Clinical trial: a single-centre, randomised, controlled trial of tradipitant on satiation, gastric functions, and serum drug levels in healthy volunteers

Rapid elucidation of agonist-driven regulation of the neurokinin 1 receptor using a GPCR phosphorylation immunoassay

Agonist-induced phosphorylation is a crucial step in the activation/deactivation cycle of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), but direct determination of individual phosphorylation events has remained a major challenge. We have recently developed a bead-based immunoassay for the quantitative assessment of agonist-induced GPCR phosphorylation that can be performed entirely in 96-well plates, thus eliminating the need for western blot analysis. In the present study, we adapted this assay to three novel phosphosite-specific antibodies directed against the neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor, namely pS338/pT339-NK1, pT344/pS347-NK1, and pT356/pT357-NK1. We found that substance P (SP) stimulated concentration-dependent phosphorylation of all three sites, which could be completely blocked in the presence of the NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant. The other two endogenous ligands of the tachykinin family, neurokinin A (NKA) and neurokinin B (NKB), were also able to induce NK1 receptor phosphorylation, but to a much lesser extent than substance P. Interestingly, substance P promoted phosphorylation of the two distal sites more efficiently than that of the proximal site. The proximal site was identified as a substrate for phosphorylation by protein kinase C. Analysis of GPCR kinase (GRK)-knockout cells revealed that phosphorylation was mediated by all four GRK isoforms to similar extents at the T344/S347 and the T356/T357 cluster. Knockout of all GRKs resulted in abolition of all phosphorylation signals highlighting the importance of these kinases in agonist-mediated receptor phosphorylation. Thus, the 7TM phosphorylation assay technology allows for rapid and detailed analyses of GPCR phosphorylation.

An assessment of the effects of neurokinin1 receptor antagonism against nausea and vomiting: Relative efficacy, sites of action and lessons for future drug development

A broad-spectrum anti-vomiting effect of neurokinin1 receptor antagonists (NK1 RA), shown in pre-clinical animal studies, has been supported by a more limited range of clinical studies in different indications. However, this review suggests that compared with vomiting, the self-reported sensation of nausea is less affected or possibly unaffected (depending on the stimulus) by NK1 receptor antagonism, a common finding for anti-emetics. The stimulus-independent effects of NK1 RAs against vomiting are explicable by actions within the central pattern generator (ventral brainstem) and the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS; dorsal brainstem), with additional effects on vagal afferent activity for certain stimuli (e.g., highly emetogenic chemotherapy). The central pattern generator and NTS neurones are multifunctional so the notable lack of obvious effects of NK1 RAs on other reflexes mediated by the same neurones suggests that their anti-vomiting action is dependent on the activation state of the pathway leading to vomiting. Nausea requires activation of cerebral pathways by projection of information from the NTS. Although NK1 receptors are present in cerebral nuclei implicated in nausea, and imaging studies show very high receptor occupancy at clinically used doses, the variable or limited ability of NK1 RAs to inhibit nausea emphasizes: (i) our inadequate understanding of the mechanisms of nausea; and (ii) that classification of a drug as an anti-emetic may give a false impression of efficacy against nausea vs. vomiting. We discuss the potential mechanisms for the differential efficacy of NK1 RA and the implications for future development of drugs that can effectively treat nausea, an area of unmet clinical need.

Review article: An analysis of the pharmacological rationale for selecting drugs to inhibit vomiting or increase gastric emptying during treatment of gastroparesis

BACKGROUND

Drugs which can inhibit nausea/vomiting and/or increase gastric emptying are used to treat gastroparesis, mostly 'off-label'. Within each category, they act at different targets and modulate different physiological mechanisms.

AIMS

Address the questions: In gastroparesis, why should blocking one pathway causing vomiting, be more appropriate than another? Why might increasing gastric emptying via one mechanism be more appropriate than another?

METHODS

Drugs used clinically were identified via consensus opinions and reviews, excluding the poorly characterised. Their pharmacology was defined, mapped to mechanisms influencing vomiting and gastric emptying, and rationale developed for therapeutic use.

RESULTS

Vomiting: Rationale for 5-HT₃ , D₂ , H₁ or muscarinic antagonists, and mirtazapine, amitriptyline, nortriptyline, are poor. Arguments for inhibiting central consequences of vagal afferent transmission by NK₁ antagonism are complicated by doubts over effects on nausea. Gastric emptying: Confusion emerges because of side-effects of drugs increasing gastric emptying: Metoclopramide (5-HT₄ agonist, D₂ and 5-HT₃ antagonist; also blocks some emetic stimuli and causes tardive dyskinesia) and Erythromycin (high-efficacy motilin agonist, requiring low doses to minimise side-effects). Limited trials with selective 5-HT₄ agonists indicate variable efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Several drug classes inhibiting vomiting have no scientific rationale. NK₁ antagonism has rationale but complicated by limited efficacy against nausea. Studies must resolve variable efficacy of selective 5-HT₄ agonists and apparent superiority over motilin agonists. Overall, lack of robust activity indicates a need for novel approaches targeting nausea (e.g., modulating gastric pacemaker or vagal activity, use of receptor agonists or new targets such as GDF15) and objective assessments of nausea.