4.7 Article

PSNCBAM-1, a novel allosteric antagonist at cannabinoid CB1 receptors with hypophagic effects in rats

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 152, 期 5, 页码 805-814

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0707347

关键词

allosteric modulator; cannabinoid receptor; antagonist

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose: Rimonabant ( Acomplia (TM), SR141716A), a cannabinoid CB1 receptor inverse agonist, has recently been approved for the treatment of obesity. There are, however, concerns regarding its side effect profile. Developing a CB1 antagonist with a different pharmacological mechanism may lead to a safer alternative. To this end we have screened a proprietary small molecule library and have discovered a novel class of allosteric antagonist at CB1 receptors. Herein, we have characterized an optimized prototypical molecule, PSNCBAM-1, and its hypophagic effects in vivo. Experimental approach: A CB1 yeast reporter assay was used as a primary screen. PSNCBAM-1 was additionally characterized in [ S-35]-GTP gamma S, cAMP and radioligand binding assays. An acute rat feeding model was used to evaluate its effects on food intake and body weight in vivo. Key results: In CB1 receptor yeast reporter assays, PSNCBAM-1 blocked the effects induced by agonists such as CP55,940, WIN55212-2, anandamide (AEA) or 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG). The antagonist characteristics of PSNCBAM-1 were confirmed in [S-35]-GTPgS binding and cAMP assays and was shown to be non-competitive by Schild analyses. PSNCBAM-1 did not affect CB2 receptors. In radioligand binding assays, PSNCBAM-1 increased the binding of [H-3] CP55,940 despite its antagonist effects. In an acute rat feeding model, PSNCBAM-1 decreased food intake and body weight. Conclusions and implications: PSNCBAM-1 exerted its effects through selective allosteric modulation of the CB1 receptor. The acute effects on food intake and body weight induced in rats provide a first report of in vivo activity for an allosteric CB1 receptor antagonist.

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

4.7
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