Regulation of 5-hydroxytryptamine2 (5-HT2) receptor expression in cultured rat aortic smooth muscle cells by SR 46349B, a selective 5-HT2 receptor antagonist

Serotonergic and dopaminergic distinctions in the behavioral pharmacology of (±)-1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodophenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOI) and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)

RATIONALE

After decades of social stigma, hallucinogens have reappeared in the clinical literature demonstrating unique benefits in medicine. The precise behavioral pharmacology of these compounds remains unclear, however.

OBJECTIVES

Two commonly studied hallucinogens, (±)-1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodophenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOI) and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), were investigated both in vivo and in vitro to determine the pharmacology of their behavioral effects in an animal model.

METHOD

Rabbits were administered DOI or LSD and observed for head bob behavior after chronic drug treatment or after pretreatment with antagonist ligands. The receptor binding characteristics of DOI and LSD were studied in vitro in frontocortical homogenates from naïve rabbits or ex vivo in animals receiving an acute drug injection.

RESULTS

Both DOI- and LSD-elicited head bobs required serotonin(2A) (5-HT(2A)) and dopamine(1) (D(1)) receptor activation. Serotonin(2B/2C) receptors were not implicated in these behaviors. In vitro studies demonstrated that LSD and the 5-HT(2A/2C) receptor antagonist, ritanserin, bound frontocortical 5-HT(2A) receptors in a pseudo-irreversible manner. In contrast, DOI and the 5-HT(2A/2C) receptor antagonist, ketanserin, bound reversibly. These binding properties were reflected in ex vivo binding studies. The two hallucinogens also differed in that LSD showed modest D(1) receptor binding affinity whereas DOI had negligible binding affinity at this receptor.

CONCLUSION

Although DOI and LSD differed in their receptor binding properties, activation of 5-HT(2A) and D(1) receptors was a common mechanism for eliciting head bob behavior. These findings implicate these two receptors in the mechanism of action of hallucinogens.

Irving Page Lecture: 5-HT(2A) serotonin receptor biology: interacting proteins, kinases and paradoxical regulation

5-Hydroxytryptamine(2A) (5-HT(2A)) serotonin receptors are important pharmacological targets for a large number of central nervous system and peripheral serotonergic medications. In this review article I summarize work mainly from my lab regarding serotonin receptor anatomy, pharmacology, signaling and regulation. I highlight the role of serotonin receptor interacting proteins and the emerging paradigm of G-protein coupled receptor functional selectivity.

Inverse agonist-induced signaling and down-regulation of the platelet-activating factor receptor

Platelet-activating factor (PAF) is a potent phospholipid mediator involved in several diseases such as allergic asthma, atherosclerosis and psoriasis. The human PAF receptor (PAFR) is a member of the G-protein-coupled receptor family. Following stimulation, PAFR becomes rapidly desensitized; this refractory state is dependent on PAFR phosphorylation, internalization and down-regulation. In this report, we show that the PAFR inverse agonist, WEB2086, can induce phosphorylation and down-regulation of PAFR. Using selective inhibitors, we determined that the agonist, PAF, and WEB2086 could induce phosphorylation of PAFR by PKC. Moreover, dominant-negative (DN) mutant of PKC isoforms beta inhibited WEB2086-stimulated PAFR phosphorylation, whereas PAF-stimulated phosphorylation was inhibited by DN PKCalpha and delta. WEB2086 also induced PAFR down-regulation which could be blocked by PKC inhibitors and by DN PKCbeta. WEB2086-induced down-regulation was dynamin-dependent but arrestin-independent. Unlike PAF, WEB2086-stimulated intracellular trafficking of PAFR was independent of Rab5. Specific inhibitors of lysosomal proteases and of proteasomes were both effective in reducing WEB2086-induced PAFR down-regulation, indicating the importance of receptor targeting to both lysosomes and proteasomes in long-term cell desensitization to WEB2086. These results indicate that although both agonists and inverse agonists induce receptor PAFR down-regulation, this may be accomplished through different signal transduction and trafficking pathways.

5-HT2A and 5-HT2C receptors and their atypical regulation properties

The 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors belong to the G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily. GPCRs transduce extracellular signals to the interior of cells through their interaction with G-proteins. The 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors mediate effects of a large variety of compounds affecting depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, hallucinations, dysthymia, sleep patterns, feeding behaviour and neuro-endocrine functions. Binding of such compounds to either 5-HT(2) receptor subtype induces processes that regulate receptor sensitivity. In contrast to most other receptors, chronic blockade of 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors leads not to an up- but to a (paradoxical) down-regulation. This review deals with published data involving such non-classical regulation of 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors obtained from in vivo and in vitro studies. The underlying regulatory processes of the agonist-induced regulation of 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors, commonly thought to be desensitisation and resensitisation, are discussed. The atypical down-regulation of both 5-HT(2) receptor subtypes by antidepressants, antipsychotics and 5-HT(2) antagonists is reviewed. The possible mechanisms of this paradoxical down-regulation are discussed, and a new hypothesis on possible heterologous regulation of 5-HT(2A) receptors is proposed.

