Search

2,5-Dimethoxy-4-substituted phenylisopropylamines and phenethylamines are 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) (5-HT)(2A/2C) agonists. The former are partial to full agonists, whereas the latter are partial to weak agonists. However, most data come from studies analyzing phospholipase C (PLC)-mediated responses, although additional effectors [e.g., phospholipase A(2) (PLA(2))] are associated with these receptors. We compared two homologous series of phenylisopropylamines and phenethylamines measuring both PLA(2) and PLC responses in Chinese hamster ovary-K1 cells expressing human 5-HT(2A) or 5-HT(2C) receptors. In addition, we assayed both groups of compounds as head shake inducers in rats. At the 5-HT(2C) receptor, most compounds were partial agonists for both pathways. Relative efficacy of some phenylisopropylamines was higher for both responses compared with their phenethylamine counterparts, whereas for others, no differences were found. At the 5-HT(2A) receptor, most compounds behaved as partial agonists, but unlike findings at 5-HT(2C) receptors, all phenylisopropylamines were more efficacious than their phenethylamine counterparts. 2,5-Dimethoxyphenylisopropylamine activated only the PLC pathway at both receptor subtypes, 2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine was selective for PLC at the 5-HT(2C) receptor, and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-nitrophenethylamine was PLA(2)-specific at the 5-HT(2A) receptor. For both receptors, the rank order of efficacy of compounds differed depending upon which response was measured. The phenylisopropylamines were strong head shake inducers, whereas their phenethylamine congeners were not, in agreement with in vitro results and the involvement of 5-HT(2A) receptors in the head shake response. Our results support the concept of functional selectivity and indicate that subtle changes in ligand structure can result in significant differences in the cellular signaling profile.

It has been suggested that sigma receptors may be involved in the etiology of psychosis and that 5-hydroxytryptamine2 (5-HT2) antagonists may have utility in treating the negative symptoms of psychosis as well as reducing the side effects associated with the typical antipsychotic haloperidol. We have evaluated the potential antipsychotic effects of 1-(cyclopropylmethyl)-4-(2'(4''-fluorophenyl)-2'-oxoethyl)piper i din e HBr (DuP 734), a selective and potent sigma and 5-HT2 receptor ligand with weak affinity for D2 receptors, in behavioral animal models that are not necessarily dependent on dopamine antagonism. DuP 734 potently blocked mescaline-induced scratching (ED50 = 0.35 mg/kg, p.o.) and aggressive activity (ED50 = 1.9 mg/kg, p.o.) and was relatively much weaker as an apomorphine antagonist (ED50 = 12 mg/kg, p.o.). This was in contrast to the typical antipsychotic agents such as haloperidol and chlorpromazine, which were very potent in all three tests. In rats, DuP 734 did not antagonize avoidance behavior or induce catalepsy, and, therefore, differed from the potent dopamine receptor antagonist antipsychotics. It did, however, reduce lever response rates in a random interval 60-sec food reward schedule of reinforcement (ED50 = 6.0 mg/kg, p.o.) in rats. The results suggest that DuP 734 may have antipsychotic activity without the liability of motor side effects typical of neuroleptics. Although DuP 734 itself did not antagonize avoidance activity, it significantly enhanced the potency of haloperidol in blocking avoidance behavior by 3-fold (by shifting the ED50 from 0.94 to 0.36 mg/kg, p.o.), whereas the ED50 of haloperidol for blockade of escape behavior and induction of catalepsy was not affected.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Tactile startle responding by male Sprague-Dawley rats given 60 presentations of air-puff stimuli (37.5 psi) was measured after the intraperitoneal administration of graded doses of hallucinogens and other psychoactive drugs. Among the drugs tested were the indoleamine-derived compounds, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), N,N-dimethyltryptamine and psilocin, and the phenylethylamine-derived compounds, mescaline, 2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylamphetamine and a series of active and inactive congeners of 2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylamphetamine. All of the active phenylethylamines increased startle response magnitudes throughout the test session. This pattern of augmented startle suggests that these drugs increase reactivity. However, none of the indoleamine hallucinogens increased startle responding. Of the nonhallucinogenic drugs tested, only apomorphine increased startle responding, while clonidine significantly decreased it, and amphetamine, chlorimipramine, scopolamine and methysergide had no effect. In additional studies with LSD, it was found that LSD increased the response to only the first stimulus when more intense air-puffs were used (50 psi). Furthermore, when the number of stimuli was increased from 60 to 240 (1 hr) so that appreciable habituation was evident in controls, LSD impaired this habituation. Whereas the response magnitudes of the control group decreased by 70% across the session, the responses of LSD-treated rats decreased by only 32%. These results suggest that LSD and phenylethylamine-derived hallucinogens may differ in their effects on tactile startle responding.