Congying Wang1, Guang-Wen Li, Li-Yen Mae Huang. 1. Department of Neuroscience and Cell Biology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77555-1069, USA. conwang@utmb.edu
Abstract
Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is a well-known inflammatory mediator that enhances the excitability of DRG neurons. Homomeric P2X3 and heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors are abundantly expressed in dorsal root ganglia (DRG) neurons and participate in the transmission of nociceptive signals. The interaction between PGE2 and P2X3 receptors has not been well delineated. We studied the actions of PGE2 on ATP-activated currents in dissociated DRG neurons under voltage-clamp conditions. PGE2 had no effects on P2X2/3 receptor-mediated responses, but significantly potentiated fast-inactivating ATP currents mediated by homomeric P2X3 receptors. PGE2 exerted its action by activating EP3 receptors. To study the mechanism underlying the action of PGE2, we found that the adenylyl cyclase activator, forskolin and the membrane-permeable cAMP analogue, 8-Br-cAMP increased ATP currents, mimicking the effect of PGE2. In addition, forskolin occluded the enhancement produced by PGE2. The protein kinase A (PKA) inhibitors, H89 and PKA-I blocked the PGE2 effect. In contrast, the PKC inhibitor, bisindolymaleimide (Bis) did not change the potentiating action of PGE2. We further showed that PGE2 enhanced alpha,beta-meATP-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia and the enhancement was blocked by H89. These observations suggest that PGE2 binds to EP3 receptors, resulting in the activation of cAMP/PKA signaling pathway and leading to an enhancement of P2X3 homomeric receptor-mediated ATP responses in DRG neurons.
Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is a well-known inflammatory mediator that enhances the excitability of DRG neurons. Homomeric P2X3 and heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors are abundantly expressed in dorsal root ganglia (DRG) neurons and participate in the transmission of nociceptive signals. The interaction between PGE2 and P2X3 receptors has not been well delineated. We studied the actions of PGE2 on ATP-activated currents in dissociated DRG neurons under voltage-clamp conditions. PGE2 had no effects on P2X2/3 receptor-mediated responses, but significantly potentiated fast-inactivating ATP currents mediated by homomeric P2X3 receptors. PGE2 exerted its action by activating EP3 receptors. To study the mechanism underlying the action of PGE2, we found that the adenylyl cyclase activator, forskolin and the membrane-permeable cAMP analogue, 8-Br-cAMP increased ATP currents, mimicking the effect of PGE2. In addition, forskolin occluded the enhancement produced by PGE2. The protein kinase A (PKA) inhibitors, H89 and PKA-I blocked the PGE2 effect. In contrast, the PKC inhibitor, bisindolymaleimide (Bis) did not change the potentiating action of PGE2. We further showed that PGE2 enhanced alpha,beta-meATP-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia and the enhancement was blocked by H89. These observations suggest that PGE2 binds to EP3 receptors, resulting in the activation of cAMP/PKA signaling pathway and leading to an enhancement of P2X3 homomeric receptor-mediated ATP responses in DRG neurons.
ATP plays a prominent role in nociception. Its application onto human skin elicits pain
[1,2]. Injection of
ATP into the rat hindpaw reduces paw withdrawal latencies and produces flinching and
writhing behaviors [3-6]. Recent studies of purinergic receptors
in primary sensory dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons demonstrate that ATP gives rise to
nociception by activating P2X receptors in primary sensory DRG neurons [7-9]. In
situ hybridization assay indicates that P2X2-P2X6 mRNAs are present in DRG
neurons [10]. P2X2 and P2X3 receptors are the
major receptor types selectively expressed in peripheral and central terminals and the
somata of DRG neurons [11-14]. These neurons are small
(diameter d < 25 μm) and medium (25 < d < 40 μm) in size, bind
isolectin B4 and express vanilloid TRPV1 receptors [15-18]. The importance of P2X3-containing receptors in nociception
is further confirmed by the findings that nociceptive behaviors become greatly
diminished in P2X3 knock-out mice [19,20] and in animals treated with P2X3 antisense oligonuclotides
[21], small interfering RNA (siRNA)
[22] or the specific P2X3 antagonist,
A-37491 [23]. Electrophysiological studies
indicate that ATP produces large inward currents by activating P2X3 homomeric and P2X2/3
heteromeric receptors, thus evoking depolarization in small and medium DRG neurons
[11,13,14,24,25]. In the
spinal dorsal horn, ATP, released from the central terminals of DRG neurons, acts on
presynaptic P2X receptors to promote AMPA receptor-mediated synaptic transmission in
nociceptive pathways [26-30]An important characteristic of P2X3 receptor-mediated responses is its sensitivity to
tissue and nerve injury. Nociceptive behaviors produced by ATP become greatly enhanced
after inflammation [24] and nerve injury
[31-33]. An increase in P2X3 receptor-mediated responses is one of
the major reasons for the enhancement [11,31]. We found that the ATP currents in DRG neurons isolated from
rats with inflammation or nerve injury are 2–3 fold larger [11,31]. The mechanisms responsible
for the increase include upregulation of P2X3 receptors [11], enhancement of trafficking of P2X3 receptors toward the
membrane [31] and activation of calmodulin
protein kinase II [34]. The chemical mediator
prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is released during inflammation and sensitizes peripheral
terminals of DRG neurons [35,36]. It increases capsaicin-evoked currents [37,38], promotes the release of substance P
and CGRP from sensory neurons [39,40]. In the spinal cord, PGE2 dis-inhibits dorsal horn neurons by
blocking inhibitory glycinergic synaptic responses [41,42]. PGE2 was found to enhance
α,β-elicited nociceptive behaviors in
rats [3]. The interaction between PGE2 and
purinergic receptors has not been thoroughly investigated. Studying the action of PGE2
on ATP currents in DRG neurons, we found that PGE2 increases P2X3-receptor mediated ATP
currents. Protein kinase A (PKA) mediates the potentiating action of PGE2.
