Click here to close Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly. We suggest using a current version of Chrome, FireFox, or Safari.
Neuropharmacology 2019 Oct 01;157:107674. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2019.107674.
Show Gene links Show Anatomy links

A challenge finding P2X1 and P2X4 ligands.

Beswick P , Wahab B , Honey MA , Paradowski M , Jiang K , Lochner M , Murrell-Lagnado RD , Thompson AJ .

Identifying novel small-molecule P2X1 and P2X4 ligands with sub-type specificity and high-affinity remains a pharmacological challenge. Here we use computational methods, electrophysiology and fluorescent microplate assays to screen for ligand candidates acting at these receptors. Modelling and docking identified 80 compounds for testing at P2X4 receptors, and 20 of these showed >50% inhibition in fluorescence-based assays, making them appealing for further SAR studies. Confirmation of activity by two-electrode voltage clamp, followed by their elaboration resulted in only minor improvements in potency, with the highest IC50 being 295 μM. Testing on P2X1 receptors, resulted in a series of biguanide compounds that yielded a maximum IC50 of 100 μM, but no consistent SAR could be found. Potencies of established antagonists gave expected results, although the measured potencies varied between techniques and no antagonism could be found for compounds such as paroxetine, carbamazepine, 9(10H)-acridanone, acridinol and phenoxazine-type heterocycles. This study highlights the challenge of identifying P2X4 and P2X1 ligands and suggests that a combination of complimentary approaches is needed if we are to be confident of ligand activities at these receptors.

PubMed ID: 31238045
Article link: Neuropharmacology
Grant support: [+]

Species referenced: Xenopus laevis
Genes referenced: p2rx1 p2rx4