The influence of cooperativity on the determination of dissociation constants: Examination of the Cheng-Prusoff equation, the Scatchard analysis, the Schild analysis and related power equations

Pharmacological Research

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 21-40

  Cheng, Hsien C ^a  

^a SANOFI   (France)

Author keywords

Cheng Prusoff; Cooperativity; Dissociation constant; Scatchard; Schild

Indexed keywords

LIGAND;

AGONIST; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; BINDING ASSAY; CALCULATION; CHENG PRUSOFF EQUATION; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; DISSOCIATION CONSTANT; EQUILIBRIUM CONSTANT; IC 50; KINETICS; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCATCHARD PLOT; SCHILD ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; BINDING, COMPETITIVE; CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG ANTAGONISM; DRUG INTERACTIONS; DRUG SYNERGISM; KINETICS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RADIOLIGAND ASSAY; SOLUBILITY; TERMINOLOGY;

EID: 1842736339     PISSN: 10436618     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2003.11.007     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. x and competitive drug antagonism. Br. J. Pharmacol. 4:1947;277-280.
2. Arunlakshana O., Schild H.O. Some quantitative uses of drug antagonists. Br. J. Pharmacol. 14:1959;48-58.
3. Van Rossum J.M. Cumulative dose-response curves, II. Techniques for the making of dose-response curves in isolated organs and the evaluation of drug parameters. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 143:1963;299-330.
4. 50) of an enzymatic reaction. Biochem. Pharmacol. 22:1973;3099-3108.
5. Craig D. The Cheng-Prusoff relationship: something lost in the translation. Trends Phamacol. Sci. 14:1993;89-91.
6. 50, a closer look at the Cheng-Prusoff equation, the Schild plot and related power equations. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Method. 46:2002;61-71.
7. Cheng H.C., Lai R. Use of the proportionality equations for analyses of dose-response curves. Pharamacol. Res. 47:2003;163-173.
8. Moore G.J., Scanlon M.N. Methods for analyzing and interpreting cooperativity in dose-response curves I. Antagonist effects on angiotensin receptors in smooth muscle. Gen. Pharmacol. 20:1989;193-198.
9. Limbird LE. Identification of receptors using direct radioligand binding techniques. Cell surface receptors: a short course on theory and methods. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1996. p. 61-122.
10. Cheng H.C. A further look into the Cheng-Prusoff Equation for determination of dissociation constants. The Physiologist. 45:2002;350.
11. Gaddum J.H. Theories of drug antagonism. Pharmacol. Rev. 9:1957;211-218.
12. Taylor P, Insel PA. Molecular basis of pharmacologic selectivity. In: Pratt WB, Taylor P, editors. Principles of drug action, the basis of pharmacology. New York: Churchill Livingston, 1990, p. 60-4.
13. Tallarida RJ, Jacob LS. The dose-response relation in pharmacology. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1979. p. 49.
14. Segel IH. Enzyme kinetics, behavior and analysis of rapid equilibrium and steady-state enzyme systems. New-York: Wiley; 1993. p. 346.
15. Chou T.-C., Talalay P. Analysis of combined drug effects: a new look at a very old problem. Trends Phamacol. Sci. 4:1983;450-454.
16. Konkar A.A., Zhu Z., Granneman J.G. Aryloxypropanolamine and catecholamine ligand interactions with the β1-adrenergic receptor: evidence for interaction with distinct conformations of β1-adrenergic receptors. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 294:2000;923-932.
17. Nickolls S.A., Cismowski M.I., Wang X., Wolff M., Conlon P.J., Maki R.A. Molecular determinants of melanocortin 4 receptor ligand binding and MC4/MC3 receptor selectivity. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 304:2003;122-1217.
18. Kenakin T.P. The classification of drugs and drug receptors in isolated tissues. Pharmacol. Rev. 36:1984;165-222.
19. Grutter T., Changeux J.-P. Nicotinic receptors in wonderland. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26:2001;459-463.
20. Christopoulos A., Kenakin T.P. G protein-coupled receptor allosterism and complexing. Pharmacol. Rev. 54:2002;323-374.
21. Lazareno S., Birdsall N.J.M. Detection, quantitation, and verification of allosteric interactions of agents with labeled and unlabeled ligands at G protein coupled receptors: interactions of strychnine and acetylcholine at muscarinic receptors. Mol. Pharmacol. 48:1995;362-378.
22. Ellis J. Allosteric binding sites on muscarinic receptors. Drug Dev. Res. 40:1997;193-204.
23. 3H ]scopolamine and acetylcholine at muscarinic receptor subtypes: identification of a second allosteric site Mol. Pharmacol. 58:2000;194-207.
24. Black J.W., Leff P. Operational models of pharmacological agonism. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 220:1983;141-162.
25. Ariens EJ. Molecular pharmacology: the relation between stimulus and effect. New York: Academic Press; 1964. p. 146, 429.
26. Leff P., Dougall I.G. Further concerns over Cheng-Prusoff analysis. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 14:1993;110-112.
27. Lazareno S., Birdsall N.J.M. Estimation of competitive antagonist affinity from functional inhibition curves using the Gaddum, Schild and Cheng-Prusoff equations. Br. J. Pharmacol. 109:1993;1110-1119.
28. b from inhibition curves in functional experiments: alternatives to the Cheng-Prusoff equation. Trends Phamacol. Sci. 14:1993;237-239.
29. Quastel DMJ, Tabrizchi R. Quantification of drug action. In: Page CP, Curtis MJ, Sutter MC, Walker MJA, Hoffman BB, editors. Integrated pharmacology. London; 1997. p. 60.
30. 2-adrenergic receptors Mol. Pharmacol. 38:1990;348-356.