Affinities of barbiturates for the GABA-receptor complex and A1 adenosine receptors: a possible explanation of their excitatory effects

Summary The effects of barbiturates on the GABA-receptor complex and the A₁ adenosine receptor were studied. At the GABA-receptor complex the barbiturates inhibited the binding of [³⁵S]t-butylbicyclophosphorothionate ([³⁵S]TBPT) and enhanced the binding of [³H]diazepam. Kinetic and saturation experiments showed that both effects were allosteric. Whereas all barbiturates caused complete inhibition of [³⁵S]TBPT binding, they showed varying degrees of maximal enhancement of [3H]diazepam binding; (±)methohexital was identified as the most efficacious compound for this enhancement. At the A₁ adenosine receptor all barbiturates inhibited the binding of [³H]N⁶-phenylisopropyladenosine ([³H]PIA) in a competitive manner. The comparison of the effects on [³H]diazepam and [³H]PIA binding showed that excitatory barbiturates interact preferentially with the A₁ adenosine receptor, and sedative/anaesthetic barbiturates with the GABA-receptor complex. It is speculated that the interaction with these two receptors might be the basis of the excitatory versus sedative/anaesthetic properties of barbiturates.Abbreviations GABA -aminobutyric acid - TBPT t-butylbicyclophosphorothionate 1073 - DMBB 5-(1,3-dimethyl)butyl-5-ethylbarbituric acid - MCB N-methyl-5-(1-cyclohexen-1-yl)-5-ethylbarbituric acid - MPPB N-methyl-5-phenyl-5-propylbarbituric acid - PIA N⁶-phenylisopropyladenosine Send offprint requests to M. J. Lohse at the above address     

Osteosarcomatosis

A review of the 690 cases of osteosarcoma in the radiographic file of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology revealed 29 cases of "osteosarcomatosis" (multiple skeletal sites of osteosarcoma). Fifteen of these patients were 18 years old and under and manifested rapidly appearing, usually symmetric, sclerotic metaphyseal lesions. The remaining 14 patients were more than 18 years old and had fewer, asymmetric sclerotic lesions. In most patients (28 of 29), a radiographically dominant skeletal tumor was seen. Pulmonary metastases occurred in the majority of patients and were detected at the same time as the bone lesions. These 29 patients were studied with regard to demographic data and skeletal distribution and radiographic appearance of their lesions. As a result of the findings, a metastatic origin from a primary dominant osteosarcoma is favored over a multifocal origin as the basis for osteosarcomatosis. Osteosarcomatosis is more commonly encountered in the mature skeleton than has been previously recognized.     

Bacterial and mammalian DNA alkyltransferases sensitize Escherichia coli to the lethal and mutagenic effects of dibromoalkanes

Here we confirm and extend our previous studies demonstrating that the mutagenic potency of 1,2-dibromoethane (DBE) and dibromomethane (DBM) is markedly enhanced (not prevented) in bacteria expressing the O6- alkylguanine-DNA alkyltransferase (ATase) encoded by the Escherichia coli ogt gene. We demonstrate that, in close parallel with mutagenesis, the Ogt ATase sensitizes the bacteria to the lethal effects of these carcinogens, suggesting that one or more of the potentially mutagenic lesions induced by DBE and DBM in the presence of Ogt has additional lethal capacity. We further demonstrate that the sensitization to both lethality and mutagenesis by DBE and DBM is a property shared by other DNA alkyltransferases. This objective was accomplished by quantifying the induction of mutations and lethal events in ogt- ada- E. coli expressing an exogenous bacterial or mammalian ATase from a multicopy plasmid. Mammalian recombinant ATases enhanced the lethal and mutagenic actions of DBE and suppressed the lack of sensitivity of the vector- transformed bacteria to DBM. In most cases the order of effectiveness of the ATases ranked: murine > human > Ogt > rat. Further comparisons included the full-length Ada ATase from E. coli and a truncated Ada version (T-ada) that retains the O6-methylguanine binding domain of the protein. The full-length Ada ATase was effective in enhancing the lethality but not the mutagenicity induced by DBE and DBM. The T-ada ATase provided less sensitization than Ada to lethality by DBE, but of the three bacterial ATases T-ada yielded the highest sensitization to mutagenesis by this compound. T-ada and Ada ATases were in general less effective than the mammalian versions, with the exception of the rat recombinant ATase. The effectiveness of the different mammalian and bacterial ATases in promoting the deleterious actions of dibromoalkanes was compared with the effectiveness of these proteins in suppressing the lethal and mutagenic effects induced by N-nitroso-N-methylurea. The ability to sensitize E. coli to the lethal and mutagenic effects of DBE and DBM seems restricted to DNA alkyltransferase, since overexpression of thioredoxin (Trx) or glutaredoxin (Grx1) in ogt- ada- cells showed no effect, in spite of the reported potential of bioactive dihaloethane- derived species to alkylate Trx.      

