AJP - Heart Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 292: H2921-H2926, 2007. First published February 9, 2007; doi:10.1152/ajpheart.01191.2005
0363-6135/07 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
292/6/H2921    most recent
01191.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhu, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Buolamwini, J. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhu, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Buolamwini, J. K.

Cardioprotective effects of novel tetrahydroisoquinoline analogs of nitrobenzylmercaptopurine riboside in an isolated perfused rat heart model of acute myocardial infarction

Z. Zhu,1 P. A. Hofmann,2 and J. K. Buolamwini1

1Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, and 2Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee

Submitted 10 November 2005 ; accepted in final form 2 February 2007


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
We have investigated the cardioprotective effects of novel tetrahydroisoquinoline nitrobenzylmercaptopurine riboside (NBMPR) analog nucleoside transport (NT) inhibitors, compounds 2 and 4, in isolated perfused rat hearts. Langendorff-perfused heart preparations were subjected to 10 min of treatment with compound 2, compound 4, or vehicle (control) followed by 30 min of global ischemia and 120 min of reperfusion. For determination of infarct size, reperfusion time was 180 min. At 1 µM, compounds 2 and 4 provided excellent cardioprotection, with left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP) recovery and end-diastolic pressure (EDP) increase of 82.9 ± 4.0% (P < 0.001) and 14.1 ± 2.0 mmHg (P < 0.03) for compound 2-treated hearts and 79.2 ± 5.9% (P < 0.002) and 7.5 ± 2.7 mmHg (P < 0.01) for compound 4-treated hearts compared with 41.6 ± 5.2% and 42.5 ± 6.5 mmHg for control hearts. LVDP recovery and EDP increase were 64.1 ± 4.2% and 29.1 ± 2.5 mmHg for hearts treated with 1 µM NBMPR. Compound 4 was the best cardioprotective agent, affording significant cardioprotection, even at 0.1 µM, with LVDP recovery and EDP increase of 76.0 ± 4.9% (P < 0.003) and 14.1 ± 1.0 mmHg (P < 0.03). At 1 µM, compound 4 and NBMPR reduced infarct size, with infarct area-to-total risk area ratios of 29.13 ± 3.17 (P < 0.001) for compound 4 and 37.5 ± 3.42 (P < 0.01) for NBMPR vs. 51.08 ± 5.06% for control hearts. Infarct size was more effectively reduced by compound 4 than by NBMPR (P < 0.02). These new tetrahydroisoquinoline NBMPR analogs are not only potent cardioprotective agents but are, also, more effective than NBMPR in this model.

cardioprotection; nucleoside transport inhibitors; left ventricular developed pressure; end-diastolic pressure; ischemia; reperfusion; adenosine potentiation; infarct size reduction

IN THE MAMMALIAN HEART, the nucleoside adenosine is released in response to an ischemic insult, largely through ATP breakdown, to exert broad-spectrum cardioprotective actions through the activation of adenosine receptors (ARs), as well as AR-independent mechanisms (12, 16, 24, 35, 42, 43). Adenosine has also been implicated in ischemic preconditioning and postconditioning cardioprotective mechanisms (20). The cardioprotective actions of adenosine, however, are short-lived because of rapid reuptake through nucleoside transporters (NTs) into surrounding cells and metabolism. Thus approaches to augment extracellular adenosine concentrations and prolong its cardioprotective actions are being explored (16, 20, 35). One of these approaches is the inhibition of adenosine transport (47–50). The use of NT inhibitors to potentiate adenosine's cardioprotective effects is attractive, because, in contrast to AR agonists, which activate ARs throughout the body and, thus, are prone to unwanted side effects (17, 26), NT inhibitors provide an event- and site-specific approach to cardioprotection with few side effects (20). NT inhibitors have been shown to elevate extracellular adenosine concentrations and, thereby, potentiate its cardioprotective effects (20, 31, 34). For example, enhancement of cardiac functional recovery after global ischemia by NT inhibition has been shown in cat (30), dog (33), and rabbit (34) isolated hearts.