Results
PGE2 potentiates P2X3 receptor-mediated ATP responses
We first determined the effects of PGE2 on ATP or its analog,
α,β-meATP-activated currents in DRG neurons. Only small (cross sectional
area < 600 μm2) and medium (600–1200 μm2)
cells, which are known to mediate the transmission of nociceptive signals
[43], were used for the study.
Application of 10 μM ATP or α,β-meATP at a holding potential of -60 mV
elicited large inward currents in more than 80% of the neurons tested (Fig. 1A). The fast ATP or α, β-meATP-evoked currents are
mediated by P2X3 receptors because α,β-meATP activates only P2X1 and P2X3
receptors [7] and the antagonist, A-317491,
which acts specifically on P2X3 receptors [23], abolished both current responses (Fig. 1A). PGE2 (up to 100 μM), by itself, did not evoke any membrane
currents (n = 6, data not shown). However, PGE2 (1 μM, 2 min application)
enhanced the peak amplitude of both fast-inactivating ATP- and
α,β-meATP-evoked currents (Fig. 1B). These results
suggest that PGE2 potentiates homomeric P2X3 receptor-mediated responses.
Figure 1
Enhancement of fast-inactivating ATP currents by PGE2.
(A) PGE enhances P2X3 receptor-mediated ATP currents. α,β-meATP and
ATP evoked similar fast-inactivating currents. Both currents were blocked by
the specific P2X3 antagonist, A-317491.
(B) In the same cell, PGE2 potentiated α,β-meATP- and ATP-evoked
currents similarly. Iαβ-meATP
(PGE2)/Iαβ-meATP = 1.47 ± 0.07, IATP
(PGE2)/IATP = 1.54 ± 0.06 (* P < 0.05, n = 8).
(C) Homomeric P2X3 receptors mediate the action of PGE2. (Left) A 2 sec ATP (10
μM) pulse elicited fast-inactivating (Fast), slow-inactivating (Slow) and
mixed ATP currents in normal cells. Membrane was held at -60 mV. The currents
were obtained from three different cells. (Right) After a 2-min application of
PGE2 (1 μM), the fast ATP current was potentiated but the slow ATP current
did not change. For the cell exhibiting mixed responses, PGE2 enhanced the
peak, but not the steady state ATP currents. Bar graphs show the pooled data.
PGE2 increased the peak amplitude of both fast-inactivating ATP currents
[IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.46 ± 0.04 (n = 72)] and
mixed ATP currents [IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.56 ± 0.08
(n = 6)] (* P < 0.05), which were mediated by homomeric P2X3 receptors. On
the other hand, PGE2 had no effect on P2X2/3 receptor-mediated slow
currents.
Enhancement of fast-inactivating ATP currents by PGE2.(A) PGE enhances P2X3 receptor-mediated ATP currents. α,β-meATP and
ATP evoked similar fast-inactivating currents. Both currents were blocked by
the specific P2X3 antagonist, A-317491.(B) In the same cell, PGE2 potentiated α,β-meATP- and ATP-evoked
currents similarly. Iαβ-meATP
(PGE2)/Iαβ-meATP = 1.47 ± 0.07, IATP
(PGE2)/IATP = 1.54 ± 0.06 (* P < 0.05, n = 8).(C) Homomeric P2X3 receptors mediate the action of PGE2. (Left) A 2 sec ATP (10
μM) pulse elicited fast-inactivating (Fast), slow-inactivating (Slow) and
mixed ATP currents in normal cells. Membrane was held at -60 mV. The currents
were obtained from three different cells. (Right) After a 2-min application of
PGE2 (1 μM), the fast ATP current was potentiated but the slow ATP current
did not change. For the cell exhibiting mixed responses, PGE2 enhanced the
peak, but not the steady state ATP currents. Bar graphs show the pooled data.
PGE2 increased the peak amplitude of both fast-inactivating ATP currents
[IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.46 ± 0.04 (n = 72)] and
mixed ATP currents [IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.56 ± 0.08
(n = 6)] (* P < 0.05), which were mediated by homomeric P2X3 receptors. On
the other hand, PGE2 had no effect on P2X2/3 receptor-mediated slow
currents.To further validate this conclusion, the effects of PGE2 on P2X3 receptor-mediated
currents were studied in detail. As described in our previous study [11], homomeric P2X3 and heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors
are the major P2X receptors expressed in DRG neurons. The current responses can be
categorized based on their kinetics of inactivation as fast, slow, and mixed
responses. Fast-inactivating currents are mediated by homomeric P2X3 receptors,
slow-inactivating currents by heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors and mixed currents by both
homomeric P2X3 and heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors [11,13]. We found that PGE2 (1 μM)
potentiated the peak amplitude of fast-inactivating ATP currents in 63% (72 out of
114) of the neurons tested (Fig. 1C). PGE2 had no effects on
fast ATP currents in 22% of cells and reduced fast ATP responses in the rest 15% of
cells (IATP (with PGE2)/IATP = 0.57 ± 0.08, n = 17) (data
not shown). Only the potentiating effects of PGE2 on fast-inactivating ATP currents
were investigated in detail. PGE2 did not alter slow-inactivating ATP currents (Fig.
