Much of the conceptual framework regarding how to study receptor function evolved from pharmacological investigation of drug action. Consequently, the historical account of the development of receptor theory in this chapter, as well as the outline of how to characterize receptors in intact tissues that follows in chapter 2, will emphasize early investigations of drug action rather than, for example, physiological studies of hormone action. However, the reader must keep in mind that “drug” can be defined as any agent that affects living processes. Drugs presumably bind to receptors designed for interaction with endogenous hormones and neurotransmitters. By way of definition, agonist drugs are analogous to endogenous hormones and neurotransmitters, in the sense that they elicit a biological effect, although the effect elicited may be stimulatory or inhibitory. In contrast, antagonist drugs are defined as agents that block receptor-mediated effects elicited by hormones, neurotransmitters, or agonist drugs by competing for receptor occupancy. Antagonists do not appear to have an endogenous counterpart in the strict sense of a competitive inhibitor of receptor occupancy.
KeywordsPartial Agonist Receptor Occupancy Rate Theory Competitive Antagonism Mutual Antagonism
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Albert, A. (1979) Chemotherapy: history and principles. In Selective Toxicity (6th ed.), Chapman and Hall (eds.), John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 182–199. (This section of chapter 6 summarized P. Erhlich’s fundamental contributions to chemotherapy and general “receptor” principles.)Google Scholar
- Bernard, C. (1856) Physiological analysis of the properties of the muscular and nervous system by means of curare. Comptes Rendus Acad. de Sci. 43:825–829. Translated and reprinted in Readings in Pharmacology, L. Shuster (ed.), Little, Brown and Company, Boston, pp. 73–81.Google Scholar
- Clark, A.J. and Raventos, J. (1937) The antagonism of acetylcholine and of quarternary ammonium salts. Quant. J. Exp. Physiol. 26:375–392.Google Scholar
- Colquhoun, D. (1973) The relation between classical and cooperative models for drug action. In Drug Receptors, H.P. Rang (ed.), University Park, Baltimore, pp. 149–182.Google Scholar
- Dale, H.H. (1914) The action of certain esters and ethers of choline, and their relation to muscarine. J. Pharm. Exp. Ther. 6:174–190.Google Scholar
- Erhlich, P. (1913) Chemotherapeutics: scientific principles, methods and results. Lancet 2:445–451.Google Scholar
- Gaddum, J.H. (1937) The quantitative effects of antagonistic drugs. J. Physiology 89:7P–9P.Google Scholar
- Goldstein, A., Aronow, L. and Kaiman, S.M. (1974) Principles of Drug Action: The Basis of Pharmacology (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 82–111.Google Scholar
- Stephenson, R.P. (1956) A modification of receptor theory. Br. J. Pharmacology 11:379–393.Google Scholar
- Thron, CD. and Waud, D.R. (1968) The rate of action of atropine. J. Pharm. Exp. Ther. 160:91–105.Google Scholar