Several chemical classes of compounds have been shown to inhibit mammalian NT processes (for review see Ref. 14), but only a few, such as nitrobenzylmercaptopurine riboside (NBMPR), dilazep, dipyridamole, and draflazine, have demonstrated effective inhibitory activity (8, 27, 29, 31, 32). Dipyridamole has a high affinity for binding to plasma proteins (21), which compromises its bioavailability, and it is nonspecific as well, inhibiting phosphodiesterase and stimulating prostacyclin release (17, 23). The lidoflazine class of compounds, which includes draflazine, also causes nonspecific cell membrane stabilization (16). Thus, because the present repertoire of NT inhibitors lacks suitable drug development leads, novel compounds are needed.

Among the known NTs (11, 20), the equilibrative NT type 1 (ENT1) is by far the most important in mammalian tissues, especially the human myocardium (4) and, therefore, the NT that might be the most promising for targeting in cardioprotective therapeutics. The most selective ENT1 inhibitors are nucleoside analogs represented by NBMPR (Fig. 1) (34, 35). NBMPR alone or in combination with erythro-9-(2-hydroxy-3-nonyl)-adenine (EHNA), a potent adenosine deaminase inhibitor, has been shown to attenuate myocardial stunning (1, 2, 5, 7). However, NBMPR is not a suitable clinical candidate because of its susceptibility to metabolic loss of the S-6-nitrobenzyl group, causing a 1,000-fold loss in potency and yielding a 6-mercaptopurine riboside metabolite, which may be mutagenic (13) and immunosuppressive (15).


Figure 1
View larger version (5K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Nucleoside transport inhibitors. NBMPR, nitrobenzylmercaptopurine riboside.

 
We recently reported the synthesis and potent ENT1 transporter inhibitory activity of a series of novel 1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline analogs of NBMPR (60). The ENT1 inhibitory constants (Ki) are provided in Table 1. Compound 4 was the most potent, with a Ki of 0.45 nM, which was lower than that of the standard NBMPR (Ki = 0.70 nM) (60). Compound 2, which was also tested in the present study, exhibited a Ki of 250 nM. Compound 4 and its counterparts are attractive, because, in contrast to NBMPR, they will not readily lose a nitrobenzyl group as a result of metabolism to produce inactive metabolites (see above). Thus we are interested in exploring the cardioprotection potential of these novel tetrahydroisoquinoline derivative NT inhibitors. We report a comparative study of the cardioprotective effects of two tetrahydroisoquinoline analogs, compounds 4 and 2, and NBMPR in isolated rat hearts. The results indicate that compounds 4 and 2 are better cardioprotective agents than the standard compound NBMPR.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Ki values of NBMPR, compound 2, and compound 4

 

   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
Compounds. Compounds 2 and 4 were synthesized according to methods reported previously (60). NBMPR was purchased from Aldrich (Milwaukee, WI). The structures of the compounds are shown in Fig. 1.

Animals. Female Wistar rats (225–249 g body wt; Harlan Sprague Dawley, Indianapolis, IN) were maintained in the animal care facility of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center and used in accordance with the guidelines of the Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, with an approved protocol.

Langendorff-perfused heart preparations and measurement of ventricular function. Rats were anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium (30 mg/kg ip), and their hearts were quickly removed and placed in ice-cold, oxygenated modified Krebs-Henseleit buffer [in mM: 4.7 KCl, 118 NaCl, 1.2 MgSO4, 1.2 KH2PO4, 25 NaHCO3, 11 glucose, and 1.3 CaCl2 (pH 7.4)]. After cannulation via the aorta, the hearts were mounted on a Langendorff apparatus, perfused with 37°C oxygenated (95% O2-5% CO2) modified Krebs-Henseleit buffer, and placed in a 100-ml organ bath that was filled with oxygenated modified Krebs-Henseleit buffer and maintained at 37°C. A left atriotomy was performed, and a water-filled cellophane balloon fixed to a pressure transducer (BLPR, World Precision Instruments, Sarasota, FL) was inserted into the left ventricle for determination of left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP). Before initiation of the experiment, the volume in the intraventricular balloon was changed with a micrometer syringe to adjust left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (EDP) to 5–15 mmHg. Hearts were paced at 300 beats/min, and pacing voltage was set at twice the threshold value. External pacing was stopped during global normothermic ischemia and resumed after 5 min of reperfusion. For all determinations of ventricular performance, the pressures from the transducer were digitized using an analog-to-digital conversion board (model NB-MIO-16XL-18 µs, National Instruments, Austin, TX) and saved in a Macintosh computer. Data acquisition and analysis were carried out using LABVIEW software (National Instruments).