1C). For mixed ATP responses, PGE2 increased the peak
amplitude of the currents (IATP (with PGE2)/IATP = 1.56 ±
0.08, n = 6), while it had no effect on the steady-state currents (Fig. 1C). These results suggest that PGE2 acts on the homomeric P2X3
receptors, but not on the heteromeric P2X2/3 receptors.
The characteristics of PGE2 actions on fast-inactivating ATP currents
The time course of PGE2 (1 μM) effects was then studied (Fig. 2A). ATP (10 μM) was repeatedly applied to the tested cell every two
min, a period that allowed P2X3 receptors to recover from inactivation sufficiently
to give consistent current responses [11,44]. Two minutes after PGE2, fast ATP currents were
increased by 48%, reaching a saturating value 10 min later. The enhancing effect was
maintained at the peak level for another 4–6 min and then started to decay.
Thus, the action of PGE2 on the fast-inactivating ATP currents desensitizes. Vehicle
(0.1% DMSO) had no effect on the fast ATP currents (Fig. 2B).
We chose to measure currents following a brief (2 min) application of PGE2 (1
μM) in most experiments because the application period allowed the potentiating
effects of PGE2 to reach a sufficiently high level and to dissipate within 4 min.
Figure 2
Characteristics of PGE2 actions.
(A) Time course of PGE2 effects on fast ATP currents. ATP pulses were applied
to the recorded cell every 2 min. After ATP responses reached a steady state, 1
μM PGE2 was applied to the bath. The fast ATP response was increased by
48% [IATP (with PGE2)/IATP = 1.48 ± 0.07, n = 6] two
min later and the increase reached a peak level [IATP (with
PGE2)/IATP = 1.90 ± 0.11] 10 min after PGE2 application.
Numbers in the graph correspond to the original traces shown above.
(B) Bar graphs are the pooled data from 5 cells (* P < 0.05).
(C) PGE2 does not change the affinity of ATP for P2X3 receptors. Fast ATP
currents were measured at different ATP concentrations in control and in 1
μM PGE2. For the purpose of normalization among cells, the responses to 10
μM ATP in control solution in all of the cells were measured. Each data
point was obtained from studies of 4–6 cells. The data points at 0.01 and
0.1 μM ATP for control and PGE2 groups overlapped. The dose-response
curves were fit by the Hill equation with Hill coefficient = 1. For control,
EC50 = 2.02 ± 0.4 μM. For PGE2, EC50 = 2.77
± 0.58 μM. PGE2 treatment does not alter ATP affinities for P2X
receptors, although it greatly enhances peak ATP responses.
Characteristics of PGE2 actions.(A) Time course of PGE2 effects on fast ATP currents. ATP pulses were applied
to the recorded cell every 2 min. After ATP responses reached a steady state, 1
μM PGE2 was applied to the bath. The fast ATP response was increased by
48% [IATP (with PGE2)/IATP = 1.48 ± 0.07, n = 6] two
min later and the increase reached a peak level [IATP (with
PGE2)/IATP = 1.90 ± 0.11] 10 min after PGE2 application.
Numbers in the graph correspond to the original traces shown above.(B) Bar graphs are the pooled data from 5 cells (* P < 0.05).(C) PGE2 does not change the affinity of ATP for P2X3 receptors. Fast ATP
currents were measured at different ATP concentrations in control and in 1
μM PGE2. For the purpose of normalization among cells, the responses to 10
μM ATP in control solution in all of the cells were measured. Each data
point was obtained from studies of 4–6 cells. The data points at 0.01 and
0.1 μM ATP for control and PGE2 groups overlapped. The dose-response
curves were fit by the Hill equation with Hill coefficient = 1. For control,
EC50 = 2.02 ± 0.4 μM. For PGE2, EC50 = 2.77
± 0.58 μM. PGE2 treatment does not alter ATP affinities for P2X
receptors, although it greatly enhances peak ATP responses.The PGE2 effects on the kinetics of ATP currents were examined. The activation time
(Ta) of the fast current response was calculated by measuring the
duration between 10 and 90% of the peak value. The inactivation time constants
(τ1in and τ2in) were obtained by fitting the
inactivating phase of the current with a sum of two exponentials. The changes in
Ta, τ1in and τ2in were not
significantly different after PGE2 treatment (Table 1),
suggesting that PGE2 does not alter the kinetics of the fast-inactivating ATP
currents.
Table 1
Kinetics of ATP-evoked fast-inactivating currents in control (Con) and PGE2
treated DRG neurons.
Ta
τ1in
τ2in
Con
5.9 ± 1.1
38.1 ± 6.6
377.3 ± 95.2
PGE2
5.7 ± 0.9
46.1 ± 7.8
432.3 ± 121.2
Ta: Activation time, i.e., duration between 10 and 90% of peak current
values.
τ1in and τ2in: Inactivation time constants.
Data represent the mean ± SEM; n = 15. The differences in Ta,
T1in and T2in in Con and PGE2 neurons were not
significant.
Kinetics of ATP-evoked fast-inactivating currents in control (Con) and PGE2
treated DRG neurons.Ta: Activation time, i.e., duration between 10 and 90% of peak current
values.τ1in and τ2in: Inactivation time constants.
