4.6 Article

The IOP-lowering effects and mechanism of action of tafluprost in prostanoid receptor-deficient mice

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 91, 期 5, 页码 673-676

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.105585

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To clarify the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering profile of tafluprost, a newly synthesised prostaglandin F-2 alpha analogue, in mice. Methods: C57BL/6J, and EP1, EP2, EP3 and postaglandin F (FP) receptor-deficient wild-type (WT), EP1KO, EP2KO, EP3KO and FPKO, respectively mice were bred and acclimatised under a 12-h (6:00-18:00) light dark cycle. To evaluate effects of tafluprost (0.002%) on IOP at night, a single 3 ml drop of tafluprost solution was applied topically at 18: 00 once into one eye in each mouse. IOP was measured 3 h after the application with a microneedle method. To clarify whether endogenous prostaglandin is concerned with the tafluprost-induced IOP reduction, we applied 0.1% diclofenac Na, a cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor or PBS 30 min before the application of tafluprost in WT and EP3KO mice and measured IOP 3 h after the tafluprost application. We also determined whether animals responded predictably to 0.1% bunazosin HCl, a drug known to increase uveoscleral outflow. Results: 3 h after the application of 0.0015% tafluprost, mean (SEM) IOP reductions were 25.8 (2.1)% 26.3 (0.8)% 24.2 (1.4)% 16.5 (1.7)% and 20.9 (1.5)% in WT, EP1KO, EP2KO, EP3KO and FPKO mice, respectively. IOP reductions in EP3KO and FPKO mice were significantly smaller than in WT mice. Pretreatment with diclofenac Na significantly attenuated the IOP lowering effect of tafluprost in WT mice but not in EP3KO mice. Bunazosin HCl lowered IOP significantly in all genotypes by the same amount. Conclusion: We conclude that tafluprost lowers IOP through the prostanoid FP receptor. A part of ocular hypotensive effect of tafluprost is attributed to FP receptor-mediated prostaglandin production acting through the prostanoid EP3 receptor.

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

4.6
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