Experimental protocol. After a 20-min baseline equilibration period, the hearts were randomly assigned for treatment with modified Krebs-Henseleit buffer containing 0.01% DMSO (vehicle control) or individual test compounds at the appropriate concentration for 10 min. Then the hearts were subjected to 30 min of global normothermic ischemia followed by 120 min of reperfusion. The time line of the experimental protocol is shown in Fig. 2.


Figure 2
View larger version (3K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Experimental protocol for determination of postischemic cardiac functional recovery with nucleoside transport (NT) inhibitors. Hearts were subjected to 20 min of baseline equilibration, 10 min of treatment with NT inhibitors, 30 min of global normothermic ischemia, and 120 min of reperfusion. During drug treatment, each heart was treated with one concentration of NT inhibitors. Four different concentrations of compound 4 and 3 different concentrations of compound 2 were used. Vehicle solution (0.01% of DMSO) was used as control.

 
Preischemic LVDP and EDP were determined by averaging LVDP and EDP values, respectively, for the final 5 min of the 20-min baseline perfusion. Similarly, postischemic LVDP and EDP were taken as the average LVDP and EDP, respectively, for the last 5 min of the 120-min reperfusion. Postischemic LVDP recovery was calculated as postischemic LVDP divided by preischemic LVDP. Postischemic EDP rise was determined as the difference between postischemic and preischemic EDP. Hearts were included in data analysis only if their preischemic LVDP values were stable at 80–130 mmHg during preischemic equilibration.

Determination of infarct size. Hearts used for infarct size experiments were subjected to 20 min of equilibration, 10 min of treatment with control or test compound, 30 min of global ischemia, and 180 min of reperfusion. Before global ischemia, each heart was subjected to one of three treatments: 0.01% DMSO (vehicle control), 1 µM NBMPR, or 1 µM compound 4.

After 3 h of reperfusion, hearts were removed from the apparatus, and the ventricular myocardium was frozen at –20°C for 2 h and subsequently cut into 2-mm-thick transverse sections. The heart slices were incubated in 1% triphenyltetrazolium chloride in 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) at 37°C for 10 min. After incubation in triphenyltetrazolium chloride, which stained surviving tissue red, the slices were fixed in 10% formalin solution for 20 min. Both sides of each slice were then scanned into a computer for planimetric analysis using Photoshop version 8.0 (Adobe, Mountain View, CA) and ImageJ 1.31v (National Institutes of Health). Since hearts were subjected to global ischemia, the total cross-sectional areas were defined as the total risk areas. The infarcted area-to-total risk area ratio of the two sides of each slice was calculated. The final infarct size of each heart was the average of infarcted area-to-total risk area ratio of all slices.

Statistical analysis. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Student's t-test and Kruskal-Wallis post hoc test; P < 0.05 was taken to indicate statistically significant differences between treatment groups. Values are means ± SE.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
Functional response to global normothermic ischemia and reperfusion after treatment with NT inhibitors. Preischemic LVDP and EDP were not significantly different between all groups before drug/vehicle treatment. Representative data showing the effects of vehicle and compound 4 on LVDP are shown in Fig. 3. After 10 min of treatment with vehicle (0.01% DMSO), 30 min of global normothermic ischemia, and 120 min of reperfusion, the average postischemic LVDP of control hearts was 41.6 ± 5.2% of preischemic LVDP (Fig. 4). Treatment with 1 µM compound 4 caused a statistically significant increase in cardiac functional recovery compared with control hearts, improving the postischemic LVDP to 79.2 ± 5.9% relative to preischemic LVDP (P < 0.002). Treatment with the prototype es (ENT1) nucleoside transporter inhibitor NBMPR at 1 µM also produced a significant postischemic LVDP recovery compared with control hearts, with an average postischemic LVDP recovery of 64.1 ± 4.2% of preischemic LVDP (P < 0.03). Interestingly, treatment with the weak es (ENT1) transporter inhibitor compound 2 (60) at 1 µM also resulted in a significantly higher postischemic LVDP recovery (82.9 ± 4.0%, P < 0.03) than in NBMPR-treated hearts. Thus compounds 4 and 2 at 1 µM demonstrated equivalent excellent improvement of functional recovery in ischemic-reperfused hearts, despite their very different NT inhibitory potencies (60). Nevertheless, 1 µM is four times the Ki of compound 2. We were surprised to find that NBMPR, which is similar in potency to compound 4 as an NT inhibitor (60), caused significantly less functional recovery than both of the tetrahydroisoquinoline compounds at the same dose level of 1.0 µM (Fig. 4). Treatment of hearts with 1 µM compound 4 or compound 2 also resulted in a significant improvement in EDP, as evidenced by the reduction in the average postischemic rise in EDP (Fig. 5): 42.5 ± 6.5 mmHg for control vs. 7.5 ± 2.7 mmHg (P < 0.01) and 14.1 ± 5.0 mmHg (P < 0.05) with compounds 4 and 2, respectively. At 1 µM, NBMPR, in contrast to either tetrahydroisoquinoline analog, did not significantly reduce the rise in postischemic EDP (29.1 ± 2.5 mmHg, P < 0.25) compared with control. The significant reductions in the postischemic rise in EDP induced by compound 4 or compound 2 suggest that these compounds not only improve functional recovery but, also, attenuate the degree of contracture of the heart. Figure 3 also shows a very transient increase in LVDP at the point of application of the compound, suggesting an inotropic effect. This is not sustained, however, and the reason for this is unclear.


