↓ Skip to main content

Interaction of arylpiperazines with 5-HT1A, 5-HT1B, 5-HT1C and 5-HT1D receptors: do discriminatory 5-HT1B receptor ligands exist?

Overview of attention for article published in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology, June 1989
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
173 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Interaction of arylpiperazines with 5-HT1A, 5-HT1B, 5-HT1C and 5-HT1D receptors: do discriminatory 5-HT1B receptor ligands exist?
Published in
Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology, June 1989
DOI 10.1007/bf00168661
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philippe Schoeffter, Daniel Hoyer

Abstract

The effects of several putative 5-HT1 receptor-subtype selective ligands were investigated in biochemical models for 5-HT1A, 5-HT1B, and 5-HT1D receptors (inhibition of forskolin-stimulated adenylate cyclase activity in calf hippocampus, rat and calf substantia nigra, respectively) and 5-HT1C receptors (stimulation of inositol phosphates production in pig choroid plexus). Following compounds were studied: 5-HT (5-hydroxytryptamine), TFMPP (1-(m-trifluoromethylphenyl)piperazine), mCPP (1-(m-chlorophenyl)piperazine), CGS 12066 (7-trifluoromethyl-4-(4-methyl-1-piperazinyl)-pyrrolo[1,2-a] quinoxaline 1), isamoltane (CGP 361A, 1-(2-(1-pyrrolyl)-phenoxy)-3-isopropylamino-2-propranol), quipazine, 1-NP (1-(1-naphthyl)piperazine), and PAPP (LY165163, 1-[2-(4-aminophenyl)ethyl]-4-(3-trifluoromethylphenyl)- piperazine). Among reported 5-HT1B receptor selective drugs, TFMPP had similar potency at 5-HT1A, 5-HT1B and 5-HT1C receptors, mCPP did not separate between 5-HT1B and 5-HT1C receptors, CGS 12066 was equipotent at 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D receptors, and isamoltane was only slightly 5-HT1B versus 5-HT1A selective. Quipazine showed equal potency at 5-HT1B and 5-HT1C receptors and 1-NP did not discriminate between the four receptor subtypes. PAPP described as 5-HT1A receptor selective, was equally potent at 5-HT1A and 5-HT1D receptors. The potencies determined in second messenger studies were in good agreement with the affinity values determined in radioligand binding studies. Thus 5-HT1A, 5-HT1B, 5-HT1C and 5-HT1D receptors have different pharmacological profiles as predicted from radioligand binding studies. Despite claims to the contrary, none of the tested compounds had actual selectivity for a given 5-HT1 receptor subtype.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 29%
Professor 3 21%
Student > Master 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 14%
Neuroscience 2 14%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 1 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2010.
All research outputs
#7,454,951
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology
#347
of 1,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,165
of 14,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,724 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 14,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them