|
|
||||||||
From the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Louisville, Kentucky.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
. The present
study was undertaken to determine whether the reduction of intraocular
pressure in cats induced by PGF2
is mediated by FP or
other prostaglandin receptors.
METHODS. One eye of each cat was treated topically with prostaglandin
F2
, fluprostenol (FP receptor agonist), or 17-phenyl
trinor PGE2 (EP1 receptor agonist) in a dose
range of 12.5 to 50 µg. The effects of SC19220 and SC51089
(EP1 receptor antagonists), BWA868c, and SQ29548 (DP and TP
receptor antagonists, respectively) on the intraocular response to
PGF2
were also examined. At intervals up to 6 hours
after treatment, intraocular pressure was measured with a
pneumotonometer, and pupil diameters were measured with a millimeter
ruler.
RESULTS. In the dose ranges used, PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 decreased intraocular pressure and pupil diameter. The
greatest reduction of intraocular pressure by 50.0 µg
PGF2
was 5.0 ± 1.4 mm Hg, whereas that by 50 µg
17-phenyl trinor PGE2 was 6.2 ± 1.5 mm Hg. The
isopropyl ester of PGF 2
at a dose of 1.25 µg reduced
intraocular pressure by 3.75 ± 0.25 mm Hg at 2 hours. At doses up
to100 µg, fluprostenol did not decrease intraocular pressure but did
reduce pupil diameter. SC19220, a weak but selective EP1
receptor antagonist, inhibited the intraocular pressure response to
both PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor PGE2. The
more potent EP1 receptor antagonist SC51089 had a greater
inhibitory effect than SC19220 on the intraocular pressure response to
PGF2
. Both of these antagonists had a small but
nondose dependent and statistically insignificant effect on the pupil
response to PGF2
. These observations suggest that in
cats, intraocular pressure and pupil responses to PGF2
are mediated by EP1 and FP receptors, respectively.
However, SC19220 significantly and dose-dependently inhibited the pupil
response to 17-phenyl trinor PGE2, suggesting that
EP1 receptors mediate pupil response to this agonist. DP
and TP receptor antagonists at doses 5- to 20-fold greater than the
IC50 values had no effect on the ocular hypotensive
response to PGF2
. The concurrent administration of 12.5
µg of each of PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 did not produce an additive effect on intraocular
pressure, indicating that in cats PGF2
and 17-phenyl
trinor PGE2 act on the same receptor type.
CONCLUSIONS. These results suggest that a significant proportion of the
ocular hypotensive action of PGF2
in cats is mediated by
EP1 but not by FP receptor. Evidence was also provided to
show that 17-phenyl trinor PGE2 is an ocular hypotensive
agent in cats.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
in particular is an extremely potent ocular
hypotensive agent and is currently thought to reduce intraocular
pressure by increasing uveoscleral outflow,5
6
perhaps
through the mediation of discrete FP receptors in the ciliary
muscle.7
8
9
10
However, one report suggests that the ocular
hypotensive action of PGF2
in the cat is not
mediated by FP receptors.11
Also,
PGF2
has been reported to have a weak relaxant
effect on cat ciliary muscle, whereas the more selective FP receptor
agonist 17-phenyl trinor PGF2
was without
effect.12
13
These observations suggest that increased
uveoscleral outflow in response to PGF2
may
not be mediated by FP receptors. Recently, a study on the generation of
second messengers reported that 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2, but not PGF2
,
stimulated the formation of inositol phosphates in cat ciliary
muscles.14
To examine whether the ocular hypotensive
action of PGF2
is mediated by
EP1 or other PG receptors, we investigated the
response of IOP and pupil diameter in cats to
PGF2
and fluprostenol, FP receptor agonists,
and an EP1 receptor agonist, 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2. | Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Measurement of IOP and Pupil Diameter
All animals used were treated in accordance with the ARVO
Statement for the Use of Animals in Ophthalmic and Vision Research.
Twenty cats (23 kg) were domesticated for 4 months and trained to
accept topical administration of saline or local anesthetic drops and
the application of a pneumotonometer tip to the cornea to measure IOP.
These cats were randomly divided into groups of three to six cats
depending on the experimental design of each experiment. A washout
period of 15 to 30 days was allowed between separate experiments.
Before the experiments with prostaglandins, IOPs of the eyes treated
with the vehicle and untreated contralateral eyes of all the cats were
measured for a 6-hour period using a pneumotonometer (model 30-Classic;
Mentor O & O, Norwell, MA). This pneumotonometer was calibrated for
human eyes by the manufacturer and has been used to measure IOP of
cats15
16
17
without further calibration. We did not
calibrate it for cat eyes because our study is not concerned with the
physiology or comparative physiology of IOP. In our pharmacological
study, we were interested in the effects of prostaglandins on IOP and
the differences between the treated and the control eyes. Intraocular
pressure measured in cats using this pneumotonometer in the present
study was in the range of 17 to 19 mm Hg compared with 14 to
20,15
17 to 20,16
and 19 to 20 mm
Hg17
as reported previously.
