Binding site location on GABAA receptors determines whether mixtures of intravenous general anaesthetics interact synergistically or additively in vivo

Anesthetic Mechanisms: Synergistic Interactions With Lipid Rafts and Voltage-Gated Sodium Channels

Despite successfully utilizing anesthetics for over 150 years, the mechanism of action remains relatively unknown. Recent studies have shown promising results, but due to the complex interactions between anesthetics and their targets, there remains a clear need for further mechanistic research. We know that lipophilicity is directly connected to anesthetic potency since lipid solubility relates to anesthetic partition into the membrane. However, clinically relevant concentrations of anesthetics do not significantly affect lipid bilayers but continue to influence various molecular targets. Lipid rafts are derived from liquid-ordered phases of the plasma membrane that contain increased concentrations of cholesterol and sphingomyelin and act as staging platforms for membrane proteins, including ion channels. Although anesthetics do not perturb membranes at clinically relevant concentrations, they have recently been shown to target lipid rafts. In this review, we summarize current research on how different types of anesthetics-local, inhalational, and intravenous-bind and affect both lipid rafts and voltage-gated sodium channels, one of their major targets, and how those effects synergize to cause anesthesia and analgesia. Local anesthetics block voltage-gated sodium channel pores while also disrupting lipid packing in ordered membranes. Inhalational anesthetics bind to the channel pore and the voltage-sensing domain while causing an increase in the number, size, and diameter of lipid rafts. Intravenous anesthetics bind to the channel primarily at the voltage-sensing domain and the selectivity filter, while causing lipid raft perturbation. These changes in lipid nanodomain structure possibly give proteins access to substrates that have translocated as a result of these structural alterations, resulting in lipid-driven anesthesia. Overall, anesthetics can impact channel activity either through direct interaction with the channel, indirectly through the lipid raft, or both. Together, these result in decreased sodium ion flux into the cell, disrupting action potentials and producing anesthetic effects. However, more research is needed to elucidate the indirect mechanisms associated with channel disruption through the lipid raft, as not much is known about anionic lipid products and their influence over voltage-gated sodium channels. Anesthetics' effect on S-palmitoylation, a promising mechanism for direct and indirect influence over voltage-gated sodium channels, is another auspicious avenue of research. Understanding the mechanisms of different types of anesthetics will allow anesthesiologists greater flexibility and more specificity when treating patients.

Modeling mixtures interactions in environmental toxicology

In the environment, organisms are exposed to mixtures of different toxicants, which may interact in ways that are difficult to predict when only considering each component individually. Adapting and expanding tools from pharmacology, the toxicology field uses analytical, graphical, and computational methods to identify and quantify interactions in multi-component mixtures. The two general frameworks are concentration addition, where components have similar modes of action and their effects sum together, or independent action, where components have dissimilar modes of action and do not interact. Other interaction behaviors include synergism and antagonism, where the combined effects are more or less than the additive sum of individual effects. This review covers foundational theory, methods, an in-depth survey of original research from the past 20 years, current trends, and future directions. As humans and ecosystems are exposed to increasingly complex mixtures of environmental contaminants, analyzing mixtures interactions will continue to become a more critical aspect of toxicological research.

Time to Wake Up! The Ongoing Search for General Anesthetic Reversal Agents

How general anesthetics work remains a topic of ongoing study. A parallel field of research has sought to identify methods to reverse general anesthesia. Reversal agents could shorten patients' recovery time and potentially reduce the risk of postoperative complications. An incomplete understanding of the mechanisms of general anesthesia has hampered the pursuit for reversal agents. Nevertheless, the search for reversal agents has furthered understanding of the mechanisms underlying general anesthesia. The study of potential reversal agents has highlighted the importance of rigorous criteria to assess recovery from general anesthesia in animal models, and has helped identify key arousal systems (e.g., cholinergic, dopaminergic, and orexinergic systems) relevant to emergence from general anesthesia. Furthermore, the effects of reversal agents have been found to be inconsistent across different general anesthetics, revealing differences in mechanisms among these drugs. The presynapse and glia probably also contribute to general anesthesia recovery alongside postsynaptic receptors. The next stage in the search for reversal agents will have to consider alternate mechanisms encompassing the tripartite synapse.

