Agonist-directed trafficking explaining the difference between response pattern of naratriptan and sumatriptan in rabbit common carotid artery.
Article Details
- CitationCopy to clipboard
Akin D, Onaran HO, Gurdal H
Agonist-directed trafficking explaining the difference between response pattern of naratriptan and sumatriptan in rabbit common carotid artery.
Br J Pharmacol. 2002 May;136(2):171-6.
- PubMed ID
- 12010764 [ View in PubMed]
- Abstract
1. Sumatriptan or eletriptan produced vasocontraction in common carotid artery (CCA) by stimulating 5HT(1B) receptors (see also Akin & Gurdal, this issue). 2. Naratriptan as a 5HT(1B/D) agonist, was unable to produce vasocontraction in this artery, but inhibited the vasocontractile response induced by sumatriptan or eletriptan. 3. All these agonists inhibited forskolin-stimulated cyclic AMP production with comparable potencies and maximal responses. This inhibition was mediated by 5HT(1B) receptors: 5HT(1B) antagonist SB216641 (1 microM) completeley antagonized sumatriptan-, eletriptan- or naratriptan-induced cyclic AMP inhibition, but 5HT(1D) antagonist BRL15572 (1 microM) did not affect this response. 4. Naratriptan-induced stimulation of 5-HT(1B) receptors resulted only in adenylate cyclase inhibition, whereas stimulation of these receptors by sumatriptan or eletriptan produced vasocontraction as well. Hence, we concluded that the 5HT(1B)-mediated inhibition of adenylate cyclase was not a sufficient condition to couple the receptor stimulation to vasocontraction. 5. We discussed agonist-induced trafficking as a plausible mechanism for the observed phenomenon.
DrugBank Data that Cites this Article
- Drug Targets
Drug Target Kind Organism Pharmacological Action Actions Naratriptan 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 1B Protein Humans YesAgonistDetails Naratriptan 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 1D Protein Humans YesAgonistDetails