Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Eur J Pharmacol. 2009 Mar 1;605(1-3):53-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2008.12.044. Epub 2009 Jan 11.

Pharmacological comparison of muscarinic ligands: historical versus more recent muscarinic M1-preferring receptor agonists.

Author information

  • 1Discovery Neuroscience, Wyeth Research, CN-8000, Princeton, NJ 08543, USA.

Abstract

In functional assay assessments using the five muscarinic receptor subtypes, a second generation of muscarinic M(1)-preferring receptor agonists [AC-42 (1), AC-260584 (2), 77-LH-28-1 (3) and LY-593039 (4)] was shown to have higher selectivity for muscarinic M(1) over M(3) receptor as compared to historical agonists [talsaclidine (8), sabcomeline (10), xanomeline (11), WAY-132983 (12), cevimeline (9) and NGX-267 (6)]. Another striking difference of these more recent compounds is their affinities for the dopamine D(2) and 5-HT(2B) receptors. Taken together, these results suggest that the newer compounds may have a greater clinical safety profile, especially with regard to muscarinic M(3) receptor-mediated events, than the historical agonists, but their affinities for other receptors may still compromise their use to validate the therapeutic potential of muscarinic M(1) receptor agonists.

PMID:
19168056
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk