• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | thegreenhand

Two ligands with the same target - result?

JohnBoy2000

Bluelighter
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
2,463
I'm just curious as to how this transpires on a molecular level.

I assume there would arise a case of basic competition for the target protein?

In this case the target being the noradrenergic transporter.

And the ligands being Venlafaxine and Atomoxetine.

Does it basically compound the effect?
Or does the competition - can it potentially, reduce the effect?

I understand occasionally, SSRI's are used in combination - would lead me to believe it can be done.

Any insights?


PS - Atomoxetine supposedly has the ability to saturate the NA transporter.
If that is the case - how Venlafaxine compound that effect?
Can it compound that effect?
 
In almost all cases it will compound the effect. Only in cases where ones IA is significantly lower than others, its dissociation rate also extremely low, its affinity much higher than the other, and you are taking enough to occupy nearly all target sites will it reduce the effect of the other.
 
It depends on the doses. Most medicines don't fill 100% of the receptors. In both cases, VMAT-2 mediates their activity, their affinity to a G-coupled receptor is a secondary target, if therapeutically valid at all.
 
It depends on the doses. Most medicines don't fill 100% of the receptors. In both cases, VMAT-2 mediates their activity, their affinity to a G-coupled receptor is a secondary target, if therapeutically valid at all.

No, This is pretty basic level pharmacology. both of those drugs are primarily MAT inhibitors, monoamine transporter inhibitors MATs like SERT NET (NERT) and DAT are SLC6 family and are in the external membrane and normally shuttle monoamines from the synapse back into the cytosol of the neuron. The transporters are in the extracellular membrane.
VMAT-2 is very different to the extracellular transporters and it removes monoamines already inside the neuron, from the cytosol and shuttles them inside the synaptic vesicles inside the neuron where it can be re released into the synapse, it is a member of a completely different family and is not only in a completely different location, it is powered differently.
if further unknowledge about geopolitics, terrorism, opioids or QSAR and other pharmacology is required Clubcard we'll call you, don't call us, we'll call you. |-) as you put it education truly is a great thing.


back on topic....
The effect of a combination of two drugs with the same target depends on the affinity to and the functional activity of each drug on the target, very basically if one is higher affinity it will displace the lower affinity one, so the effects will be mostly the effects of the higher affinity ligand, For example a high affinity antagonist will overwhelm the effects of a low affinity agonist and so the overall effects will be those of the high affinity antagonist, and vice versa Anyway venlafaxine is much more effective for SERT over NET whereas atomexitine is way activity at NET over SET, so assuming dosing to get similar levels of inhibition of both primary targets SERT in the case of venlafaxine and NET in the case of atomexetine then the secondary/crossover effects at NET from venlafaxine and SERT from atomexetine are minor compared to the major target. I doubt atomexetine can saturate ie fully occupy NET at normal physiological concentrations, I wonder also if NET like DAT has a high affinity binding site and several lower affinity binding sites, most probably. Which would complicate things, as if two drugs bind differently to the target protein and have the same functional effect but their binding site doesn't overlap then they can operate independently of each other.

So a combination of a SERT inhibitor and a NET inhibitor will raise both extracellular serotonin and extracellular norepinephrine levels, at least until the system down regulates and adjusts to the presence of the reuptake inhibitors.
SSRI is a bit of a misnomer as very few so called SSRIs are wholly selective for serotonin transporter SERT, and they all have a raft of off-target interactions.
 
back on topic....
The effect of a combination of two drugs with the same target depends on the affinity to and the functional activity of each drug on the target, very basically if one is higher affinity it will displace the lower affinity one, so the effects will be mostly the effects of the higher affinity ligand, For example a high affinity antagonist will overwhelm the effects of a low affinity agonist and so the overall effects will be those of the high affinity antagonist, and vice versa Anyway venlafaxine is much more effective for SERT over NET whereas atomexitine is way activity at NET over SET, so assuming dosing to get similar levels of inhibition of both primary targets SERT in the case of venlafaxine and NET in the case of atomexetine then the secondary/crossover effects at NET from venlafaxine and SERT from atomexetine are minor compared to the major target. I doubt atomexetine can saturate ie fully occupy NET at normal physiological concentrations, I wonder also if NET like DAT has a high affinity binding site and several lower affinity binding sites, most probably. Which would complicate things, as if two drugs bind differently to the target protein and have the same functional effect but their binding site doesn't overlap then they can operate independently of each other.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00259-009-1118-9

That's obviously not on humans but - alludes to saturation.

In terms of the latter piece of information in that paragraph - just for personal clarification, I have to read more in depth into that.

Can you allude at all to where I might go about doing so?
More than one binding site - I didn't come across that in Nestlers book - is that a pharmacological principle, or medicinal chemistry one?

Anyways - a book title, paper link?
Would be swell.

So a combination of a SERT inhibitor and a NET inhibitor will raise both extracellular serotonin and extracellular norepinephrine levels, at least until the system down regulates and adjusts to the presence of the reuptake inhibitors.
SSRI is a bit of a misnomer as very few so called SSRIs are wholly selective for serotonin transporter SERT, and they all have a raft of off-target interactions.

What I'm beginning to think with Venlafaxine/Atomoxetine combo is - there is unquestionable NAT implications by venlafaxine, even at low doses.
And for whatever reason - despite this, and the subsequent dose reduction necessary of Atomoxetine in combination - it doesn't yield the same positive outcome.

Therefore, my personal, limited insight deduction is that - despite supposed similar target protein occupancy via two drugs, there are differences that effectively compromise the outcome, despite the fact that theoretically, it should be the same.

Maybe it doesn't bear thinking about.
 
I would be less confident in discerning a drug pharmacological action based on its subjective effects(especially when evaluating ones self) than you are.
 
I would be less confident in discerning a drug pharmacological action based on its subjective effects(especially when evaluating ones self) than you are.


I'm not confident - but there's little information/no out there on combining two NRI's.

Subjectively - it's peculiar.

As in - I'm getting side effects consistent with excessive noradrenergic action - but not the benefits, like, being hyper, energetic, fast twitch etc.

But the possibility of two different binding sites is certainly interesting - thus, I would certainly be interested in further information here.
 
I know you can only work with the tools you've got. But I would be concerned that associating certain effects with specific pharmacological actions would skew my treatment from there on out, you read about a drug and find in vitro testing reveals certain actions which you've already decided elicit certain affects then anticipating said effects will cause them to manifest. This can be a problem with just being aware of a drugs side effect profile, I'm not sure the best way around it, maybe focus on a drugs known results and apply the ones which have been most effective for others in treating the symptoms you share. It won't stop the placebo effect, but at least it could steer it in your favor.

You keep wanting to tweak your drug regimen to squeeze the most out of it, and I get that and its a worthwhile endeavour to a point. But eventually it becomes counter-productive and an inefficient way of optimizing your treatment. At some point you've got to accept that the drugs have done all they are going to do, and you need to seek non-pharmacological therapies to further your results.
 
Last edited:
Top