Photomotor Responses in Zebrafish and Electrophysiology Reveal Varying Interactions of Anesthetics Targeting Distinct Sites on γ-Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptors

BACKGROUND

Etomidate, barbiturates, alfaxalone, and propofol are anesthetics that allosterically modulate γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABAA) receptors via distinct sets of molecular binding sites. Two-state concerted coagonist models account for anesthetic effects and predict supra-additive interactions between drug pairs acting at distinct sites. Some behavioral and molecular studies support these predictions, while other findings suggest potentially complex anesthetic interactions. We therefore evaluated interactions among four anesthetics in both animals and GABAA receptors.

METHODS

The authors used video assessment of photomotor responses in zebrafish larvae and isobolography to evaluate hypnotic drug pair interactions. Voltage clamp electrophysiology and allosteric shift analysis evaluated coagonist interactions in α1β3γ2L receptors activated by γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) versus anesthetics [log(d, AN):log(d, GABA) ratio]. Anesthetic interactions at concentrations relevant to zebrafish were assessed in receptors activated with low GABA.

RESULTS

In zebrafish larvae, etomidate interacted additively with both propofol and the barbiturate R-5-allyl-1-methyl m-trifluoromethyl mephobarbital (R-mTFD-MPAB; mean ± SD α = 1.0 ± 0.07 and 0.96 ± 0.11 respectively, where 1.0 indicates additivity), while the four other drug pairs displayed synergy (mean α range 0.76 to 0.89). Electrophysiologic allosteric shifts revealed that both propofol and R-mTFD-MPAB modulated etomidate-activated receptors much less than GABA-activated receptors [log(d, AN):log(d, GABA) ratios = 0.09 ± 0.021 and 0.38 ± 0.024, respectively], while alfaxalone comparably modulated receptors activated by GABA or etomidate [log(d) ratio = 0.87 ± 0.056]. With low GABA activation, etomidate combined with alfaxalone was supra-additive (n = 6; P = 0.023 by paired t test), but etomidate plus R-mTFD-MPAB or propofol was not.

CONCLUSIONS

In both zebrafish and GABAA receptors, anesthetic drug pairs interacted variably, ranging from additivity to synergy. Pairs including etomidate displayed corresponding interactions in animals and receptors. Some of these results challenge simple two-state coagonist models and support alternatives where different anesthetics may stabilize distinct receptor conformations, altering the effects of other drugs.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Synthetic neuroactive steroids as new sedatives and anaesthetics: Back to the future

Since the 1990s, there has been waning interest in researching general anaesthetics (anaesthetics). Although currently used anaesthetics are mostly safe and effective, they are not without fault. In paediatric populations and neonatal animal models, they are associated with learning impairments and neurotoxicity. In an effort to research safer anaesthetics, we have gone back to re-examine neuroactive steroids as anaesthetics. Neuroactive steroids are steroids that have direct, local effects in the central nervous system. Since the discovery of their anaesthetic effects, neuroactive steroids have been consistently used in human or veterinary clinics as preferred anaesthetic agents. Although briefly abandoned for clinical use due to unwanted vehicle side effects, there has since been renewed interest in their therapeutic value. Neuroactive steroids are safe sedative/hypnotic and anaesthetic agents across various animal species. Importantly, unlike traditional anaesthetics, they do not cause extensive neurotoxicity in the developing rodent brain. Similar to traditional anaesthetics, neuroactive steroids are modulators of synaptic and extrasynaptic γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA_A ) receptors and their interactions at the GABA_A receptor are stereo- and enantioselective. Recent work has also shown that these agents act on other ion channels, such as high- and low-voltage-activated calcium channels. Through these mechanisms of action, neuroactive steroids modulate neuronal excitability, which results in characteristic burst suppression of the electroencephalogram, and a surgical plane of anaesthesia. However, in addition to their interactions with voltage and ligand gated ions channels, neuroactive steroids interact with membrane bound metabotropic receptors and xenobiotic receptors to facilitate signaling of prosurvival, antiapoptotic pathways. These pathways play a role in their neuroprotective effects in neuronal injury and may also prevent extensive apoptosis in the developing brain during anaesthesia. The current review explores the history of neuroactive steroids as anaesthetics in humans and animal models, their diverse mechanisms of action, and their neuroprotective properties.