Prostaglandins, diluted in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), were instilled
onto the cornea of one eye in a 25-µl volume; the contralateral eye
received the same volume of DMSO alone. In experiments with
antagonists, eyes were pretreated 30 minutes before
PGF2
with an appropriate antagonist. This time
of pretreatment with the antagonists was determined in our preliminary
studies with SC19220, in which it was observed that 10 to 30 minutes
pretreatment was satisfactory to exert its inhibitory effect.
Intraocular pressure was measured at 1 and 2 hours before and at 0, 1,
2, 4, and 6 hours after treatment with prostaglandin receptor agonists
and at the same time of the day beginning at 9:00 AM. Before the
measurement of IOP, a drop of local anesthetic, proparacaine
hydrochloride (0.5%), was instilled onto the cornea. Horizontal pupil
diameter before and after treatment was measured with a millimeter
ruler.
Expression and Analysis of Data
Both the IOP and pupil diameter data were expressed as the
difference between drug-treated eyes and DMSO-treated contralateral
eyes. The significance of the difference between the mean values of
DMSO- and drug-treated eyes at any given time was evaluated by an ANOVA
test using Microsoft Excel 5.0. The IC50 values
were calculated using GraphPad Prizm (version 2.01; GraphPad
Software, San Diego, CA) and Lotus 123-R4.01.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, fluprostenol, and
17-phenyl trinor PGE2 on IOP and the pupil
diameters of cats are summarized in Figures 1 and 3
. In the dose range of 12.5 to 50.0 µg,
PGF2
reduced IOP without an initial phase of
ocular hypertension. All doses of PGF2
lowered
IOP, beginning 1 hour after the treatment. The greatest reduction,
5.0 ± 0.4 mm Hg, occurred between 1 and 2 hours after treatment
with 50.0 µg of PGF2
(Fig. 1A) . The IOP
returned to baseline value within 6 hours after treatment with all
doses of PGF2
. In contrast, the response of
IOP to 1.25 µg isopropyl ester of PGF2
was
significantly greater than that to PGF2
(Fig. 1A)
. This was not unexpected because the ester forms of prostaglandins
achieve greater intraocular concentrations than do their acidic
forms.18
17-Phenyl trinor PGE2 also
reduced intraocular pressure in a dose-dependent manner, with an onset
and duration of action similar to those of
PGF2
(Fig. 1B)
. The greatest reduction of IOP
by 50.0 µg of 17-phenyl trinor PGE2 was
6.2 ± 1.5 mm Hg at 2 hours after treatment. Fluprostenol, in
doses up to 100 µg, did not reduce IOP (Fig. 1C)
. Intraocular
pressures of the eyes treated with vehicle or 100 µg SC19220 and the
contralateral eyes of the 50 µg
PGF2
treated group are shown in Figure 2
. It is obvious that feline IOP remains stable during a 6-hour
experimental period with minor variations. At the maximal
concentration, none of the agonists induced a contralateral effect.
Furthermore, SC19220 alone at 100 µg had no effect on IOP.
|
|
|
, its isopropyl ester
17-phenyl trinor PGE2, and fluprostenol all
dose-dependently induced miosis. The time course and duration of the
pupil response to these agonists were similar to those of the IOP
responses (Figs. 3
A, 3B, and 3C). As shown in Table 1
, the selective EP1 receptor antagonist SC19220
inhibited the IOP response to PGF2
or
17-phenyl trinor PGE2 as well as isopropyl
PGF2
. The highest concentration of SC19220
blocked the IOP response to PGF2
by 38%,
compared with the 80% and 94% reductions of the responses to17-phenyl
trinor PGE2 and isopropyl
PGF2
, respectively. SC51089, a more potent
EP1 receptor antagonist than SC19220, confirmed
the above observation on PGF2
response. The
results (Table 1)
show that SC51089 is more effective than SC19220 in
inhibiting the IOP response to PGF2
.
Inhibition of the pupil response to PGF2
by
SC19220 or SC51089 was not dose-dependent or statistically
insignificant; whereas the inhibition of 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 response by SC19220 was dose-dependent and
significant (SC51089 was not tested against 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2). The highly potent DP receptor antagonist
BWA868c (IC50, 1 nM) at 0.3 ng (25 nM) or 1.2ng
(100nM) and TP receptor antagonist SQ29548 (IC50,
10 nM) at 0.48 ng (50 nM) or 0.96 ng (100 nM) did not affect the ocular
hypotensive response to PGF2
(Table 1)
. We
performed one classic pharmacological experiment to determine whether
PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 are acting on the same or different receptor
type. Figure 4
shows that 12.5 µg of each of these agonists administered together
did not produce a greater hypotensive effect than when administered
alone. This observation suggests that these two agonists activated the
same EP1 receptors. If they had been acting on
different receptor types, the IOP response would have been additive.
