Daniel E Kent1,2, Pavel Y Savechenkov3, Karol S Bruzik4, Keith W Miller1. 1. Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Department of Anaesthesia, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Array BioPharma, Boulder, Colorado. 4. Department of Medicinal Chemistry and Pharmacognosy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: General anaesthetics can act on synaptic GABAA receptors by binding to one of three classes of general anaesthetic sites. Canonical drugs that bind selectively to only one class of site are etomidate, alphaxalone, and the mephobarbital derivative, R-mTFD-MPAB. We tested the hypothesis that the general anaesthetic potencies of mixtures of such site-selective agents binding to the same or to different sites would combine additively or synergistically respectively. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The potency of general anaesthetics individually or in combinations to cause loss of righting reflexes in tadpoles was determined, and the results were analysed using isobolographic methods. KEY RESULTS: The potencies of combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all acted on a single class of site were strictly additive, regardless of which single site was involved. Combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all bound selectively to different sites always interacted synergistically. The strength of the synergy increased with the number of separate sites involved such that the percentage of each agent's EC50 required to cause anaesthesia was just 35% and 14% for two or three sites respectively. Propofol, which binds non-selectively to the etomidate and R-mTFD-MPAB sites, interacted synergistically with each of these agents. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The established pharmacology of the three anaesthetic binding sites on synaptic GABAA receptors was sufficient to predict whether a mixture of anaesthetics interacted additively or synergistically to cause loss of righting reflexes in vivo. The principles established here have implications for clinical practice.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: General anaesthetics can act on synaptic GABAA receptors by binding to one of three classes of general anaesthetic sites. Canonical drugs that bind selectively to only one class of site are etomidate, alphaxalone, and the mephobarbital derivative, R-mTFD-MPAB. We tested the hypothesis that the general anaesthetic potencies of mixtures of such site-selective agents binding to the same or to different sites would combine additively or synergistically respectively. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The potency of general anaesthetics individually or in combinations to cause loss of righting reflexes in tadpoles was determined, and the results were analysed using isobolographic methods. KEY RESULTS: The potencies of combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all acted on a single class of site were strictly additive, regardless of which single site was involved. Combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all bound selectively to different sites always interacted synergistically. The strength of the synergy increased with the number of separate sites involved such that the percentage of each agent's EC50 required to cause anaesthesia was just 35% and 14% for two or three sites respectively. Propofol, which binds non-selectively to the etomidate and R-mTFD-MPAB sites, interacted synergistically with each of these agents. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The established pharmacology of the three anaesthetic binding sites on synaptic GABAA receptors was sufficient to predict whether a mixture of anaesthetics interacted additively or synergistically to cause loss of righting reflexes in vivo. The principles established here have implications for clinical practice.
Authors: Daniel J Shin; Allison L Germann; Douglas F Covey; Joe Henry Steinbach; Gustav Akk Journal: Mol Pharmacol Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 4.436
Authors: David C Chiara; Selwyn S Jayakar; Xiaojuan Zhou; Xi Zhang; Pavel Y Savechenkov; Karol S Bruzik; Keith W Miller; Jonathan B Cohen Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Delia Belelli; Anna-Lisa Muntoni; Simon D Merrywest; Luc J Gentet; Anna Casula; Helen Callachan; Paola Madau; David K Gemmell; Niall M Hamilton; Jeremy J Lambert; Keith T Sillar; John A Peters Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Lily Q Cao; Michael C Montana; Allison L Germann; Daniel J Shin; Sampurna Chakrabarti; Steven Mennerick; Carla M Yuede; David F Wozniak; Alex S Evers; Gustav Akk Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-07-09 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Qiang Chen; Marta M Wells; Palaniappa Arjunan; Tommy S Tillman; Aina E Cohen; Yan Xu; Pei Tang Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Francesca M Manzella; Douglas F Covey; Vesna Jevtovic-Todorovic; Slobodan M Todorovic Journal: J Neuroendocrinol Date: 2022-01-10 Impact factor: 3.627
Authors: Abdelrahman R Shalabi; Zhiyi Yu; Xiaojuan Zhou; Youssef Jounaidi; Hanwen Chen; Jiajia Dai; Daniel E Kent; Hua-Jun Feng; Stuart A Forman; Jonathan B Cohen; Karol S Bruzik; Keith W Miller Journal: Eur J Med Chem Date: 2020-03-23 Impact factor: 6.514