Identification and Characterization of Non-Adrenergic Binding Sites in Insulin-Secreting Cells with the Imidazoline RX821002
- 117 Downloads
Recent studies have shown that certain compounds which possess an imidazoline moiety within their structure, are able to enhance the rate of insulin secretion, both in vivo and in vitro 1. 86Rb+ efflux experiments and electrophysiological studies2,3 have provided evidence that this response is due to the reduction in potassium flux via ATP-regulated K+ channels across the islet B-cell plasma membrane, resulting in membrane depolarization. The nature of the binding site mediating the effects of imidazolines in islets is unclear but it is significant that a class of binding sites known as “imidazoline-preferring” receptors has recently been described in a wide variety of tissues4. However, the pharmacology of the defined I1- and I2-imidazoline sites does not correlate with the observed responses to imidazolines in islets, although I2-receptors (also known as non-adrenoceptor idazoxan binding sites (NAIBS)) have been described in pancreatic islets5 and RINm5F insulinoma cells6. Moreover, we have shown that the secretory response induced by the imidazoline efaroxan shows stereoselectivity and is subject to down-regulation in the presence of agonist7. Thus, the possibilty remains the islet imidazoline receptor may represent a novel, third type of imidazoline binding site.
KeywordsInsulin Secretion Insulin Release Radioligand Binding Experiment Imidazoline Compound Secretagogue Activity
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.M.C. Michel, and P. Ernsberger, Keeping an eye on the I site: imidazoline-preferring receptors, Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 45: 369 (1992).Google Scholar
- 9.W. Montague, and K.W. Taylor, Pentitols and insulin release by isolated rat islets of Langerhans, Biochem. J. 109: 339 (1968).Google Scholar
- 13.A. Schulz, and A. Hassleblatt, Dual action of clonidine on insulin release: suppression but stimulation when α2-adrenoceptors are blocked, Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch. Pharmacol. 340: 305 (1989).Google Scholar