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
also
reduced IOP and pupil diameter in a dose-dependent manner. At a low
dose of 1.25 µg, the isopropyl ester of PGF2
also reduced IOP. To maintain consistency, we primarily used
prostaglandins instead of their isopropyl esters because two of the
agonists used, fluprostenol and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2, are not available as isopropyl esters.
Intraocular pressure responses to PGF2
and its
isopropyl ester are consistent with previous reports that these
compounds are potent ocular hypotensive and miotic agents in
cats.2
18
19
Fluprostenol, a more selective FP receptor
agonist than PGF2
, did not lower IOP but was
as potent as PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 as a miotic agent. The
EP1 receptor antagonist SC19220 at a 100-µg
dose significantly inhibited the reduction in IOP by
PGF2
, its isopropyl ester, and 17-phenyl
trinor PGE2. The doses of the antagonist used in
the present study appear to be high. However, it should be emphasized
that, although this EP1 antagonist is highly
selective, it is not potent, particularly in vivo. Therefore, it is not
surprising that high doses were needed to exert an inhibitory effect.
The more potent EP1 receptor antagonist SC51089,
at a dose of only 10 µg, inhibited 80% of the IOP response to
PGF2
, suggesting that the ocular hypotensive
action of PGF2x is mediated by
EP1 but not by FP receptors in the cat. These
observations were further supported by the fact that fluprostenol, a
more selective FP receptor agonist than PGF2
,
did not lower IOP while contracting the sphincter muscle to induce
miosis. If FP receptors were present in the ciliary body, fluprostenol
would have reduced IOP as it contracted the sphincter muscles that are
known to express FP receptors. Furthermore, the observation that the
concurrent administration of PGF2
and
17-phenyl trinor PGE2 was not additive in
lowering IOP indicated that these two agonists were acting primarily on
the same EP1 receptors. If these two agonists
were acting on separate receptor types, then the response to the
combined treatment would have been greater than the response to either
of the agonists alone. The order of potency of prostaglandins for
EP1 receptors is PGE2 >
PGF2
, prostacyclin >
PGD2 and
TXA2.20
Therefore, in
tissues in which FP receptors are lacking,
PGF2
is most likely to activate
EP1 receptors. Our pharmacological study in vivo
only suggests that PGF2
is acting via
EP1 receptors. To determine whether this is
precisely the situation, additional in vitro studies on the contractile
or relaxing response of the feline ciliary muscles to FP and
EP1 receptor agonists are needed.
Ligand binding assays and functional studies suggest that
PGF2
has affinity for DP and
EP3 receptors.21
22
23
Also,
stimulation of DP or EP3 receptors reduces IOP in
rabbits,22
23
and stimulation of TP receptors reduces IOP
in beagle dogs.24
Thus, to exclude the possibility that
the IOP-lowering effect of PGF2
was due to the
stimulation of either EP3 or DP receptors or
both, we tested a potent and selective DP receptor antagonist,
BWA868c.25
At 25- to 100-fold greater concentration than
its IC50, the DP receptor antagonist did not
significantly modify PGF2
response, suggesting
that DP receptors are not involved in the ocular hypotension induced by
PGF2
. Although PGF2
has a poor affinity for TP receptors, to rule out the extreme
possibility that PGF2
also stimulated these
receptors, the effect of the TP receptor antagonist
SQ2954826
on the responses to
PGF2
was examined. Even at high
concentrations, this antagonist did not block
PGF2
response. We could not test the effect of
an EP3 receptor antagonist on
PGF2
response because no such antagonists are
available. Therefore, we suggest that PGF2
does not stimulate DP or TP receptors to lower IOP in cats.
Previous studies have suggested that the reduction of IOP and
relaxation of ciliary muscle of cats by PGF2
are not mediated by FP receptors.11
12
13
Also, it has been
reported that PGF2
does not increase inositol
phosphate turnover in the feline ciliary muscles ex
vivo.14
All these studies suggest a lack of FP receptors
in the feline ciliary body but do not describe prostaglandin receptors
in cats that are activated by PGF2
to lower
IOP. The data we obtained with fluprostenol, EP1
receptor antagonists, and concurrent administration of
PGF2
and 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 suggest that FP receptors are not expressed
in the feline ciliary muscles. However, studies on the expression of
mRNA of FP receptors in the target tissues, such as the feline ciliary
muscles, need to be performed to confirm our pharmacological
observations.
