Table 1.
Cpd (50 μM) | t 1/2 for [ 3 H ]S‐CIT dissociation (min) | n |
---|---|---|
Control | 85 ± 6.9 | 10 |
S‐CIT | 790 ± 160 | 4 |
2 | 380 ± 26 | 4 |
3 | 1090 ± 130 | 4 |
4 | 1170 ± 240 | 4 |
5 | 280 ± 70 | 4 |
6 | 260 ± 20 | 4 |
7 | 440 ± 30 | 4 |
8 | 570 ± 70 | 4 |
9 | 120 ± 10 | 4 |
10 | 110 ± 9.1 | 4 |
11 | 150 ± 18 | 4 |
12 | 150 ± 9.4 | 4 |
13 | 89 ± 6.5 | 4 |
14 | 85 ± 3.0 | 4 |
15 | 100 ± 15 | 4 |
Talopram | 100 ± 3.8 | 4 |
Effect on t 1/2 (min) for [3H]‐S‐CIT dissociation by 50 μM of the indicated cpds. The t 1/2 values were calculated by non‐linear regression analysis of prebound [3H]‐S‐CIT dissociation on membrane preparations from COS7 cells transiently expressing SERT. Data are shown as mean ± SEM of n number of individual experiments. Due to the high temperature sensitivity of the assay, a control sample was always performed in parallel to the compounds, hence the high sample size for the control.