4.7 Review

Treating lung inflammation with agonists of the adenosine A(2A) receptor: promises, problems and potential solutions

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 155, 期 4, 页码 463-474

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/bjp.2008.329

关键词

lung inflammation; adenosine receptors; adenosine A(2A) receptor agonists; inhalation UK371, 104

向作者/读者索取更多资源

l Adenosine A(2A) receptor agonists may be important regulators of inflammation. Such conclusions have come from studies demonstrating that, (i) adenosine A(2A) agonists exhibit anti-inflammatory properties in vitro and in vivo, (ii) selective A(2A) antagonists enhance inflammation in vivo and, (iii) knock outs of this receptor aggravate inflammation in a wide variety of in vivo models. Inflammation is a hallmark of asthma and COPD and adenosine has long been suggested to be involved in disease pathology. Two recent publications, however, suggested that an inhaled adenosine A(2A) receptor agonist (GW328267X) did not affect either the early and late asthmatic response or symptoms associated with allergic rhinitis suggesting that the rationale for treating inflammation with an adenosine A(2A) receptor agonist may be incorrect. A barrier to fully investigating the role of adenosine A(2A) receptor agonists as anti-inflammatory agents in the lung is the side effect profile due to systemic exposure, even with inhalation. Unless strategies can be evolved to limit the systemic exposure of inhaled adenosine A(2A) receptor agonists, the promise of treating lung inflammation with such agents may never be fully explored. Using strategies similar to that devised to improve the therapeutic index of inhaled corticosteroids, UK371,104 was identified as a selective agonist of the adenosine A(2A) receptor that has a lung focus of pharmacological activity following delivery to the lung in a pre clinical in vivo model of lung function. Lung-focussed agents such as UK371,104 may be suitable for assessing the anti-inflammatory potential of inhaled adenosine A(2A) receptor agonists.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据