Data represent the mean ± SEM; n = 15. The differences in Ta,
T1in and T2in in Con and PGE2 neurons were not
significant.We then determined whether PGE2 changes the EC50 of ATP for P2X3
receptors. Dose-responses of ATP responses in the absence and presence of PGE2 (1
μM) were examined (Fig. 2C). ATP, at 200 μM, elicited
maximal ATP currents in both cases, although the level of maximal response in PGE2
was 1.55-fold larger. Dose-response curves were fit with the Hill equation. The
EC50 was 2.02 ± 0.4 μM in control and 2.77 ± 0.58
μM in PGE2 treated cells. Thus, the EC50 of ATP for P2X3 receptors
was not significantly changed by PGE2. We conclude that the potentiation of ATP
responses by PGE2 is not due to a change in the apparent affinity of ATP for P2X3
receptors.
EP3 receptors mediate the potentiating effect of PGE2
The prostanoid receptors (EP1-EP4) that mediate the potentiating effects of PGE2
(Fig. 3) were determined. The selective EP1 antagonist,
SC-19220 [45], at 1 or 10 μM, could not
block the enhancing effects of PGE2, suggesting that EP1 is not likely to be
involved. Because no specific antagonists for EP2 and EP3 were readily available,
agonists (butaporst for EP2 and sulprostone for EP3) were used. The selective EP2
agonist, butaporst [46], at either 1 or 10
μM, did not affect ATP currents. In contrast, the EP3 agonist, sulprostone, at
0.1, 1, 10 μM, progressively potentiated ATP responses, mimicking the effect of
PGE2. Although sulprostone also has a low affinity for EP1 receptors [45,46], the inability of the
EP1 antagonist, SC-19220 on sulprostone action has led us to conclude that EP3
receptors mediate the effects of PGE2. Due to the lack of proper agonists and
antagonists, the involvement of EP4 receptors was not studied.
Figure 3
EP3 receptors mediate the potentiation of ATP responses by PGE2. (A) In
the cell shown, PGE2 increased ATP currents. However, the EP2 receptor-specific
agonist, butaprost (Buta) (1 μM), had no effect on the ATP responses. The
EP3/EP1 agonist, sulprostone (Sul) (1 μM) mimicked the enhancing effect of
PGE2. The EP1 antagonist, SC-19220 (SC) (1 μM), could not block the PGE2
potentiating effect. (B) Bar graphs are the pooled data from 3–8 cells.
Only Sul mimicked the PGE2 effect on ATP currents. PGE2 effects: 0.1 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.22 ± 0.04; 1 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP= 1.49 ± 0.06; 10 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.76 ± 0.07. Sul effects:
0.1 μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.25 ± 0.06; 1
μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.52 ± 0.07; 10
μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.85 ± 0.08. SC could
not inhibit PGE2- or Sul-elicited potentiation. The results suggest that the
PGE2 effect is mediated by EP3 receptors. (* P < 0.05, # P < 0.01, NS =
not significant)
EP3 receptors mediate the potentiation of ATP responses by PGE2. (A) In
the cell shown, PGE2 increased ATP currents. However, the EP2 receptor-specific
agonist, butaprost (Buta) (1 μM), had no effect on the ATP responses. The
EP3/EP1 agonist, sulprostone (Sul) (1 μM) mimicked the enhancing effect of
PGE2. The EP1 antagonist, SC-19220 (SC) (1 μM), could not block the PGE2
potentiating effect. (B) Bar graphs are the pooled data from 3–8 cells.
Only Sul mimicked the PGE2 effect on ATP currents. PGE2 effects: 0.1 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.22 ± 0.04; 1 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP= 1.49 ± 0.06; 10 μM
PGE2, IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.76 ± 0.07. Sul effects:
0.1 μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.25 ± 0.06; 1
μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.52 ± 0.07; 10
μM Sul, IATP (Sul)/IATP = 1.85 ± 0.08. SC could
not inhibit PGE2- or Sul-elicited potentiation. The results suggest that the
PGE2 effect is mediated by EP3 receptors. (* P < 0.05, # P < 0.01, NS =
not significant)
PGE2 potentiation is mediated by PKA
Since PKA is known to participate in the actions of PGE2, its role in the
potentiation of ATP responses was studied. We first studied that action of the
adenylyl cyclase activator, forskolin and a membrane-permeable cAMP analogue,
8-Br-cAMP on P2X3-receptor mediated currents. Both forskolin and 8-Br-cAMP increased
ATP currents, mimicking the action of PGE2 (Figs 4A and 4B). To make sure that PGE2 used the same signaling pathway as
forskolin, an occlusion experiment was performed. After forskolin effect on ATP
currents was established, PGE2 was then applied to the cell (Fig. 4C). PGE2 no long could increase ATP currents in the presence of
forskolin. The results suggest an involvement of cAMP/PKA. We then studied the effect
of a membrane-permeant PKA inhibitor, H89, on the enhancing effect of PGE2. We first
made sure that the tested cell responded to PGE2 and then perfused H89 (1 μM)
onto the recorded cell (Fig. 5A). In the presence of H89 (1
μM), ATP responses declined somewhat. After 10 min pretreatment with H89, PGE2
no longer could enhance ATP currents (Figs. 5A and 5D), suggesting that PKA is involved in the modulatory action of
PGE2. To confirm the conclusion, we studied the effect of a specific membrane
impermeant PKA inhibitor, PKA-I, on the PGE2 action (Fig. 5B).
PKA-I was perfused into the cell through a patch electrode. In order to measure PGE2
potentiation before PKA-I reached the cell interior, patch electrodes of small tips
(electrode resistance = 7–8 Mohm) were used to slow the intracellular perfusion
of PKA-I. In the presence of PKA-I, the potentiating effect of PGE2 was completely
blocked (Figs. 5B, D), confirming that cAMP/PKA signaling is
involved in the PGE2 enhancement of ATP currents. The role of PKC was also
investigated. We found that bath-application of the membrane-permeant PKC inhibitor,
Bis (1 μM), onto the recorded cell had no effect on the PGE2 action (Figs. 5C and 5D). Thus, PKC does not participate
in the PGE2 modulation of ATP currents in normal DRG neurons.
Figure 4
Forskolin and 8-Br-cAMP mimic PGE2-elicited increase in ATP currents.
(A) Effects of forskolin. (Left) Examples of the action of forskolin (1
μM, 6 min) or PGE2 (1 μM, 2 min) on fast-inactivating ATP currents in
the same cell. (Right) Forskolin and PGE2 potentiatied ATP currents (IATP
(PGE2)/IATP = 1.45 ± 0.09; IATP
(Forskolin)/IATP = 1.52 ± 0.10, n = 5). (B) 8-Br-cAMP
enhanced ATP currents (IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.46 ±
0.08, IATP(8-Br-cAMP)/IATP = 1.55 ± 0.09, n = 4) (*P <
0.05). (C) Forskolin occludes the effect of PGE2. In the presence of foskolin,
PGE2 could not further increase ATP currents.
Figure 5
PKA mediates PGE2-induced increases in ATP responses. (A) Effects of the
PKA inhibitor, H89. Treatment with H89 (1 μM) reduced ATP currents
moderately. In the presence of H89, PGE2 could no longer increase ATP currents.
The block of H89 was reversed rather slowly. After washout of H89 for 35 min,
the PGE2 potentiating effect returned to the control levels. (B) Effects of the
specific membrane impermeant inhibitor PKA-inhibitor (6–22) (PKA-I).
PKA-I (0.2 μM) was included in the patch pipette. As the result of small
diameter tip pipettes used in these experiments, PKA-I did not reach its final
concentration in the cell interior several minutes after whole cell recording
was established. This allowed us to obtain a few control responses to PGE2
before PKA-I became effective. With PKA-I, PGE2 no longer potentiated ATP
responses. (C) Effects of the PKC inhibitor, Bis. Pretreatment of the cell with
Bis (1 μM) did not affect the potentiating effect of PGE2. (D) Average
effects of PGE2, (PGE2+ H89), (PGE2+PKA-I) and (PGE2+Bis). For each protein
kinase inhibitor, the effects of PGE2 and (PGE2+ inhibitor) were examined in
the same cell. For H89, IATP (PGE2-H)/IATP = 1.52 ±
0.08; IATP (PGE2-H+H89)/IATP = 0.94 ± 0.06. For
PKA-I, (IATP (PGE2-P)/IATP = 1.48 ± 0.09; IATP
(PGE2-P+PKA-I)/IATP = 0.92 ± 0.05. For Bis, IATP
(PGE2-B)/IATP = 1.46 ± 0.07, IATP
(PGE2-B+Bis)/IATP = 1.42 ± 0.08. Five cells were
tested in each group (* P < 0.05, NS = not significant).
Forskolin and 8-Br-cAMP mimic PGE2-elicited increase in ATP currents.
(A) Effects of forskolin. (Left) Examples of the action of forskolin (1
μM, 6 min) or PGE2 (1 μM, 2 min) on fast-inactivating ATP currents in
the same cell. (Right) Forskolin and PGE2 potentiatied ATP currents (IATP
(PGE2)/IATP = 1.45 ± 0.09; IATP
(Forskolin)/IATP = 1.52 ± 0.10, n = 5). (B) 8-Br-cAMP
enhanced ATP currents (IATP (PGE2)/IATP = 1.46 ±
0.08, IATP(8-Br-cAMP)/IATP = 1.55 ± 0.09, n = 4) (*P <
0.05). (C) Forskolin occludes the effect of PGE2. In the presence of foskolin,
PGE2 could not further increase ATP currents.PKA mediates PGE2-induced increases in ATP responses. (A) Effects of the
PKA inhibitor, H89. Treatment with H89 (1 μM) reduced ATP currents
moderately. In the presence of H89, PGE2 could no longer increase ATP currents.
The block of H89 was reversed rather slowly. After washout of H89 for 35 min,
the PGE2 potentiating effect returned to the control levels. (B) Effects of the
specific membrane impermeant inhibitor PKA-inhibitor (6–22) (PKA-I).
PKA-I (0.2 μM) was included in the patch pipette. As the result of small
diameter tip pipettes used in these experiments, PKA-I did not reach its final
concentration in the cell interior several minutes after whole cell recording
was established. This allowed us to obtain a few control responses to PGE2
before PKA-I became effective. With PKA-I, PGE2 no longer potentiated ATP
responses. (C) Effects of the PKC inhibitor, Bis. Pretreatment of the cell with
Bis (1 μM) did not affect the potentiating effect of PGE2. (D) Average
effects of PGE2, (PGE2+ H89), (PGE2+PKA-I) and (PGE2+Bis). For each protein
kinase inhibitor, the effects of PGE2 and (PGE2+ inhibitor) were examined in
the same cell. For H89, IATP (PGE2-H)/IATP = 1.52 ±
0.08; IATP (PGE2-H+H89)/IATP = 0.94 ± 0.06. For
PKA-I, (IATP (PGE2-P)/IATP = 1.48 ± 0.09; IATP
(PGE2-P+PKA-I)/IATP = 0.92 ± 0.05. For Bis, IATP
(PGE2-B)/IATP = 1.46 ± 0.07, IATP
(PGE2-B+Bis)/IATP = 1.42 ± 0.08. Five cells were
tested in each group (* P < 0.05, NS = not significant).
