Key result
At a concentration of 300 µM, verapamil significantly inhibited Kir2.3 channels by 69.98% by binding to the pore and interfering with PIP2 binding.
Why the study?
Verapamil blocks IK1 current and Kir2.1, but its effect on other Kir subunits contributing to IK1 current had not been studied.
Effect estimate: 69.98 ± 4.2% reduction
p-value: p=3.45 × 10^-11
Verapamil significantly inhibits Kir2.3 channels by binding to pore residues E291 and D251 and interfering with PIP2 binding, highlighting a potential atrial-selective antiarrhythmic mechanism.
The inwardly rectifying potassium current of the cardiomyocyte (IK1) is the main determinant of the resting potential. Ion channels Kir2.1, Kir2.2, and Kir2.3 form tetramers and are the molecular correlate of macroscopic IK1 current. Verapamil is an antiarrhythmic drug used to suppress atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. Its primary mechanism of action is via blocking calcium channels. In addition, it has been demonstrated to block IK1 current and the Kir2.1 subunit. Its effect on other subunits that contribute to IK1 current has not been studied to date. We therefore analyzed the effect of verapamil on the Kir channels 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 in the Xenopus oocyte expression system. Kir2.1, Kir2.2, and Kir2.3 channels were heterologously expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Respective currents were measured with the voltage clamp technique and the effect of verapamil on the current was measured. At a concentration of 300 µM, verapamil inhibited Kir2.1 channels by 41.36% ± 2.7 of the initial current, Kir2.2 channels by 16.51 ± 3.6%, and Kir2.3 by 69.98 ± 4.2%. As a verapamil effect on kir2.3 was a previously unknown finding, we analyzed this effect further. At wash in with 300 µM verapamil, the maximal effect was seen within 20 min of the infusion. After washing out with control solution, there was only a partial current recovery. The current reduction from verapamil was the same at − 120 mV (73.2 ± 3.7%), − 40 mV (85.5 ± 6.5%), and 0 mV (61.5 ± 10.6%) implying no voltage dependency of the block. Using site directed mutations in putative binding sites, we demonstrated a decrease of effect with pore mutant E291A and absence of verapamil effect for D251A. With mutant I214L, which shows a stronger affinity for PIP2 binding, we observed a normalized current reduction to 61.9 ± 0.06% of the control current, which was significantly less pronounced compared to wild type channels. Verapamil blocks Kir2.1, Kir2.2, and Kir2.3 subunits. In Kir2.3, blockade is dependent on sites E291 and D251 and interferes with activation of the channel via PIP2. Interference with these sites and with PIP2 binding has also been described for other Kir channels blocking drugs. As Kir2.3 is preferentially expressed in atrium, a selective Kir2.3 blocking agent would constitute an interesting antiarrhythmic concept.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xynogalos et al. (2022) studied Cardiac arrhythmias (in vitro model). Verapamil vs. Control solution was evaluated on Reduction of initial current in Kir2.3 channels (69.98 ± 4.2% reduction, p=3.45 × 10^-11). At a concentration of 300 µM, verapamil significantly inhibited Kir2.3 channels by 69.98% by binding to the pore and interfering with PIP2 binding.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: