In vivo binding properties of non-sedating antihistamines to CNS histamine receptors

A group of cationic amphiphilic drugs activates MRGPRX2 and induces scratching behavior in mice

BACKGROUND

Mas gene-related G protein-coupled receptors (MRGPRs) are a G protein-coupled receptor family responsive to various exogenous and endogenous agonists, playing a fundamental role in pain and itch sensation. The primate-specific family member MRGPRX2 and its murine orthologue MRGPRB2 are expressed by mast cells mediating IgE-independent signaling and pseudoallergic drug reactions.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to increase knowledge about the function and regulation of MRGPRX2/MRGPRB2, which is of major importance in prevention of drug hypersensitivity reactions and drug-induced pruritus.

METHODS

To identify novel MRGPR (ant)agonists, we screened a library of pharmacologically active compounds by utilizing a high-throughput calcium mobilization assay. The identified hit compounds were analyzed for their pseudoallergic and pruritogenic effects in mice and human.

RESULTS

We found a class of commonly used drugs activating MRGPRX2 that, to a large extent, consists of antidepressants, antiallergic drugs, and antipsychotics. Three-dimensional pharmacophore modeling revealed structural similarities of the identified agonists, classifying them as cationic amphiphilic drugs. Mast cell activation was investigated by using the 3 representatively selected antidepressants clomipramine, paroxetine, and desipramine. Indeed, we were able to show a concentration-dependent activation and MRGPRX2-dependent degranulation of the human mast cell line LAD2 (Laboratory of Allergic Diseases-2). Furthermore, clomipramine, paroxetine, and desipramine were able to induce degranulation of human skin and murine peritoneal mast cells. These substances elicited dose-dependent scratching behavior following intradermal injection into C57BL/6 mice but less so in MRGPRB2-mutant mice, as well as wheal-and-flare reactions following intradermal injections in humans.

CONCLUSION

Our results contribute to the characterization of structure-activity relationships and functionality of MRGPRX2 ligands and facilitate prediction of adverse reactions such as drug-induced pruritus to prevent severe drug hypersensitivity reactions.

New insights into the second generation antihistamines

Second generation antihistamines are recognised as being highly effective treatments for allergy-based disease and are among the most frequently prescribed and safest drugs in the world. However, consideration of the therapeutic index or the benefit/risk ratio of the H1 receptor antagonists is of paramount importance when prescribing this class of compounds as they are used to treat non-life threatening conditions. There are many second generation antihistamines available and at first examination these appear to be comparable in terms of safety and efficacy. However, the newer antihistamines in fact represent a heterogeneous group of compounds, having markedly differing chemical structures, adverse effects, half-life, tissue distribution and metabolism, spectrum of antihistaminic properties, and varying degrees of anti-inflammatory effects. With regard to the latter, there is growing awareness that some of these compounds might represent useful adjunct medications in asthma therapy. In terms of safety issues, the current second generation grouping includes compounds with proven cardiotoxic effects and others with the potential for adverse drug interactions. Moreover, some of the second generation H1 antagonists have given cause for concern regarding their potential to cause a degree of somnolence in some individuals. It can be argued, therefore, that the present second generation grouping is too large and indistinct since this was based primarily on the concept of separating the first generation sedating compounds from nonsedating H1 antagonists. Although it is too early to talk about a third generation grouping of antihistamines, future membership of such a classification could be based on a low volume of distribution coupled with a lack of sedating effects, drug interactions and cardiotoxicity.

Is there a difference in the affinity of histamine H1 receptor antagonists for CNS and peripheral receptors? An in vitro study

An extended series of structurally different histamine H1 receptor antagonists was investigated for binding at central and peripheral histamine H1 receptors in vitro. Antagonist affinities were measured by displacements of [3H]mepyramine from both guinea-pig cerebellum and lung membrane suspensions. Single [3H]mepyramine binding sites with identical affinity for [3H]mepyramine were found in both tissues; however, the H1 receptor density was 6-fold lower in lungs than in cerebellum. None of the antagonists tested showed substantial preference for either of the receptors. It is concluded from the displacement data that there is no difference between the antagonist binding sites of cerebellum and lung H1 receptors.

Sedation and histamine H1-receptor antagonism: studies in man with the enantiomers of chlorpheniramine and dimethindene

1. The effects of 10 mg (+)- and (-)-chlorpheniramine and 5 mg (+)- and (-)-dimethindene on daytime sleep latencies, digit symbol substitution and subjective assessments of mood and well-being were studied in 6 healthy young adult humans. Each subject also took 5 mg triprolidine hydrochloride as an active control and two placebos. 2. Daytime sleep latencies were reduced with triprolidine, (+)-chlorpheniramine and (-)-dimethindene, and subjects also reported that they felt more sleepy after (+)-chlorpheniramine and (-)-dimethindene. Performance on digit symbol substitution was impaired with (+)-chlorpheniramine. 3. Changes in measures with (-)-chlorpheniramine and (+)-dimethindene were not different from changes with placebo. 4. In the present study, changes in measures of drowsiness and performance were limited to the enantiomers with high affinity for the histamine H1-receptor. These findings strongly suggest that sedation can arise from H1-receptor antagonism alone, and provide further support for the belief that the histaminergic system is concerned with the regulation of alertness in man.