4.5 Article

Different ability of clenbuterol and salbutamol to block sodium channels predicts their therapeutic use in muscle excitability disorders

Journal

MOLECULAR PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 63, Issue 3, Pages 659-670

Publisher

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/mol.63.3.659

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Telethon [1208] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Activation of muscle beta(2)-adrenergic receptors successfully counteracted sarcolemma inexcitability in patients suffering from hyperkalemic periodic paralysis (HPP), a hereditary disease caused by mutations in the gene encoding the skeletal muscle sodium channel. Looking for potential modulation of these channels by beta(2)-adrenergic pathway using patch-clamp technique, we found that clenbuterol blocked sodium currents (I-Na) in rat skeletal muscle fibers and in tsA201 cells transfected with the human channel isoform, whereas salbutamol did not. The effects of clenbuterol were independent of beta-adrenoceptor stimulation. Instead, clenbuterol structure and physicochemical characteristics as well as I-Na blocking properties resembled those of local anesthetics, suggesting direct binding to the channels. Similar experiments with the chemically similar beta-antagonists propranolol and nadolol, suggested the presence of two hydroxyl groups on the aromatic moiety of the drugs as a molecular requisite for impeding sodium channel block. Importantly, clenbuterol use-dependently inhibited action potential firing in rat skeletal muscle fibers, owing to beta-adrenoceptor-independent I-Na block. From a clinical point of view, our study defines the rationale for the safe use of salbutamol in HPP patients, whereas clenbuterol may be more indicated in patients suffering from myotonic syndromes, a condition characterized by sarcolemmal overexcitability, because use-dependent I-Na block can inhibit abnormal runs of action potentials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available