AMPA receptor agonists: Resolution, configurational assignment, and pharmacology of (+)-(S)- and (-)-(R)-2-amino-3-[3-hydroxy-5-(2-pyridyl)-isoxazol-4-yl]-propionic acid (2-Py-AMPA)

✍ Scribed by Tommy N. Johansen; Bjarke Ebert; Erik Falch; Povl Krogsgaard-Larsen

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1997
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 173 KB
• Volume: 9
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0899-0042
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1520-636x(1997)9:3<274::aid-chir12>3.0.co;2-k

✦ Synopsis

We have previously shown that whereas (RS)-2-amino-3-(3-hydroxy-5-phenylisoxazol-4-yl)propionic acid (APPA) shows the characteristics of a partial agonist at (RS)-2-amino-3-(3-hydroxy-5-methylisoxazol-4-yl)propionic acid (AMPA) receptors, (S)-APPA is a full AMPA receptor agonist and (R)-APPA a weak competitive AMPA receptor antagonist. This observation led us to introduce the new pharmacological concept, functional partial agonism. Recently we have shown that the 2-pyridyl analogue of APPA, (RS)-2-amino-3-[3-hydroxy-5-(2-pyridyl)isoxazol-4-yl]propionic acid (2-Py-AMPA), is a potent and apparently full AMPA receptor agonist, and this compound has now been resolved into (+)- and (-)-2-Py-AMPA (ee > or = 99.0%) by chiral HPLC using a Chirobiotic T column. The absolute stereochemistry of the enantiomers of APPA has previously been established by X-ray analysis, and on the basis of comparative studies of the circular dichroism spectra of the enantiomers of APPA and 2-Py-AMPA, (+)- and (-)-2-Py-AMPA were assigned the (S)- and (R)-configuration, respectively. In a series of receptor binding studies, neither enantiomer of 2-Py-AMPA showed detectable affinity for kainic acid receptor sites or different sites at the N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptor complex. (+)-(S)-2-Py-AMPA was an effective inhibitor of [3H]AMPA binding (IC50 = 0.19 +/- 0.06 microM) and a potent AMPA receptor agonist in the rat cortical wedge preparation (EC50 = 4.5 +/- 0.3 microM) comparable with AMPA (IC50 = 0.040 +/- 0.01 microM; EC50 = 3.5 +/- 0.2 microM), but much more potent than (+)-(S)-APPA (IC50 = 5.5 +/- 2.2 microM; EC50 = 230 +/- 12 microM). Like (-)-(R)-APPA (IC50 > 100 microM), (-)-(R)-2-Py-AMPA (IC50 > 100 microM) did not significantly affect [3H]AMPA binding, and both compounds were weak AMPA receptor antagonists (Ki = 270 +/- 50 and 290 +/- 20 microM, respectively).