4.1 Article

Cardiovascular safety profile of MA-2029, a novel motilin receptor antagonist

期刊

JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 33, 期 5, 页码 631-639

出版社

JAPANESE SOC TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.2131/jts.33.631

关键词

MA-2029; Cisapride; Safety assessment; Cardiovascular system; hERG; Action potential

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to assess the cardiovascular effect of MA-2029, a selective motilin receptor antagonist highly expected for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). MA-2029 inhibited the human ether-a-go-go-related gene (hERG) current at 100 mu g/ml, but shortened action potential duration (APD) in isolated guinea pig papillary muscles at 10 and 100 mu g/ml and the corrected QT (QTc) interval after oral administration of 30 and 300 mg/kg in conscious telemetered dogs. The discrepancy was probably caused by blockade of the Ca2+ channel because MA-2029 inhibited the Ca2+ current in isolated guinea pig myocytes. MA-2029 at 100 mu g/ml also decreased the maximum rising velocity and action potential amplitude in the action potential study, indicating that MA-2029 has Na+ channel blocking potential. In the cardiovascular Study, MA-2029 at 30 mg/kg induced slight cardiovascular changes Such as hypotension, QTc shortening, and PR prolongation possibly caused by Ca2+ channel blockade. The plasma concentration at 4 fir after 30 mg/kg administration was 2.10 mu g/ml, 200-fold higher than the effective concentration of MA-2029 as a motilin receptor antagonist. These results suggest that MA-2029 has sufficient cardiovascular safety although it inhibits multiple ion channels at supra-effective concentrations. On the other hand, cisapride, an effective IBS drug, showed clear hERG inhibition and APD prolongation at 100 ng/ml. Cisapride exhibited a narrow safety margin because it caused QT prolongation potential even at the therapeutic concentration. In conclusion, MA-2029 is a novel drug highly expected for the treatment of IBS with lower cardiovascular risk than cisapride.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据