实验室抗抑郁试验中抗组胺药的活性

A. Barnett, R.I. Taber, F.E. Roth
{"title":"实验室抗抑郁试验中抗组胺药的活性","authors":"A. Barnett,&nbsp;R.I. Taber,&nbsp;F.E. Roth","doi":"10.1016/0028-3908(69)90037-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A series of antihistamines with widely differing chemical structures and pharmacological profiles have been compared to the standard antidepressants, imipramine and amitriptyline, in four laboratory antidepressant tests. Dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine are examples of antihistamines which were effective antagonists of tetrabenazine ptosis in mice, mouse-killing behavior in rats, and reserpine hypothermia in both species. Other antihistamines such as cyproheptadine, pyrilamine and promethazine were ineffective in these tests. The effectiveness of dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine in these procedures was equal to or greater than that of imipramine or amitriplyline. Potentiation of methamphetamine-induced excitation differed from other antidepressant tests because amitriplyline was ineffective, whereas promethazine, ineffective in other antidepressant tests, was a potent potentiator of methamphetamine.</p><p>After screening a series of nineteen clinically effective antihistamines for ability to prevent tetrabenazine-induced ptosis, it was found that all antihisiamines tested which are structurally related to pheniramine (alkylamine type) were effective tetrabenazine antagonists. Structural modifications of chlorpheniramine which cause severe reductions in antihistamine potency, did not affect anti-tetrabenazine activity. It is concluded that there is no correlation between antihistamine activity and activity in the aforementioned selected tests for antidepressant activity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14111,"journal":{"name":"International journal of neuropharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1969-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0028-3908(69)90037-9","citationCount":"51","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Activity of antihistamines in laboratory antidepressant tests\",\"authors\":\"A. Barnett,&nbsp;R.I. Taber,&nbsp;F.E. Roth\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0028-3908(69)90037-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A series of antihistamines with widely differing chemical structures and pharmacological profiles have been compared to the standard antidepressants, imipramine and amitriptyline, in four laboratory antidepressant tests. Dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine are examples of antihistamines which were effective antagonists of tetrabenazine ptosis in mice, mouse-killing behavior in rats, and reserpine hypothermia in both species. Other antihistamines such as cyproheptadine, pyrilamine and promethazine were ineffective in these tests. The effectiveness of dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine in these procedures was equal to or greater than that of imipramine or amitriplyline. Potentiation of methamphetamine-induced excitation differed from other antidepressant tests because amitriplyline was ineffective, whereas promethazine, ineffective in other antidepressant tests, was a potent potentiator of methamphetamine.</p><p>After screening a series of nineteen clinically effective antihistamines for ability to prevent tetrabenazine-induced ptosis, it was found that all antihisiamines tested which are structurally related to pheniramine (alkylamine type) were effective tetrabenazine antagonists. Structural modifications of chlorpheniramine which cause severe reductions in antihistamine potency, did not affect anti-tetrabenazine activity. It is concluded that there is no correlation between antihistamine activity and activity in the aforementioned selected tests for antidepressant activity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of neuropharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1969-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0028-3908(69)90037-9\",\"citationCount\":\"51\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of neuropharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0028390869900379\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of neuropharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0028390869900379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 51

摘要

在四项实验室抗抑郁试验中,将一系列化学结构和药理特征大不相同的抗组胺药与标准抗抑郁药丙咪嗪和阿米替林进行了比较。右氯苯那敏和三苯那敏是抗组胺药的例子,它们是小鼠丁苯那嗪中毒、大鼠杀鼠行为和利血平低温症的有效拮抗剂。其他抗组胺药如赛七胺、吡啶胺和异丙嗪在这些试验中无效。右氯苯那敏和三苯那敏在这些手术中的有效性等于或大于丙咪嗪或阿米普利林。甲基苯丙胺诱发兴奋的增强作用不同于其他抗抑郁药物试验,因为阿米替林无效,而异丙嗪在其他抗抑郁药物试验中无效,是甲基苯丙胺的有效增强剂。筛选了19种临床有效的抗组胺药对苯那敏(烷基胺型)的预防作用,发现所有与苯那敏(烷基胺型)结构相关的抗组胺药都是有效的苯那嗪拮抗剂。氯苯那敏的结构修饰会导致抗组胺效力的严重降低,但不会影响抗丁苯那嗪的活性。结论是,抗组胺活性与上述抗抑郁活性选择试验的活性之间没有相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Activity of antihistamines in laboratory antidepressant tests

A series of antihistamines with widely differing chemical structures and pharmacological profiles have been compared to the standard antidepressants, imipramine and amitriptyline, in four laboratory antidepressant tests. Dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine are examples of antihistamines which were effective antagonists of tetrabenazine ptosis in mice, mouse-killing behavior in rats, and reserpine hypothermia in both species. Other antihistamines such as cyproheptadine, pyrilamine and promethazine were ineffective in these tests. The effectiveness of dexchlorpheniramine and tripelennamine in these procedures was equal to or greater than that of imipramine or amitriplyline. Potentiation of methamphetamine-induced excitation differed from other antidepressant tests because amitriplyline was ineffective, whereas promethazine, ineffective in other antidepressant tests, was a potent potentiator of methamphetamine.

After screening a series of nineteen clinically effective antihistamines for ability to prevent tetrabenazine-induced ptosis, it was found that all antihisiamines tested which are structurally related to pheniramine (alkylamine type) were effective tetrabenazine antagonists. Structural modifications of chlorpheniramine which cause severe reductions in antihistamine potency, did not affect anti-tetrabenazine activity. It is concluded that there is no correlation between antihistamine activity and activity in the aforementioned selected tests for antidepressant activity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信