General anaesthetics as 'awakening agents'? Re-appraising the evidence for suggested 'pressure reversal' of anaesthesia

Increasing ambient pressure has been suggested to reverse general anaesthesia and provides support for the 'lipid theory'. Anaesthetic dissolution into cell membranes is said to cause their expansion to a critical volume. This triggers a sequence of events as basis of a unitary theory of anaesthestic mechanism. Pressure is argued to restore membrane volume to below critical level, reversing this process. We wished to review the original literature to assess internal consistency within and across papers, and to consider if alternative interpretations were possible. A literature search yielded 31 relevant 'pressure reversal' papers for narrative review, and 8 papers that allowed us to re-plot original data more consistently as 'dose-response' curves for the anaesthetics examined. Original studies were heterogenous for end-points, pressure ranges, species, and agents. Pressure effects were inconsistent, with narcosis at certain pressures and excitation at others, influenced by carrier gas (e.g., nitrogen vs helium). Pressure reversal (a right- or downward-shift on the re-plotted dose-response curves) was evident, but only in some species and at certain pressures and anaesthetic concentrations. However, even more striking was a novel 'awakening' effect of anaesthetics: i.e., anaesthetics reversed the narcotic effect of pressure, but this was limited to certain pressures at generally low anaesthetic concentrations. Contrary to the established view, 'pressure reversal' is not a universal phenomenon. The awakening effect of anaesthetics - described here for the first time - has equal evidence to support it, within the same literature, and is something that cannot be fully explained. Pressure cannot meaningfully be used to gain insight into anaesthetic mechanisms because of its heterogenous, non-specific and unpredictable effects on biological systems.

Pharmacological modulation of GABAA receptors

Ligand-gated ion channels are integral membrane proteins that activate through a change in conformation upon transmitter binding and were identified as key players of brain function. GABA_A receptors are major inhibitory ligand-gated ion channels of this protein family. They are the target of many therapeutic compounds widely used in the clinic and continue to attract the attention of academic and pharmaceutical laboratories. Advances in the knowledge of the structure of GABA_A receptors at the molecular level with unprecedented resolution enabled the determination of the binding sites of many allosteric modulators revealing the nature of their interactions with the receptors. Herein, we review the latest findings on allosteric modulation of GABA_A receptors and their relevance to drug discovery.

Experimental GABA A Receptor Agonists and Allosteric Modulators for the Treatment of Focal Epilepsy

GABA A receptors are ubiquitous in the central nervous system and there is a huge diversity of receptor subtypes in almost all regions of the brain. However, the expression of GABA A receptor subtypes is altered in both the gray and white matter of patients with focal epilepsy. Although there is a number of anticonvulsants with marketing authorization for the treatment of focal epilepsy which act through GABA A receptors, potentiating the inhibitory effects of GABA, it is necessary to develop more potent and more specific GABAergic anticonvulsants that are effective in drug-resistant patients with focal epilepsy. There are three orthosteric and at least seven allosteric agonist binding sites at the GABA A receptor. In experimental and clinical studies, full agonists of GABA A receptors showed a tendency to cause desensitization of the receptors, tolerance, and physical dependence; therefore, partial orthosteric agonists and positive allosteric modulators of GABA A receptors were further developed. Preclinical studies demonstrated the anticonvulsant efficacy of positive allosteric modulators with selective action on GABA A receptors with α2/α3 subunits, but only a handful of them were further tested in clinical trials. The best results were obtained for clobazam (already marketed), ganaxolone (in phase III trials), CVL-865 (in phase II trials), and padsevonil (in phase III trials). Several compounds with more selective action on GABA A receptors, perhaps only in certain brain regions, have the potential to become effective drugs against specific subtypes of focal-onset epilepsy. However, their development needs time, and in the near future we can expect only one or two new GABA A agonists to obtain marketing authorization for focal epilepsy, an advance that would be of use for just a fraction of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

Competitive Interactions between Halothane and Isoflurane at the Carotid Body and TASK Channels

Background

The degree to which different volatile anesthetics depress carotid body hypoxic response relates to their ability to activate TASK potassium channels. Most commonly, volatile anesthetic pairs act additively at their molecular targets. We examined whether this applied to carotid body TASK channels.

Methods

We studied halothane and isoflurane effects on hypoxia-evoked rise in intracellular calcium (Ca2+i, using the indicator Indo-1) in isolated neonatal rat glomus cells, and TASK single-channel activity (patch clamping) in native glomus cells and HEK293 cell line cells transiently expressing TASK-1.