Figure 3
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP) vs. time in hearts treated with compound 4 and vehicle (control).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Postischemic LVDP recovery of hearts treated with NBMPR, compound 4, compound 2, and vehicle (control). Values were obtained after 30 min of global ischemia and 120 min of reperfusion. Before ischemia, hearts were treated with NBMPR, compound 4, compound 2, or vehicle (0.01% DMSO, control). Values are means ± SE (n = 3 for each treatment group except control, where n = 9). *P < 0.05; #P < 0.01 vs. control.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Postischemic rise of end-diastolic pressure in hearts treated with NBMPR, compound 4, compound 2, or vehicle (control). Values were obtained after 30 min of global ischemia and 120 min of reperfusion. Before ischemia, hearts were treated with NBMPR, compound 4, compound 2, or vehicle (0.01% DMSO, control). Values are means ± SE (n = 3 for each treatment group except control, where n = 9). *P < 0.05; #P < 0.01 vs. control.

 
Concentration-dependent functional differences between compound 4, compound 2, and NBMPR. Compound 4 showed a trend toward enhancement of postischemic LVDP recovery at lower concentrations than the other compounds tested. For example, postischemic LVDP recovery of hearts treated with 0.1 µM compound 4 was significantly higher than control: 76.0 ± 4.9% vs. 41.6 ± 5.2% (P < 0.01). Further lowering of the concentration of compound 4, even to 0.05 µM, still led to an improved LVDP recovery, 60.2 ± 2.6%, which was equivalent to that induced by 1 µM NBMPR (64.1 ± 4.2%). This suggests a 20-fold higher potency of compound 4 than NBMPR with regard to left ventricular functional recovery. There was also a significant reduction in EDP elevation for 0.1 µM compound 4 (14.1 ± 1.0 mmHg). In contrast, there was no significant cardiac functional recovery in hearts treated with ≤0.1 µM compound 2; nor did ≤1.0 µM compound 2 significantly reduce the rise in EDP (Fig. 5). Similar to compound 2, 0.1 µM NBMPR also did not enhance LVDP recovery. Also, it did not significantly reduce the rise in EDP, even at 1 µM, which further highlights the inferiority of NBMPR to these compounds.

Effects of compounds on infarct size. Having demonstrated the potent effects of the new compounds in postischemic recovery of ventricular function, we also examined whether this protective effect translated to protection of the myocardium against ischemia-reperfusion tissue injury. We used compound 4, which showed excellent improvement in functional recovery, and compared it with the standard agent NBMPR in infarct size determination experiments. The results, which are presented in Fig. 6, show that compound 4 or NBMPR reduced infarct size relative to vehicle treatment. The average infarct size in vehicle-treated (control) rat hearts was 51.08 ± 5.06% of the total risk area, whereas those for compound 4- and NBMPR-treated hearts were 29.13 ± 3.17% and 37.5 ± 3.42%, respectively. This translates to infarct size reductions of 40% and 20% by compound 4 (P < 0.001) and NBMPR (P < 0.01), respectively. The ability of compound 4 to reduce infarct size was significantly greater than that of NBMPR (P < 0.02), which reflects the superiority of compound 4 to NBMPR with regard to improvement in left ventricular functional recovery and cardiac contracture (Figs. 4 and 5).


