In ferret ventricular myocardium, beta-blockers antagonize (-)-isoprenaline via a high-affinity state of the beta1-adrenoceptor, while CGP12177 acts through a low-affinity state.
Distinguishes beta1-adrenoceptor affinity states in ferret ventricle; leaves open relevance to human HF therapy.
We compared the potency of 11 clinically available beta-blockers as antagonists of the positive inotropic effects of (-)-isoprenaline and CGP12177 on ferret ventricular myocardium. (-)-CGP12177, (-)-pindolol and (-)-alprenolol were non-conventional partial agonists with intrinsic activity of 0.7, 0.2 and 0.1 respectively. All beta-blockers antagonized in a concentration-dependent and surmountable manner the positive inotropic effects of both (-)-isoprenaline and CGP12177. The potency of each beta-blocker was consistently higher against (-)-isoprenaline than against CGP12177. Two groups of beta-blockers were identified. In one group the difference between the pK(B) values of blockade against (-)-isoprenaline and CGP12177 was 1.1 - 1.6 log units ((-)-alprenolol, (-)-pindolol, (-)-bupranolol, nadolol and carvedilol). In the other group the pK(B) difference was of 2.1 - 3.0 log units ((-)-atenolol, metoprolol, bisoprolol, sotalol, (-)-propranolol and (-)-timolol). The beta-blockers competed with (-)-[(125)I]-cyanopindolol for binding to ventricular beta(1)-adrenoceptors. The binding affinities correlated with the corresponding blocking potencies against (-)-isoprenaline. On average the pK(i) values were 0.5 log units smaller than the pK(B) values against (-)-isoprenaline but 1.6 log units greater than the pK(B) values against CGP12177. In ferret ventricle the effects of (-)-isoprenaline appear to be antagonized by beta-blockers through the state of the beta(1)-adrenoceptor for which (-)-[(125)I]-cyanopindolol and beta-blockers have high affinity. The cardiostimulant effects of CGP12177 appear to be mediated through a low-affinity state of the beta(1)-adrenoceptor for which beta-blockers have low affinity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Löwe et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: