BACKGROUND: Methoxycarbonyl etomidate (MOC-etomidate) is a rapidly metabolized and ultrashort-acting etomidate analog that does not produce prolonged adrenocortical suppression after bolus administration. Its metabolite (MOC-ECA) is a carboxylic acid whose pharmacology is undefined. We hypothesized that MOC-ECA possesses significantly lower pharmacological activity than MOC-etomidate, accounting for the latter's very brief duration of hypnotic action and inability to produce prolonged adrenocortical suppression after bolus administration. To test this hypothesis, we compared the potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate in 3 biological assays. METHODS: The hypnotic potency of MOC-ECA was assessed in tadpoles using a loss-of-righting reflexes assay. The γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA(A)) receptor modulatory potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate were compared by defining the concentrations of each required to directly activate α(1)(L264T)β(2)γ(2L) GABA(A) receptors. The adrenocortical inhibitory potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate were compared by defining the concentrations of each required to inhibit in vitro cortisol production by adrenocortical cells. RESULTS: MOC-ECA's 50% effective concentration for loss-of-righting reflexes in tadpoles was 2.8 ± 0.64 mM as compared with a previously reported value of 8 ± 2 μM for MOC-etomidate. The 50% effective concentrations for direct activation of GABA(A) receptors were 3.5 ± 0.63 mM for MOC-ECA versus 10 ± 2.5 μM for MOC-etomidate. The half-maximal inhibitory concentration for inhibiting in vitro cortisol production by adrenocortical cells was 30 ± 7 μM for MOC-ECA versus 0.10 ± 0.02 μM for MOC-etomidate. CONCLUSIONS: In all 3 biological assays, MOC-ECA's potency was approximately 300-fold lower than that of MOC-etomidate.
BACKGROUND:Methoxycarbonyl etomidate (MOC-etomidate) is a rapidly metabolized and ultrashort-acting etomidate analog that does not produce prolonged adrenocortical suppression after bolus administration. Its metabolite (MOC-ECA) is a carboxylic acid whose pharmacology is undefined. We hypothesized that MOC-ECA possesses significantly lower pharmacological activity than MOC-etomidate, accounting for the latter's very brief duration of hypnotic action and inability to produce prolonged adrenocortical suppression after bolus administration. To test this hypothesis, we compared the potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate in 3 biological assays. METHODS: The hypnotic potency of MOC-ECA was assessed in tadpoles using a loss-of-righting reflexes assay. The γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA(A)) receptor modulatory potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate were compared by defining the concentrations of each required to directly activate α(1)(L264T)β(2)γ(2L) GABA(A) receptors. The adrenocortical inhibitory potencies of MOC-ECA and MOC-etomidate were compared by defining the concentrations of each required to inhibit in vitro cortisol production by adrenocortical cells. RESULTS:MOC-ECA's 50% effective concentration for loss-of-righting reflexes in tadpoles was 2.8 ± 0.64 mM as compared with a previously reported value of 8 ± 2 μM for MOC-etomidate. The 50% effective concentrations for direct activation of GABA(A) receptors were 3.5 ± 0.63 mM for MOC-ECA versus 10 ± 2.5 μM for MOC-etomidate. The half-maximal inhibitory concentration for inhibiting in vitro cortisol production by adrenocortical cells was 30 ± 7 μM for MOC-ECA versus 0.10 ± 0.02 μM for MOC-etomidate. CONCLUSIONS: In all 3 biological assays, MOC-ECA's potency was approximately 300-fold lower than that of MOC-etomidate.
Authors: Joseph F Cotten; Ri Le Ge; Natalie Banacos; Ervin Pejo; S Shaukat Husain; James H Williams; Douglas E Raines Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: S Shaukat Husain; Michael R Ziebell; Dirk Ruesch; Filbert Hong; Enrique Arevalo; Jonathan A Kosterlitz; Richard W Olsen; Stuart A Forman; Jonathan B Cohen; Keith W Miller Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2003-03-27 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Joseph F Cotten; S Shaukat Husain; Stuart A Forman; Keith W Miller; Elizabeth W Kelly; Hieu H Nguyen; Douglas E Raines Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Gavin J Kilpatrick; Margaret S McIntyre; Richard F Cox; Jeffrey A Stafford; Gregory J Pacofsky; Gwyer G Lovell; Robert P Wiard; Paul L Feldman; Holly Collins; Barbara L Waszczak; Gary S Tilbrook Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Ervin Pejo; Peter Santer; Lei Wang; Philip Dershwitz; S Shaukat Husain; Douglas E Raines Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Ervin Pejo; Rile Ge; Natalie Banacos; Joseph F Cotten; S Shaukat Husain; Douglas E Raines Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Celena Ma; Ervin Pejo; Megan McGrath; Selwyn S Jayakar; Xiaojuan Zhou; Keith W Miller; Jonathan B Cohen; Douglas E Raines Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 7.892