Figure 6
View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 6. Top: representative triphenyltetrazolium chloride-stained ventricle slices corresponding to each treatment. Bottom: infarct size [ratio of infracted area to total risk area (%I/R)] after 30 min of ischemia and 3 h of reperfusion following treatment with 0.01% DMSO (vehicle control), 1 µM NBMPR, or 1 µM compound 4. Values are means ± SE (n = 5). *P < 0.01; #P < 0.001 vs. control.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
We have demonstrated the cardioprotective effects of novel tetrahydroisoquinoline NT inhibitors, which were recently discovered in our laboratory (60). Our findings that these new NT inhibitors enhance postischemic ventricular functional recovery, attenuate myocardial contracture, and reduce infarct size are consistent with previous work showing the cardioprotective effects of NT inhibitors (1, 2, 5, 7–10, 20, 24, 25, 29, 30, 33, 34). Site-specific inhibition of NT during ischemia and reperfusion has been reported to attenuate stunning of the myocardium (8) by preventing superoxide generation or activating ARs. Interestingly, bradycardia caused by the use of EHNA alone was prevented when NBMPR was combined with EHNA (29). NBMPR has also been shown to improve LVDP recovery and ATP repletion and enhance endogenous adenosine accumulation in rat hearts (25). Zughaib et al. (61) showed that NBMPR and EHNA augment endogenous adenosine during ischemia and reperfusion in vivo to attenuate myocardial stunning in dogs. They also demonstrated that augmentation of endogenous adenosine levels is an effective therapeutic approach to protection against reversible postischemic dysfunction.

Cardioprotective mechanisms of adenosine involve vasodilatation, prevention of platelet aggregation, inhibition of catecholamine release, inhibition of neutrophil activation, induction of myocyte protein kinase (PKC) cytoprotective mechanisms, and opening of ATP-sensitive potassium channels, which result from activation of AR signaling cascades (24). It is generally believed that A1AR and A3AR are associated with ischemic preconditioning (19, 24, 31, 32, 42, 44, 46), whereas A2AR activation appears to mediate the tissue protective and anti-inflammatory actions of adenosine during reperfusion (24, 31, 39). A2aAR, A2bAR, and A3AR have also been implicated in the recently discovered phenomenon of postconditioning (22, 59). NT inhibition not only causes extracellular accumulation of adenosine, but it can also cause retention/trapping of adenosine within cardiomyocytes (1, 54), which can help replenish essential adenine nucleotides, such as ATP. Specificity of NBMPR and congeners is known to be different from that of other NT inhibitors such as the lidoflazine analogs or dipyridamole (14). In the guinea pig atrium, NBMPR and dipyridamole increased interstitial fluid adenosine concentration (28). It is possible that NBMPR and compounds 2 and 4 produce their cardioprotective effects in the isolated rat heart by increasing interstitial adenosine concentrations and/or entrapping adenosine within cardiomyocytes (25). The use of AR antagonists will show whether an increase in interstitial adenosine concentrations is involved in the cardioprotective actions. Measurement of myocyte adenosine retention in treated hearts vs. untreated hearts will indicate whether adenosine entrapment contributes to the cardioprotection.

Our results establish that compounds 2 and 4 are cardioprotective agents. Compound 4 was significantly more effective than compound 2 at low doses, but not at the highest tested dose (1 µM), at which the two compounds were equipotent in enhancing postischemic cardiac functional recovery. Taken together, the results suggest that more than one mechanism may be operating in the cardioprotective effects. At lower doses, it appears that the NT inhibition mechanism may be the most important, since compound 4 is a much more effective NT inhibitor than compound 2 (60). This notion is further underscored by the superiority of compounds 2 and 4 to NBMPR, which has NT inhibitory activity similar to that of compound 4.

Ischemia-reperfusion injury is the primary cause of complications of cardiac surgery and the underlying cause of death in the majority of patients who die within 30 days after cardiac surgery (37, 58). Current myocardial protection approaches are limited and inadequate, especially in high-risk patients (38, 57), for whom more effective cardioprotective therapies are needed. In this context, it is significant that the novel tetrahydroisoquinoline compounds are superior to NBMPR. In these compounds, the nitrobenzyl moiety of NBMPR is locked into the nitro-1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline system, and they are less likely to lose this moiety in vivo. This overcomes a major disadvantage of NBMPR relative to metabolic loss of the S-6 nitrobenzyl moiety to produce the practically inactive 6-mercaptopurine riboside metabolite, which may be mutagenic (13) and immunosuppressive (15), especially if there is a need for chronic use in very high-risk patients. For this reason, it is interesting to pursue these new compounds for the development of novel cardioprotective therapies.


   GRANTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
REFERENCES
 
This study was supported by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Grants HL-067479 (J. K. Buolamwini) and HL-48839 (P. A. Hofmann).


   FOOTNOTES
 

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: J. K. Buolamwini, Dept. Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Univ. of Tennessee Health Science Center, 847 Monroe Ave., Suite 327, Memphis, TN 38163 (e-mail: jbuolamwini{at}utmem.edu)