PGE2 enhances α,β-meATP induced hyperalgesia and allodynia
We also determined whether the PGE2 enhancing effect on P2X3 receptor-mediated
responses could be observed behaviorally (Fig. 6). Low
concentrations of α,β-meATP (1 nmol/50 μl) and PGE2 (0.05 nmol/50
μl) were used for the study. By keeping the individual effects of either
α,β-meATP or PGE2 small, an enhancing effect of (α,β-meATP
+PGE2), if it existed, could be easily distinguishable. Intraplantar injection of
α,β-meATP or PGE2 lowered the paw withdrawal (PW) mechanical thresholds by
21.9 ± 3.8% and 15.5 ± 3.0% (n = 3) respectively (Fig. 6A). However, the PW threshold was lowered by 65.3 ± 6.9% (n = 3)
when α,β-meATP and PGE2 were applied simultaneously. Thus, the combination
of α,β-meATP and PGE2 produced a significantly stronger response than
adding the responses produced by separate application of α,β-meATP and
PGE2. Intraplantar pretreatment with the PKA inhibitor, H89 (0.5 nmol/50 μl),
reversed the enhanced allodynia produced by PGE2 (Fig 6A).
Similar experiments were conducted to study PGE2 effects on the PW latency in
response to thermal stimulation (Fig. 6B). α,β-meATP
+ PGE2 reduced the PW latency significantly more than the combined reduction of PW
latencies produced by separate application of α,β-meATP and PGE2. H89 again
reversed the enhanced hyperalgesia produced by PGE2. These observations suggest that
PGE2 sensitizes α,β-meATP-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia through a PKA
signaling pathway.
Figure 6
PGE2 sensitizes the mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia produced
by α,β-meATP. (A) Mechanical allodynia. Paw withdrawal
threshold was measured 10 min after paw injection of α,β-meATP (1
nmol/50 μl) or PGE2 ((0.05 nmol/50 μl). The data were normalized with
baseline responses before either injection. α,β-meATP and PGE2
applied individually resulted in a moderate decrease in the threshold
[(1-meATP/Con) = 0.22 ± 0.04; (1-PGE/Con) = 0.16 ± 0.03, n = 3)].
However, co-injection of α,β-meATP and PGE2 produced a much larger
decrease in the threshold [1-(meATP+PGE)/Con = 0.65 ± 0.07, n = 3] than
adding the threshold reduction produced by α,β-meATP and by PGE2. H89
(0.5 nmol/50 μl) reversed the enhanced allodynia produced by PGE2. (B)
Thermal hyperalgesia. α,β-meATP and PGE2, applied separately,
produced a small reduction in the paw withdrawal latency [(1-meATP/Con) = 0.08
± 0.04; (1-PGE/Con) = 0.18 ± 0.02, n = 3]. Co-injection of PGE2 and
α,β-meATP produced a much larger reduction in the paw withdrawal
latency [(1-(meATP+PGE)/Con = 0.54 ± 0.04, n = 3]. H89 blocked the
enhancing effect of PGE2. (* P < 0.05, Two-way ANOVA).
PGE2 sensitizes the mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia produced
by α,β-meATP. (A) Mechanical allodynia. Paw withdrawal
threshold was measured 10 min after paw injection of α,β-meATP (1
nmol/50 μl) or PGE2 ((0.05 nmol/50 μl). The data were normalized with
baseline responses before either injection. α,β-meATP and PGE2
applied individually resulted in a moderate decrease in the threshold
[(1-meATP/Con) = 0.22 ± 0.04; (1-PGE/Con) = 0.16 ± 0.03, n = 3)].
However, co-injection of α,β-meATP and PGE2 produced a much larger
decrease in the threshold [1-(meATP+PGE)/Con = 0.65 ± 0.07, n = 3] than
adding the threshold reduction produced by α,β-meATP and by PGE2. H89
(0.5 nmol/50 μl) reversed the enhanced allodynia produced by PGE2. (B)
Thermal hyperalgesia. α,β-meATP and PGE2, applied separately,
produced a small reduction in the paw withdrawal latency [(1-meATP/Con) = 0.08
± 0.04; (1-PGE/Con) = 0.18 ± 0.02, n = 3]. Co-injection of PGE2 and
α,β-meATP produced a much larger reduction in the paw withdrawal
latency [(1-(meATP+PGE)/Con = 0.54 ± 0.04, n = 3]. H89 blocked the
enhancing effect of PGE2. (* P < 0.05, Two-way ANOVA).
Discussion
We found that PGE2 increases the amplitude of P2X3 homomeric receptor-mediated ATP
currents without changing the kinetics of the currents in a majority of small and medium
DRG neurons (Fig. 1, Table 1). In contrast,
PGE2 had no effect on P2X2/3 heteromeric receptors. The enhancement of ATP responses is
not due to a change in the apparent affinity of ATP for P2X3 receptors (Fig. 2) but the result of activation of PKA by PGE2. The conclusion is
supported by the observations: (1) the PKA activators, e.g., forskolin, not only mimics
the action of PGE2 but occludes the effect of PGE2 (Fig. 4) and
(2) the PKA inhibitors, H89 and PKA-I, block the action of PGE2 (Fig. 5). Our conclusion is further supported by the behavioral observations that
PGE2 sensitizes the α,β-meATP-induced spontaneous flinching responses
[3] and enhances
α,β-meATP-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia (Fig. 6).
