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina (T.K.); and Department of Pharmacology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia (A.C.) Abstract ............................................................................... 597 I. Introduction............................................................................ 597 II. Working definition of a receptor .......................................................... 598 III. Use of drugs in definition of receptors or of signaling pathways ............................. 598 A. The expression of amount of drug: concentration and dose ............................... 598 1. Concentration..................................................................... 598 2. Dose. ............................................................................ 598 B. General terms used to describe drug action ........................................... -
Endomorphin-1: Induction of Motor Behavior and Lack of Receptor Desensitization
The Journal of Neuroscience, June 15, 2001, 21(12):4436–4442 Endomorphin-1: Induction of Motor Behavior and Lack of Receptor Desensitization Arpesh Mehta,1 George Bot,2 Terry Reisine,2 and Marie-Franc¸ oise Chesselet1 1Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 90095, and 2Department of Pharmacology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 The endomorphins are recently discovered endogenous ago- ish the subsequent ability of the agonist to inhibit adenylate nists for the -opioid receptor (Zadina et al., 1997). Endomor- cyclase activity in cells expressing the cloned -opioid recep- phins produce analgesia; however, their role in other brain tor. Confirming the involvement of -opioid receptors, the be- functions has not been elucidated. We have investigated the havioral effect of endomorphin-1 in the globus pallidus was behavioral effects of endomorphin-1 in the globus pallidus, a blocked by the opioid antagonist naloxone and the -selective brain region that is rich in -opioid receptors and involved in peptide antagonist Cys 2-Tyr 3-Orn 5-Pen 7 amide (CTOP). Fur- 2 4 motor control. Bilateral administration of endomorphin-1 in the thermore, the selective receptor agonist [D-Ala -N-Me-Phe - globus pallidus of rats induced orofacial dyskinesia. This effect Glycol 5]-enkephalin (DAMGO) also stimulated orofacial dyski- was dose-dependent and at the highest dose tested (18 pmol nesia when infused into the globus pallidus, albeit transiently. per side) was sustained during the 60 min of observation, Our findings suggest that endogenous agonists may play a indicating that endomorphin-1 does not induce rapid desensi- role in hyperkinetic movement disorders by inducing sustained tization of this motor response. -
P2Y6R Agonist
Cognitive Vitality Reports® are reports written by neuroscientists at the Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation (ADDF). These scientific reports include analysis of drugs, drugs-in- development, drug targets, supplements, nutraceuticals, food/drink, non-pharmacologic interventions, and risk factors. Neuroscientists evaluate the potential benefit (or harm) for brain health, as well as for age-related health concerns that can affect brain health (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, cancers, diabetes/metabolic syndrome). In addition, these reports include evaluation of safety data, from clinical trials if available, and from preclinical models. P2Y6R Agonist Evidence Summary P2Y6R activation promotes microglial phagocytosis, but also drives vascular inflammation, so agonists may exacerbate cardiovascular disease. Short term safety is good, but long-term safety is unknown. Neuroprotective Benefit: P2Y6R stimulation promotes microglial activation and phagocytosis which may facilitate amyloid clearance, but may also promote neuroinflammation and neuronal loss. Aging and related health concerns: P2Y6R activity is associated with the exacerbation of hypertension, atherosclerosis, neuropathic pain, and cancer metastasis in preclinical models, but may benefit glaucoma. Safety: The agonist GC021109 was safe in short Phase 1 trials, but long-term safety has not been established. Effects may vary in different patient populations. 1 Availability: Research use Dose: Not established Endogenous agonist: UDP Chemical formula: C9H14N2O12P2 Half-life: Not reported BBB: Not reported MW: 404.16 g/mol Clinical trials: Two Phase 1 studies for Observational studies: GC021109 in healthy controls (n=44) None and mild/moderate AD (n=36). Source: PubChem What is it? The P2Y6 receptor (P2Y6R) is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) which belongs to the class of purinergic receptors.