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Abd-Elfattah AS, Ding M, Jessen ME, Wechsler AS. Nucleoside trapping during reperfusion prevents ventricular dysfunction "stunning" in absence of adenosine: possible separation between ischemic and reperfusion injury. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 108: 269–278, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Abd-Elfattah AS, Ding M, Wechsler AS. Protection of the stunned myocardium: selective nucleoside transport blocker (NBMPR) administered after 20 min of ischemia treatments and recovery of ventricular function. Circulation 88: 335–343, 1993.
  3. Abd-Elfattah AS, Ding M, Wechsler AS. Intermittent warm aortic cross-clamping prevents cumulative ATP depletion, ventricular fibrillation and dysfunction "stunning": is it preconditioning? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 110: 328–339, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Abd-Elfattah AS, Hoehner J, Wechsler AS. Identification of nucleoside transport binding sites in the human myocardium. Mol Cell Biochem 180: 105–110, 1998.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  5. Abd-Elfattah AS, Jessen ME, Hanan SA, Tuchy G, Wechsler AS. Is adenosine-5'-triphosphate derangement or free-radical-mediated injury the major cause of ventricular dysfunction during reperfusion? Role of adenine nucleoside transport in myocardial reperfusion injury. Circulation 82 Suppl IV: 341–350, 1990.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Abd-Elfattah AS, Jessen ME, Lekven J, Doherty NE 3rd, Brunsting LA, Wechsler AS. Myocardial reperfusion injury. Role of myocardial hypoxanthine and xanthine in free radical-mediated reperfusion injury. Circulation 78: III-224–III-235, 1988.
  7. Abd-Elfattah AS, Jessen ME, Lekven J, Wechsler AS. Different cardioprotection with selective inhibitors of adenosine metabolism and transport: role of purine release in ischemic and reperfusion injury. Mol Cell Biochem 180: 179–191, 1998.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  8. Abd-Elfattah AS, Maddox R, Jessen ME, Hanan SA, Wechsler AS. Selective nucleoside transport blocker NBMPR attenuates myocardial stunning in a rabbit model deficient of xanthine oxidase. In: Purines and Myocardial Protection, edited by AS Abd-Elfattah and AS Wechsler. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic, 1995.
  9. Abd-Elfattah AS, Wechsler AS. Separation between ischemic and reperfusion injury by site-specific entrapment of endogenous adenosine and inosine using NBMPR and EHNA. J Card Surg 9 Suppl: 387–396, 1994.[ISI][Medline]
  10. Abd-Elfattah AS, Wechsler AS. Nucleoside transport and myocardial injury and protection: possible separation between ischemic and reperfusion injury by selective nucleoside transport blocker NBMPR. In: Purines and Myocardial Protection, edited by AS Abd-Elfattah and AS Wechsler. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic, 1995.
  11. Baldwin SA, Beal PR, Yao SY, King AE, Cass CE, Young JD. The equilibrative nucleoside transporter family, SLC29. Pflügers Arch 447: 735–743, 2004.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  12. Belardinelli L, Linden J, Berne RM. The cardiac effects of adenosine. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 32: 73–97, 1989.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  13. Benedict WF, Baker L, Haroun L, Choi E, Ames BN. Mutagenicity of cancer chemotherapeutic agents in the Salmonella/microsome test. Cancer Res 37: 2209–2213, 1977.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Buolamwini JK. Nucleoside transport inhibitors: structure-activity relationships and potential therapeutic application. Curr Med Chem 4: 35–66, 1997.[ISI]
  15. Elion GB. Pharmacologic and physical agents. Immunosuppressive agents. Transplant Proc 9: 975–979, 1977.[ISI][Medline]
  16. Engler RL. Harnessing nature's own cardiac defense mechanism with acadesine, an adenosine regulating agent: importance of the endothelium. J Card Surg 9 Suppl: 482–492, 1994.[ISI][Medline]
  17. Erion MD. Adenosine receptors as pharmacological targets. Annu Rev Med Chem 28: 295–303, 1993.
  18. FitzGerald GA. Dipyridamole. N Engl J Med 316: 1247–1256, 1987.[ISI][Medline]
  19. Ge ZD, Peart JN, Wan TC, Kreckler LM, Jacobson MA, Gross GJ, Auchampach JA. Cl-IB-MECA reduces ischemia/reperfusion injury in mice by activating the A3 adenosine receptor. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 319: 1200–1210, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Geiger JD, Parkinson FE, Kowaluk EA. Regulators of endogenous adenosine levels as therapeutic agents. In: Purinergic Approaches in Experimental Therapeutics, edited by KA Jacobson and MF Jarvis. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1997, p. 55–84.
  21. Gray JH, Owen RP, Giacomini KM. The concentrative nucleoside transporter family, SLC28. Pflügers Arch 447: 728–734, 2004.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  22. Gross ER, Gross GJ. Ligand triggers of classical preconditioning and postconditioning. Cardiovasc Res 70: 212–221, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Grover GJ, Sleph PG. The cardioprotective effects of R-75231 and lidoflazine are not caused by adenosine A1 receptor activation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 268: 90–96, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Headrick JP, Hack B, Ashton KJ. Acute adenosinergic cardioprotection in ischemic-reperfused hearts. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 285: H1797–H1818, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Hirari K, Ashraf M. Modulation of adenosine effects in attenuation of ischemia and reperfusion injury in rat heart. J Mol Cell Cardiol 30: 1803–1815, 1998.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  26. Jacobson KA, Costanzi S, Kim SK, Roh E, Joshi BV, Tchilibon S, Duong HT, Gao ZG. Action of nucleosides and nucleotides at 7 transmembrane-spanning receptors. Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids 25: 1425–1436, 2006.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  27. Kaiser HJ, Stumpfig D, Flammer J. Short-term effect of dipyridamole on blood flow velocities in the extraocular vessels. Int Ophthalmol 19: 355–358, 1996.[CrossRef][ISI]
