Skip to main content
NCBI home page
British Journal of Pharmacology logoLink to British Journal of Pharmacology
. 1976 Sep;58(1):57–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1976.tb07693.x

The kinetics of competitive antagonists on guinea-pig ileum.

F Roberts, R P Stephenson
PMCID: PMC1667141  PMID: 974378

Abstract

1 The kinetics of action of some competitive muscarinic and histamine antagonists were examined on guinea-pig isolated ileum and their behaviour compared with the predictions of the interaction-limited model described by Paton (1961). 2 The kinetics of antagonism were not consistent with the predictions of this model: (1) The apparent dissociation rate constant calculated from the decrease in occupancy on washout was not independent of the concentration of antagonist. (2) The dissociation rate constant of a 'slow' antagonist calculated from the change in occupancy when a 'fast' antagonist was superimposed varied with the concentration of fast antagonist. (3) If the concentration of slow antagonist was increased when the fast antagonist was superimposed so that the equilibrium occupancy of the 'slow' was the same as before, a transitional phase was observed. 3 The kinetics of antagonism were observed in longitudinal muscle strips and intact pieces of ileum, bathed in Tyrode or Krebs solution, and with isometric and isotonic recording. No evidence was found that the discrepancies between the interaction-limited model and the observed kinetics could be accounted for by the experimental method used. 4 It is therefore concluded that either access is rate-limiting in these circumstances or, if interaction is rate-limiting, some alternative interaction-limited model is required to describe the kinetics of antagonism. In either case it would seem unwise at this time to calculate antagonist-receptor rate constants from the observed kinetics of antagonism.

Full text

PDF
57

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Abramson F. B., Barlow R. B., Mustafa M. G., Stephenson R. P. Relationships between chemical structure and affinity for acetylcholine receptors. Br J Pharmacol. 1969 Sep;37(1):207–233. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1969.tb09539.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Colquhoun D., Ritchie J. M. The kinetics of the interaction between tetrodotoxin and mammalian nonmyelinated nerve fibers. Mol Pharmacol. 1972 May;8(3):285–292. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. FURCHGOTT R. F. The pharmacology of vascular smooth muscle. Pharmacol Rev. 1955 Jun;7(2):183–265. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. GREENGARD P., STRAUB R. W. After-potentials in mammalian non-myelinated nerve fibres. J Physiol. 1958 Dec 30;144(3):442–462. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1958.sp006112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gingsborg B. L., Stephenson R. P. On the simultaneous action of two competitive antagonists. Br J Pharmacol. 1974 Jun;51(2):287–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1974.tb09659.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. PATON W. D., RANG H. P. THE UPTAKE OF ATROPINE AND RELATED DRUGS BY INTESTINAL SMOOTH MUSCLE OF THE GUINEA-PIG IN RELATION TO ACETYLCHOLINE RECEPTORS. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1965 Aug 24;163:1–44. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1965.0058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. PATON W. D., ROTHSCHILD A. M. THE EFFECT OF VARYING CALCIUM CONCENTRATION ON THE KINETIC CONSTANTS OF HYOSCINE AND MEPYRAMINE ANTAGONISM. Br J Pharmacol Chemother. 1965 Apr;24:432–436. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1965.tb01730.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Paton W. D. Adrenergic receptors viewed in light of general receptor theories. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1967 Feb 10;139(3):632–644. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1967.tb41233.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Rang H. P. The kinetics of action of acetylcholine antagonists in smooth muscle. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1966 Apr 19;164(996):488–510. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1966.0045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Roberts F., Stephenson R. P. Proceedings: The kinetics of action of acetylcholine antagonists on guinea-pig ileum. Br J Pharmacol. 1974 May;51(1):128P–128P. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. STEPHENSON R. P. A modification of receptor theory. Br J Pharmacol Chemother. 1956 Dec;11(4):379–393. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1956.tb00006.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Stephenson R. P. Automatic control of isolated smooth muscle with digital print-out of contraction size. Br J Pharmacol. 1968 Sep;34(1):230P–230P. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Thron C. D., Waud D. R. The rate of action of atropine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1968 Mar;160(1):91–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Thron C. D., Waud D. R. The rate of action of atropine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1968 Mar;160(1):91–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Waud D. R. The rate of action of competitive neuromuscular blocking agents. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1967 Oct;158(1):99–114. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Pharmacology are provided here courtesy of The British Pharmacological Society

RESOURCES