Muscarinic Receptors—Characterization, coupling and function (original) (raw)

Distribution and function of the muscarinic receptor subtypes in the cardiovascular system

Physiological Genomics, 2018

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors belong to the G protein-coupled receptor superfamily and are widely known to mediate numerous functions within the central and peripheral nervous system. Thus, they have become attractive therapeutic targets for various disorders. It has long been known that the parasympathetic system, governed by acetylcholine, plays an essential role in regulating cardiovascular function. Unfortunately, due to the lack of pharmacologic selectivity for any one muscarinic receptor, there was a minimal understanding of their distribution and function within this region. However, in recent years, advancements in research have led to the generation of knockout animal models, better antibodies, and more selective ligands enabling a more thorough understanding of the unique role muscarinic receptors play in the cardiovascular system. These advances have shown muscarinic receptor 2 is no longer the only functional subtype found within the heart and muscarinic receptors 1 and 3 mediate both dilation and constriction in the vasculature. Although muscarinic receptors 4 and 5 are still not well characterized in the cardiovascular system, the recent generation of knockout animal models will hopefully generate a better understanding of their function. This mini review aims to summarize recent findings and advances of muscarinic involvement in the cardiovascular system.

Heterogeneity of vascular muscarinic receptors

Journal of Autonomic Pharmacology, 1990

Introduction 3 Muscarinic receptor classification 4 Contractile responses 5 Relaxant responses-direct 6 Relaxant responses-indirect 7 Competition radioligand binding studies 8 Effector-coupling systems 9 Further considerations 10 Conclusions 233 234 234 234 237 239 240 24 1 24 1 242 Summary Muscarinic receptors mediate diverse effects on the vasculature. Recently, a consensus has been arrived at with regard to muscarinic receptor classification (Levine & Birdsall, 1989). As a result, it may now be possible to clarify the role of each subtype in the responses of vascular tissues to muscarinic agonists. It is apparent that vascular muscarinic receptors form a heterogeneous population. MI receptors contract canine venous tissue, whilst M, receptors contract porcine and bovine coronary arteries. M, receptors also mediate EDRF-dependent relaxant responses in the majority of tissues studied to date. M2 receptors elicit relaxations by a decrease in sympathetic outflow in canine femoral vein, rabbit ear artery and rat portal vein. These conclusions are primarily derived from functional estimations of equilibrium dissociation constants, since comparable radioligand binding data are both scarce and contradictory. It is concluded that all three major subtypes of receptors are present in the vasculature. However, the limited selectivity of the available antagonists, the lack of extensive use of such compounds and the unavailability of selective agonists clearly indicate the need for more definitive studies to be undertaken.

Determination of the muscarinic receptor subtype mediating vasodilatation

British Journal of Pharmacology, 1985

The muscarinic receptor mediating vasodilatation of the rabbit aorta and dog femoral artery has been assessed using muscarinic antagonists. With the exception of pirenzepine, the antagonist affinities were similar to those reported for the ileal receptors and dissimilar to those reported for the atrial receptors. Pirenzepine exhibited an affinity (7.54) intermediate between that reported for the CNS receptors (8.4) and that reported for the ileal receptors (6.77). This value for pirenzepine was confirmed using acetylcholine as the agonist and using the dog femoral artery as the vascular tissue. It is concluded that the muscarinic receptor profile mediating vasodilatation is not easily accommodated into the current receptor classification.