We further showed that the enhancement could be blocked by intraplantar injection of H89
(Fig. 6). The molecular mechanism responsible for PKA-induced
potentiation of ATP current is not well understood. Few studies were conducted to study
the conserved PKA site on the P2X receptor molecules. There is evidence that
phosphorylation at Ser431 in the C-terminus of P2X2 receptors reduces ATP currents
mediated by P2X2 receptors transfected in HEK293 cells [47]. On the other hand, the adenylyl cyclase, forskolin, was
found to increase ATP currents in HEK cells expressing P2X4 receptors although the
phosphorylation site on the receptor has not been identified [48]. The factor contributing to the differential actions of PKA
on different P2X receptor subtypes has yet to be determined. It is unclear how
phosphorylation of the conserved PKA site changes P2X receptor activity. A number of
possibilities have been proposed by studying phosphorylation of sites other than the PKA
site. Phosphorylation of the PKC sites in P2X1 and P2X2 receptor slowed the rate of
inactivation of ATP currents [49,50]. Calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II was found to
enhance P2X3 receptor activity by promoting trafficking of the receptor to the membrane
[34]. Phosphorylation of regulatory
proteins associated with P2X1 or P2X7 receptor increased the activity of the P2X
receptors [51,52].To identify the EP receptor involved in the action of PGE2 is challenging because
agonists and antagonists of EP receptors are not completely selective [53]. By using a combination of the agonists and
antagonist, we conclude that EP3 mediates the potentiating action of PGE2. This
conclusion is consistent with the study of Southall and Vasko [39] who used reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and
antisense to identify the EP receptors participate in PGE2-induced sensitization of DRG
neurons. They found that although EP1, 2, 3C and 4 are expressed in DRG neurons, as
observed by others [54], only EP3C and EP4
receptor subtypes mediate the PGE2-induced cAMP production and increased release of
substance P and CGRP. We have not determined which EP3 splice variant participates in
the potentiating action of ATP. Given that EP3A and EP3B mRNA are not found in DRGs
[39] and EP3C (i.e., EP3γ) is the
only EP3 variant coupled to Gs to produce cAMP [55], we suggest that PGE2 acts on EP3C to potentiate the response of
P2X3 currents. In addition to increasing ATP currents, PGE2 was also found to decrease
or have no effect on ATP currents in some DRG neurons. The reason for this variability
has not been studied. DRG neurons expressing other EP receptor subtypes or devoid of EP
receptor expression could contribute to the varying PGE2 actions. For example, the EP3D
receptor is known to couple to Gi or Gq to reduce cAMP level in cells [45].It is well documented that PGE2 produces sensitization of TRPV1 receptors [38] and TTX-resistant Na+ channels
[36,56] in DRG
neurons. Here, we show that the P2X3 receptor is another target of PGE2. Since P2X3
receptors play an important role in pain processing [12,13] and their activation is sensitive to
tissue and nerve injury [3,11], the modulation by PGE2 would provide a way for sensory neurons
to specifically respond to tissue injury. Our study elucidates the mechanism of an acute
action of PGE2 on ATP currents. P2X3 receptors have been shown to undergo profound
changes in their expression and trafficking after inflammation and nerve injury
[11,31,34]. The binding properties of EP receptors [57] and the signaling of PGE2 can change in inflamed
tissues [58-60]. It is of great interest to determine how PGE2 modulates P2X3
receptor-mediated responses after inflammation or nerve injury. A good understanding of
the plasticity of PGE2 action on P2X receptors under injurious conditions will help us
use the downstream targets of PGE2 for designing analgesics. Such therapeutic agents
should be more specific and produce less side-effects, thus providing an alternative to
cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2) inhibitors which can have devastating risks for patients
[61,62].
Conclusion
We demonstrate that PGE2 potentiates P2X3 receptor-mediated ATP currents in DRG neurons
and enhances α,β meATP-induced allodynia and hyperalgesia by binding to EP3
receptors to activate the cAMP/PKA signaling cascade. Thus, the P2X3 receptor represents
a downstream target of PGE2 and is likely a useful therapeutic drug target for treating
inflammatory and neuropathic pain.
Methods
Animals
All animal procedures were in accordance with the guidelines of the National
Institutes of Health and the International Association for the Study of Pain and
approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of
Texas Medical Branch. Sprague Dawley rats were used in the study. Rats of 25–35
d of age were used in the electrophysiology study; older rats (8–10 weeks old)
were used in behavioral experiments.
Electrophysiology
ATP currents were recorded from acutely dissociated neurons isolated from L4-5 DRGs
of 25–35 d old rats. DRG neurons isolated from young rats survived better. The
characteristics of ATP currents in young and adult DRGs were indistinguishable. DRGs
were excised from sodium pentobarbital (50 mg/kg, i.p.) anesthetized rats and put in
an ice-cold, oxygenated dissecting solution, which contained (in mM): 135 NaCl, 5
KCl, 2 KH2PO4, 1.5 CaCl2, 6 MgCl2, 10
glucose, and 10 HEPES, pH 7.2 (osmolarity, 305 mOsm). After removal of the connective
tissue, the ganglia were put into a dissecting solution containing collagenase IV
(1.0–1.5 mg/ml; Boehringer Mannheim, Indianapolis, IN) and trypsin (1.0 mg/ml;
Sigma, St. Louis, MO) and incubated for 1 hr at 34.5°C. Afterward, DRGs were
taken out from the enzyme solution, washed and put into another dissecting solution
containing DNAase (0.5 mg/ml; Sigma). Ganglia were then triturated with fire-polished
glass pipettes and the dissociated cells were placed on acid-cleaned glass
coverslips. The experiments were performed at room temperature two hours after
plating. Cells were continuously superfused (0.5 ml/min) with an external solution
[130 mM NaCl/5 mM KCl/2 mM KH2PO4/2.5 mM CaCl2/1 mM
MgCl2/10 mM HEPES/10 mM glucose, pH 7.3 (osmolarity, 295–300
mosM)]. In order to obtain a fast solution exchange, ATP (Sigma) was applied through
an electronic valve with a solution exchange rate of 0.2 ms. This exchange rate was
fast enough so that it would not limit peak ATP responses. Under voltage-clamp
conditions, the whole-cell patch recording technique was used for current recordings.