Results

Halothane (5%) depressed glomus cell Ca2+i hypoxic response (mean ± SD, 94 ± 4% depression; P < 0.001 vs. control). Isoflurane (5%) had a less pronounced effect (53 ± 10% depression; P < 0.001 vs. halothane). A mix of 3% isoflurane/1.5% halothane depressed cell Ca2+i response (51 ± 17% depression) to a lesser degree than 1.5% halothane alone (79 ± 15%; P = 0.001), but similar to 3% isoflurane alone (44 ± 22%; P = 0.224), indicating subadditivity. Halothane and isoflurane increased glomus cell TASK-1/TASK-3 activity, but mixes had a lesser effect than that seen with halothane alone: 4% halothane/4% isoflurane yielded channel open probabilities 127 ± 55% above control, versus 226 ± 12% for 4% halothane alone (P = 0.009). Finally, in HEK293 cell line cells, progressively adding isoflurane (1.5 to 5%) to halothane (2.5%) reduced TASK-1 channel activity from 120 ± 38% above control, to 88 ± 48% (P = 0.034).

Conclusions

In all three experimental models, the effects of isoflurane and halothane combinations were quantitatively consistent with the modeling of weak and strong agonists competing at a common receptor on the TASK channel.

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

A potent photoreactive general anesthetic with novel binding site selectivity for GABAA receptors

The pentameric γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors (GABA_ARs) are the major inhibitory ligand-gated ion channels in the central nervous system. They mediate diverse physiological functions, mutations in them are associated with mental disorders and they are the target of many drugs such as general anesthetics, anxiolytics and anti-convulsants. The five subunits of synaptic GABA_ARs are arranged around a central pore in the order β-α-β-α-γ. In the outer third of the transmembrane domain (TMD) drugs may bind to five homologous intersubunit binding sites. Etomidate binds between the pair of β - α subunit interfaces (designated as β⁺/α^-) and R-mTFD-MPAB binds to an α⁺/β^- and an γ⁺/β^- subunit interface (a β^- selective ligand). Ligands that bind selectively to other homologous sites have not been characterized. We have synthesized a novel photolabel, (2,6-diisopropyl-4-(3-(trifluoromethyl)-3H-diazirin-3-yl)phenyl)methanol or pTFD-di-iPr-BnOH). It is a potent general anesthetic that positively modulates agonist and benzodiazepine binding. It enhances GABA-induced currents, shifting the GABA concentration-response curve to lower concentrations. Photolabeling-protection studies show that it has negligible affinity for the etomidate sites and high affinity for only one of the two R-mTFD-MPAB sites. Exploratory site-directed mutagenesis studies confirm the latter conclusions and hint that pTFD-di-iPr-BnOH may bind between the α⁺/β^- and α⁺/γ^- subunits in the TMD, making it an α⁺ ligand. The latter α⁺/γ^- site has not previously been implicated in ligand binding. Thus, pTFD-di-iPr-BnOH is a promising new photolabel that may open up a new pharmacology for synaptic GABA_ARs.

Binding site location on GABAA receptors determines whether mixtures of intravenous general anaesthetics interact synergistically or additively in vivo

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

General anaesthetics can act on synaptic GABA_A receptors by binding to one of three classes of general anaesthetic sites. Canonical drugs that bind selectively to only one class of site are etomidate, alphaxalone, and the mephobarbital derivative, R-mTFD-MPAB. We tested the hypothesis that the general anaesthetic potencies of mixtures of such site-selective agents binding to the same or to different sites would combine additively or synergistically respectively.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

The potency of general anaesthetics individually or in combinations to cause loss of righting reflexes in tadpoles was determined, and the results were analysed using isobolographic methods.

KEY RESULTS

The potencies of combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all acted on a single class of site were strictly additive, regardless of which single site was involved. Combinations of two or three site-selective anaesthetics that all bound selectively to different sites always interacted synergistically. The strength of the synergy increased with the number of separate sites involved such that the percentage of each agent's EC₅₀ required to cause anaesthesia was just 35% and 14% for two or three sites respectively. Propofol, which binds non-selectively to the etomidate and R-mTFD-MPAB sites, interacted synergistically with each of these agents.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The established pharmacology of the three anaesthetic binding sites on synaptic GABA_A receptors was sufficient to predict whether a mixture of anaesthetics interacted additively or synergistically to cause loss of righting reflexes in vivo. The principles established here have implications for clinical practice.