Otoacoustic emissions as a screening test for hearing impairment in children recovering from acute bacterial meningitis

OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) as a screening test for hearing impairment in children with acute bacterial meningitis. Hearing tests were performed before discharge from the hospital in an attempt to improve coverage and avoid delays in the diagnosis of postmeningitic hearing loss. METHODS: Children with bacterial meningitis were recruited from 21 centers. In the 48 hours before discharge from the hospital, all patients underwent a thorough audiologic assessment consisting of transient evoked OAEs, auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), otoscopy, and tympanometry. Hearing loss was defined as ABR threshold >/=30 dB. The results of OAE screening were compared with the gold standard of ABR threshold. RESULTS: Of 124 children recruited, we were able to perform both OAEs and ABRs on 110 children. Seven (6.3%) of the 110 children had ABR threshold >/=30 dB; 2 had sensorineural hearing loss and 5 had conductive hearing loss. At follow-up, hearing loss persisted in both cases of sensorineural hearing loss and no new cases were identified. All 7 children with hearing loss failed the OAE screening test. Ninety-four children with normal hearing thresholds passed the test, and 9 failed. Thus, the screening test had a sensitivity of 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.00), a specificity of 0.91 (0.85 to 0.97), a positive predictive value of 0. 44 (0.20 to 0.70), and a negative predictive value of 1.00 (0.96 to 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: OAE screening in children recovering from meningitis was found to be feasible and effective. The test was highly sensitive and reasonably specific. Inpatient OAE screening should allow early diagnosis of postmeningitic hearing loss and prompt auditory rehabilitation.     

Functional modulation of PTH1R activation and signaling by RAMP2

Receptor-activity-modifying proteins (RAMPs) are ubiquitously expressed membrane proteins that associate with different G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs), including the parathyroid hormone 1 receptor (PTH1R), a class B GPCR and an important modulator of mineral ion homeostasis and bone metabolism. However, it is unknown whether and how RAMP proteins may affect PTH1R function. Using different optical biosensors to measure the activation of PTH1R and its downstream signaling, we describe here that RAMP2 acts as a specific allosteric modulator of PTH1R, shifting PTH1R to a unique preactivated state that permits faster activation in a ligand-specific manner. Moreover, RAMP2 modulates PTH1R downstream signaling in an agonist-dependent manner, most notably increasing the PTH-mediated Gi3 signaling sensitivity. Additionally, RAMP2 increases both PTH- and PTHrP-triggered β-arrestin2 recruitment to PTH1R. Employing homology modeling, we describe the putative structural molecular basis underlying our functional findings. These data uncover a critical role of RAMPs in the activation and signaling of a GPCR that may provide a new venue for highly specific modulation of GPCR function and advanced drug design.

G protein–coupled receptors(GPCRs) represent the largest class of membrane-bound proteins and are involved in a multitude of biological processes (1). They are characterized by a seven-transmembrane helix structure, which undergoes a characteristic rearrangement upon binding of agonists. Agonist binding to its cognate receptor induces conformational changes in the transmembrane helices, which are transmitted to the cytosolic face of the receptors and ultimately result in receptor activation, which represents the key step of signal transduction. The combination of crystallographic and cryogenic electron microscopy studies and the employment of optical biosensors to study the reorganization of the seven transmembrane domains has allowed a detailed understanding of the general mechanisms of GPCR activation (2–5).Earlier structural studies suggest that GPCRs undergo similar conformational changes upon activation, including, most prominently, an outward movement of the transmembrane helix 6 at the cytosolic face, thereby creating a pocket to which the G protein α-subunit can couple (5). More recent studies, however, have revealed that the exact type of changes may depend on the receptor class and the specific receptor (6–8). Class- and receptor-specific differences may also exist in the interaction of receptors not only with downstream G proteins and β-arrestins but also with accessory and modulatory proteins (9).Studies of the kinetic steps that govern the structural rearrangements which underlie receptor activation (10) showed that its speed might depend on the receptor class and the specific receptor. For example, when exposed to saturating agonist concentrations, most class A GPCRs switch into the active state within tens of milliseconds. The same process takes 1 to 2 ms for a class C GPCR and may take up to a second for class B receptors (11–15). Little is known whether the activation kinetics of GPCRs can be modulated by their cellular context and whether proteins other than the receptors themselves might play a role in shaping signaling kinetics and specificity.Here, we study the parathyroid hormone 1 receptor (PTH1R), a prototypical member of class B GPCRs characterized by a large N-terminal domain that binds a major part of their cognate peptide agonists (16, 17). Compared to class A GPCRs, PTH1R activation is relatively slow and occurs in a two-step process: The initial N-terminal binding step has a time constant of ∼140 ms, followed by an interaction of the ligand with the transmembrane core, which changes into its active conformation with a time constant of ∼1 s (11, 14). Pleiotropic in its downstream coupling, PTH1R signals primarily via G_s but can also couple to G_q (18), G_12/13 (19), and G_i (20) and interacts with and signals via β-arrestins (21, 22). The two endogenous agonists, parathyroid hormone (PTH) and parathyroid hormone-related peptide (PTHrP), trigger PTH1R activation with similar kinetics and specificity for the various intracellular pathways (23–25). However, PTH can induce prolonged signaling from intracellular sites, while PTHrP signals exclusively from the cell surface (26).PTH1R has been reported to interact with modulatory proteins of the receptor-activity-modifying protein (RAMP) family (27–29). RAMPs constitute a family of single transmembrane helix proteins with three members: RAMP1, RAMP2, and RAMP3.It is controversial whether PTH1R interacts only or preferentially with RAMP2 (28) or all three RAMPs (28, 29). In RAMP2 knock-out mice, PTH1R function is deregulated, and placental dysfunction is observed (30), suggesting a major physiological role of the PTH1R/RAMP2 interaction. Yet, the molecular mechanisms of how RAMPs may modulate the activation dynamics of PTH1R and their signaling properties remain to be elucidated.To address these questions, we develop and employ biosensors for PTH1R activation and investigate an array of downstream signaling pathways to assess the effects of RAMPs on the activation dynamics and signaling properties of PTH1R in response to its two endogenous ligands, PTH and PTHrP. We observe that RAMP2 specifically interacts with PTH1R and modulates its activation kinetics as well as signaling dynamics in an agonist-dependent manner.