Membrane potential was held at -60 mV. Unless indicated, patch-clamp electrodes had a
resistance of 3–5 Mohm when filled with the pipette solution, which contained
(in mM): 145 K gluconate, 10 NaCl, 10 HEPES, 10 Glucose, 5 BAPTA and 1
CaCl2, pH 7.25 adjusted with KOH (osmolarity = 290 mOsm). The currents
were filtered at 2–5 kHz and sampled at 100 μs per point.
Behavioral experiments
Mechanical allodynia was quantified by the responses to von Frey filament stimulation
using the 50% threshold methods [63].
Individual rats were placed on a metal mesh platform and under a plastic dome.
Animals were habituated to the testing environment for at least 20 min before an
experiment. A series of calibrated von Frey filaments of increasing strengths will be
applied to the midplantar surface until a paw withdrawal occurred. The 50% threshold
(expressed in grams), which is defined as 10 (Xf+ k × d)/10000 where Xf = value
of the final von Frey filament unit used (in log units); k = tabular value of the
pattern of positive/negative response; d = mean difference (in log units) between von
Frey hairs, was determined. A cutoff threshold was 15 g to avoid tissue damage. All
behavioral studies were performed under blind conditions. Saline (PBS) or
α,β-meATP was injected into the rat paw. The α,β-meATP effect on
PW threshold was measured 10 min after the injection when the response reached a peak
level. To study the effect of PGE2 on the α,β-meATP response,
α,β-meATP and PGE2 were applied simultaneously to the rat paw. To study the
protein kinase-dependence of PGE2, the PKA antagonist, H89 was applied 20 min prior
to the (PGE2+α,β-meATP) application.Thermal hyperalgesia was examined by measuring paw withdrawal latencies (PWLs) using
the radiant heat method [64]. A lamp was
placed under the plantar surface of the rat hindpaw and the time elapsed from the
onset of radiant heat stimulation to the withdrawal of the paw was recorded. The heat
intensity was adjusted to give a baseline latency of ≈10 s; a cutoff time of 30
s was set to prevent tissue damage. To obtain baseline PWLs, three measurements
separated by a 5-min interval were made for each rat's hind paw and scores were
averaged.
Drugs
Bisindolylmaleimide I (Bis), H89 dihydrochloride (H89), protein kinase A inhibitor
6–22 amide (PKA-I), were purchased from Calbiochem (La Jolla, CA). ATP,
α,β-meATP, 8-Bromoadenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (8-Br-cAMP),
A-316491 and forskolin were from Sigma (St. Louis, MO) ; PGE2, sulprostone, butaprost
and SC-1220 were from Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, MI). Except for PKA-I, ATP and
α,β-meATP, all other compounds were prepared in DMSO as stocks. The final
concentrations used in experiments at least 1000 times lower than stocks
concentrations. Stock solutions were stored at -20°C and diluted immediately
before use.
Data analyses
All data are expressed as mean ± SEM. Differences between two means were
analyzed with paired or unpaired Student's t-test. Rise time (Ta) and inactivation
time constants were used to determine kinetic properties of ATP responses. Ta of ATP
currents were obtained by measuring the activation time between 10 and 90% of the
peak value. The time constants of current inactivation were obtained by fitting the
decay phase of current with exponential functions using the Levenberg-Marquardt
algorithm. Comparisons between multiple means were done with one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) followed by Newman Keuls post hoc test. A P < 0.05 was
considered significant.
Competing interests
The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
CW designed and performed the electrophysiological experiments and drafted the
manuscript. GL carried out the behavioral experiments. LMH designed and coordinated the
study and prepared the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.
Authors: E C Burgard; W Niforatos; T van Biesen; K J Lynch; E Touma; R E Metzger; E A Kowaluk; M F Jarvis Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Elena Adinolfi; Miran Kim; Mark T Young; Francesco Di Virgilio; Annmarie Surprenant Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2003-07-17 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Steve McGaraughty; Carol T Wismer; Chang Z Zhu; Joseph Mikusa; Prisca Honore; Katharine L Chu; Chih-Hung Lee; Connie R Faltynek; Michael F Jarvis Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2003-11-17 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Jian Jin; Angel Morales-Ramos; Patrick Eidam; John Mecom; Yue Li; Carl Brooks; Mark Hilfiker; David Zhang; Ning Wang; Dongchuan Shi; Pei-San Tseng; Karen Wheless; Brian Budzik; Karen Evans; Jon-Paul Jaworski; Jack Jugus; Lisa Leon; Charlene Wu; Mark Pullen; Bhumika Karamshi; Parvathi Rao; Emma Ward; Nicholas Laping; Christopher Evans; Colin Leach; Dennis Holt; Xin Su; Dwight Morrow; Harvey Fries; Kevin Thorneloe; Richard Edwards Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: M J Jugus; J P Jaworski; P B Patra; J Jin; D M Morrow; N J Laping; R M Edwards; K S Thorneloe Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2009-05-22 Impact factor: 8.739