Different regulation of rat 5-HT(2A) and rat 5-HT(2C) receptors in NIH 3T3 cells upon exposure to 5-HT and pipamperone

The 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(2C) receptors belong to the same subtype of the G-protein coupled receptor family and have several agonist and antagonist ligands in common. To gain more insight into the differences in the regulation of the two receptors, we studied the effect of agonist and antagonist pre-treatment on radioligand receptor binding and 5-HT-induced inositol phosphate formation on rat 5-HT(2A) and rat 5-HT(2C) receptors stable expressed in NIH 3T3 cells. We compared short (15 min) and prolonged (48 h) pre-treatment of the cells with the natural agonist, 5-HT and with the antagonist pipamperone, which can be readily washed out. The rat 5-HT(2C) receptor showed an agonist-induced down-regulation (decrease in B(max) of labelled agonist and antagonist binding) and desensitisation (decrease in 5-HT-induced inositol phosphate formation and potency of 5-HT). Antagonist pre-treatment induced an increase in rat 5-HT(2C) receptor-mediated inositol phosphate formation as well as increased agonist and antagonist radioligand binding. These findings are consistent with the classical model of G-protein coupled receptor regulation. In contrast, the rat 5-HT(2A) receptor expressed in the same host cell behaved differently, unlike the classical model. Pre-treatment with 5-HT for 15 min and 48 h did not change receptor levels measured by radioligand binding, but the signal transduction response (inositol phosphate formation) was significantly reduced. Pre-treatment with the antagonist pipamperone for 15 min and 48 h caused an increase in antagonist radioligand binding but a reduction in agonist radioligand binding and a decrease in inositol phosphate formation and potency of 5-HT. Hence, the rat 5-HT(2A) receptor apparently undergoes agonist desensitisation without down-regulation of the total receptor number. Antagonist pre-treatment causes a paradoxical desensitisation, possibly by uncoupling of the receptor from G-proteins. The uncoupled receptor does not bind 5-HT in the nanomolar range but retains its antagonist binding properties. Paradoxical antagonist-induced desensitisation of rat 5-HT(2A) receptors has also been observed in vivo.

Cortical [3H]ketanserin binding and 5-HT2A receptor-mediated inositol phosphate production in the spontaneously hypertensive rat and Lewis rat strains

The spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) and Lewis rat strains differ in the elevated plus-maze of anxiety, the former and the latter strain displaying low and high anxiety, respectively. A recent study has shown that serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT)2A receptor-mediated head shakes, but not [3H]ketanserin binding at these receptors, are less in Lewis rats, compared with SHRs. Herein, we have analysed the hypothesis of a difference in 5-HT2A receptor-effector coupling between these two strains. Confirming our previous results, the Bmax and KD values for the specific [3H]ketanserin binding at cortical 5-HT2A receptors were respectively identical in both strains. The accumulation of total inositol phosphates by the 5-HT2A,2B,2C receptor agonist 1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodophenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOI; 0.01-100 microM) was concentration- and strain (Lewis > SHR)-dependent. Preincubation with 0.01 and 0.1 microM of the 5-HT2A receptor antagonist SR 46349B, respectively, decreased and prevented DOI-elicited inositol phosphate production in both strains. The aforementioned genetic differences in 5-HT2A receptor-mediated head shakes may thus lie at some point distal from the 5-HT2A receptor.

Regional variability in changes in 5-HT2A receptor mRNA levels in rat brain following irreversible inactivation with EEDQ

In this study, the relationship between the expression of 5-HT2A receptors and level of 5-HT2A receptor mRNA in discrete regions of rat brain was examined by inactivating 5-HT2A receptors with the alkylating agent N-ethoxycarbonyl-2-ethoxy-1,2-dihydroquinoline (EEDQ; 10 mg/kg, i.p.) and measuring the time course of receptor recovery and changes in mRNA levels. In untreated controls, the distribution and levels of 5-HT2A receptors labeled with [3H]ketanserin and receptor mRNA labeled with a 230-base 33P-labeled riboprobe were found to be highly correlated in most sub-regions of the cortex, the caudate-putamen and the claustrum but not in the piriform cortex or the hippocampus. Administration of EEDQ produced 90-99% inactivation of 5-HT2A receptors and the rate of receptor recovery was uniform in most regions studied. 5-HT2A receptors in most regions reached control levels by day 14, the lone exception being the caudate-putamen where receptors reached only 56% of control by day 14. Following inactivation of receptors with EEDQ there was a transient increase in levels of 5-HT2A receptor mRNA in several regions. Although rates of receptor recovery were uniform, four distinct patterns of mRNA response were observed: (1) early elevation followed by late elevation, (2) early elevation only, (3) late elevation only, and (4) no detectable change. The absence of a direct relationship between changes in 5-HT2A receptor mRNA and 5-HT2A receptor recovery in this model system suggests that transcriptional regulation is not the mechanism controlling the recovery of these receptors after irreversible inactivation. This study also lends support to the idea that alternative mechanisms may play a role in 5-HT2A receptor regulation after other pharmacological and physiological manipulations. The regional variability in 5-HT2A mRNA regulation reported here highlights the importance of using techniques with a high level of anatomical resolution to study changes in 5-HT2A receptor mRNA levels.