The concentrations of prostaglandins used in the present study appear
to be high, and it could be argued that other prostaglandin receptors,
particularly EP1 receptors, were stimulated by
such high concentrations. In fact, the doses of prostaglandins used in
the present study were smaller than those used in previous
studies.2
11
18
It should also be pointed out that a dose
of a compound administered topically to the eye is diluted by tears and
that only a fraction of the dilution permeates the cornea. Thus, the
intraocular prostaglandin concentration will probably range only
from 0.25% to 0.5% of the administered dose.27
28
29
Therefore, the intraocular concentrations of the agonists at the doses
used in the present study were probably in the range of 0.03 to 0.25
µg. Furthermore, the actual concentration of the agonist in the
tissues of the uveoscleral pathway or the site of action of
PGF2
or 17-phenyl trinor
PGE2 is likely to be less than the total
concentration in the intraocular tissues. Therefore, prostaglandin
agonists, administered topically, most likely stimulated the receptors
for which the agonist has primary affinity. This suggestion is
supported by the fact that fluprostenol, at large doses of 25 to 50
µg, stimulated only FP receptors in the iris sphincter muscle, not
EP1 or other prostaglandin receptors.
At present, the mechanism of the ocular hypotensive action of the EP1 receptor agonist 17-phenyl trinor PGE2 on IOP is not known. In a recent study, Krauss et al.30 observed that novel TP receptor agonists reduce IOP and increase aqueous humor outflow in dogs. TP receptor activation results in the increased turnover of inositol trisphosphates followed by mobilization of intracellular calcium, leading to the contraction of smooth muscle cells in the trabecular meshwork and ciliary muscles. These events may be the underlying mechanism of facility increase by TP receptor agonists. Stimulation of EP1 receptors also mobilizes intracellular calcium, thus it can be speculated that 17-phenyl trinor PGE2 has the same mechanism of action as TP receptor agonists in lowering IOP. However, such speculation needs to be explored in studies on aqueous humor dynamics.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Submitted for publication July 28, 1998; revised January 28, April 27, and June 10, 1999; accepted June 24, 1999.
Commercial relationships policy: N.
Corresponding author: Parimal Bhattacherjee, University of Louisville, 301 E. Mohammad Ali Boulevard, Louisville, KY 40202. E-mail: p0bhat01{at}ulkyvm.louisville.edu
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and its isopropyl ester on normal and glaucomatous human eyes Bito, LZ Stjernschantz, J eds. The Ocular Effects of Prostaglandins and Other Eicosanoids ,447-458 Alan R. Liss New York.
analog: effect on intraocular pressure in patients with ocular hypertension Br J Ophthalmol 76,214-217
increases uveoscleral outflow in the cynomolgus monkey Exp Eye Res 49,389-402[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-induced ocular hypotension: evidence for enhancement of uveoscleral outflow by PGF2
Arch Ophthalmol 105,1112-1116
on calcium efflux Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33,2679-2686
effects on intraocular pressure negatively correlate with FP-receptor stimulation Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 30,1838-1842
on cat and rhesus monkey eyes Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 22,588-598This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. Ota, M. Aihara, T. Saeki, S. Narumiya, and M. Araie The Effects of Prostaglandin Analogues on Prostanoid EP1, EP2, and EP3 Receptor-Deficient Mice. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., August 1, 2006; 47(8): 3395 - 3399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Schlotzer-Schrehardt, M. Zenkel, and R. M. Nusing Expression and Localization of FP and EP Prostanoid Receptor Subtypes in Human Ocular Tissues Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2002; 43(5): 1475 - 1487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Tintut, F. Parhami, A. Tsingotjidou, S. Tetradis, M. Territo, and L. L. Demer 8-Isoprostaglandin E2 Enhances Receptor-activated NFkappa B Ligand (RANKL)-dependent Osteoclastic Potential of Marrow Hematopoietic Precursors via the cAMP Pathway J. Biol. Chem., April 12, 2002; 277(16): 14221 - 14226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Kamphuis, A. Schneemann, L. M. van Beek, A. B. Smit, P. F. J. Hoyng, and E. Koya Prostanoid Receptor Gene Expression Profile in Human Trabecular Meshwork: A Quantitative Real-Time PCR Approach Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., December 1, 2001; 42(13): 3209 - 3215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. Stjernschantz From PGF2{{alpha}}-Isopropyl Ester to Latanoprost: A Review of the Development of Xalatan The Proctor Lecture Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2001; 42(6): 1134 - 1145. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
P. Mukhopadhyay, L. Bian, H. Yin, P. Bhattacherjee, and C. A. Paterson Localization of EP1 and FP Receptors in Human Ocular Tissues by In Situ Hybridization Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2001; 42(2): 424 - 428. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |