Comparison of Enantiomers of SPFF, a Novel β2-Adrenoceptor Agonist, in Bronchodilating Effect in Guinea Pigs

Previous study on racemic SPFF [2-(4-amino-3-chloro-5-trifluomethyl-phenyl)-2-tert-butylamino-ethanol hydrochloride], a novel β2-adrenoceptor agonist, has validated that it is a potent, long-acting bronchodilator with relative higher β2-adrenoceptor selectivity. On the basis of this study, we compar...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Biological & Pharmaceutical Bulletin 2008/05/01, Vol.31(5), pp.866-872
Hauptverfasser: Hao, Zhihui, Zhang, Yuyang, Pan, Li, Su, Xing, Cheng, Maosheng, Wang, Minwei, Zhao, Houde, Wu, Yingliang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Previous study on racemic SPFF [2-(4-amino-3-chloro-5-trifluomethyl-phenyl)-2-tert-butylamino-ethanol hydrochloride], a novel β2-adrenoceptor agonist, has validated that it is a potent, long-acting bronchodilator with relative higher β2-adrenoceptor selectivity. On the basis of this study, we compared the pharmacological properties of SPFF and its enantiomers ((−)-SPFF and (+)-SPFF) in guinea pigs taking isoprenaline or salbutamol (SAB) as referenced drugs. For the relaxation of both normal and precontracted trachea strips in vitro, (−)-SPFF was found more potent than (±)-SPFF or (+)-SPFF. Moreover, we confirmed that the bronchodilator effect of (−)- and (+)-enantiomers were due to activation of the β2-adrenoceptor because this effect was antagonized by a specific β2-adrenoceptor antagonist, ICI-118551, with similar pA2 values to those of (±)-SPFF. Radioligand binding assay revealed that affinity of (−)-enantiomer to β2-adrenoceptor was 6 and 164 fold greater than that of (±)- and (+)-SPFF, respectively. In addition, isomeric difference of overall selectivity between (−)-SPFF and (+)-SPFF was 10.7 fold for lung versus atria. (−)-SPFF displayed almost the same protective effect against bronchospasm induced by histamine-acetylcholine aerosol in conscious guinea pigs as (±)-SPFF did. However, the latent time of (+)-SPFF (1 mg·kg−1) was significantly shorter than that of (±)- and (−)-SPFF at the same doses. Finally, in the inhibition of histamine-induced increase of pulmonary resistance (RL) in anesthetized guinea pigs, (−)-SPFF was 1.3 and 3.5 times more potent than (±)- and (+)-SPFF. Correspondingly, in inhibiting the decrease of pulmonary compliance (CL) , the potencies of (−)- and (+)-enantiomers were approximately equivalent to that of (±)-SPFF. Furthermore, a study on the long-lasting action of the test drugs had shown that the effects of (−)-SPFF (30 μg·kg−1), (±)-SPFF (30 μg·kg−1) and (+)-SPFF (100 μg·kg−1) in inhibiting the increase of RL all lasted for 4 h. Nevertheless, the effects of (−)- and (+)-enantiomers were slightly lower 4 h after intraduodenal administration in inhibiting the decrease of CL. In conclusion, (−)-SPFF may be beneficial for the treatment of asthma because of its more potent efficacy and higher adrenoceptor affinity than (±)- or (+)-SPFF.
ISSN:0918-6158
1347-5215
DOI:10.1248/bpb.31.866