  28. Karsai D, Zsuga J, Juhasz B, Der P, Szentmiklosi AJ, Tosaki A, Gesztelyi R. Effect of nucleoside transport blockade on the interstitial adenosine level characterized by a novel method in guinea pig atria. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 47: 103–109, 2006.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  29. Keeling IM, Obermayr RP, Schneider B, Spieckermann PG. Postischemic cardiac function recovery in the isolated rat heart: effects of adenosine deaminase and nucleoside transport inhibition. Langenbecks Arch Surg 385: 531–537, 2000.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  30. King AE, Ackley MA, Cass CE, Young D, Baldwin SA. Nucleoside transporters: from scavengers to novel therapeutic targets. Trends Pharmacol Sci 27: 416–425, 2006.[CrossRef][Medline]
  31. Linden J. Molecular approach to adenosine receptors: receptor-mediated mechanisms of tissue protection. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 41: 775–787, 2001.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  32. Liu GS, Thornton J, Van Winkle DM, Stanley AWH, Olsson RA, Downey JM. Protection against infarction afforded by preconditioning is mediated by A1 adenosine receptors in rabbit heart. Circulation 84: 350–356, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Masuda M, Chang-chun C, Mollhoff T, Van Belle H, Flameng W. Effects of nucleoside transport inhibition on long-term ex vivo preservation of canine hearts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 104: 1610–1617, 1992.[Abstract]
  34. Masuda M, Demeulemeester A, Chang-chun C, Hendrikx M, Van Belle H, Flameng W. Cardioprotective effects of nucleoside transport inhibition in rabbit hearts. Ann Thorac Surg 52: 1300–1305, 1991.[Abstract]
  35. Mullane K, Bullough D. Harnessing an endogenous cardioprotective mechanism: cellular sources and sites of action of adenosine. J Mol Cell Cardiol 27: 1041–1054, 1995.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  36. Musa H, Dobrzynski H, Berry Z, Abidi F, Cass CE, Young JD, Baldwin SA, Boyett MR. Immunocytochemical demonstration of the equilibrative nucleoside transporter rENT1 in rat sinoatrial node. J Histochem Cytochem 50: 305–309, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Nalysnyk L, Fahrbach K, Reynolds MW, Zhao SZ, Ross S. Adverse events in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) trials: a systematic review and analysis. Heart 89: 767–772, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Nicolini F, Beghi C, Muscari C, Agostinelli AM, Budillon A, Spaggiari I, Gherli T. Myocardial protection in adult cardiac surgery: current options and future challenges. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 24: 986–993, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Ohta A, Stkovski M. The role of G-protein-coupled adenosine receptors in downregulation of inflammation and protection from tissue damage. Nature 414: 916–920, 2001.[CrossRef][Medline]
  40. Paterson ARP, Jacobs ES, Harley ER, Fu NW, Robins MJ, Cass CE. Measurement and inhibition of membrane transport of adenosine. In: Regulatory Functions of Adenosine, edited by RM Berne, TW Rall, and R Rubio. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1983, p. 203–220.
  41. Paul B, Chen MF, Paterson ARP. Inhibitors of nucleoside transport: structure-activity relationships. J Med Chem 18: 968–973, 1975.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  42. Peart J, Willems L, Headrick JP. Receptor and non-receptor-dependent mechanisms of cardioprotection with adenosine. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 284: H519–H527, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Pelleg A, Belardinelli L. Cardiac electrophysiology and pharmacology of adenosine: basic and clinical aspects. Cardiovasc Res 27: 54–61, 1993.[Free Full Text]
  44. Sheldrick A, Gray KM, Drew GM, Louttit JB. The effect of body temperature on myocardial protection conferred by ischaemic preconditioning or the selective adenosine A1 receptor agonist GR79236 in an anaesthetized rabbit model of myocardial ischaemia and reperfusion. Br J Pharmacol 128: 385–395, 1999.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  45. Sugiyama S, Ozawa T. Biochemical basis for reperfusion arrhythmias. J Mol Cell Cardiol 19 Suppl 5: 67–75, 1987.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  46. Thornton JD, Liu GS, Olsson RA, Downey JM. Intravenous pretreatment with A1-selective adenosine analogues protects the heart against infarction. Circulation 85: 659–665, 1992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Van Belle H. Nucleoside transport inhibition: a therapeutic approach to cardioprotection via adenosine? Cardiovasc Res 27: 68–76, 1993.[ISI][Medline]
  48. Van Belle H. Adenosine promoters: an overview of existing strategies. Curr Opin Invest Drugs 2: 1191–1199, 1993.
  49. Van Belle H. Adenosine uptake blockers for cardioprotection. In: Adenosine and Adenine Nucleotides: From Molecular Biology to Integrative Physiology, edited by L Belardinelli and A Pelleg. Boston: Kluwer, 1995, p. 373–378.
  50. Van Belle H. In vivo effects of inhibitors of adenosine uptake. In: Adenosine and Adenine Nucleotides: Physiology and Pharmacology, edited by DM Paton. London: Taylor and Francis, 1998, p. 251–258.
  51. Van Belle H, Goossen F, Wynants J. Biochemical and functional effects of nucleoside transport inhibition in the isolated cat heart. J Mol Cell Cardiol 21: 797–805, 1985.
  52. Van Belle H, Janssen PAJ. Comparative pharmacology of nucleoside transport inhibitors. Nucleosides Nucleotides 10: 975–982, 1991.[ISI]
  53. Van Belle H, Wynants J, Ver Donck K. Comparison of the existing nucleoside transport inhibitors: in vitro and in vivo data. In: Purine and Pyrimidine Metabolism in Man, edited by RA Harkness, GB Elion, and N Zollner. New York: Plenum, 1991, vol. 7, p. 419–422.
  54. Van Belle H, Xhonneux R, Flameng W, Wynants J. Oral pretreatment with mioflazine completely changes the pattern and remarkably prolongs the accumulation of nucleosides in ischemic and reperfused myocardium. Basic Res Cardiol 81: 407–416, 1986.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  55. Ver Donck K. Purine metabolism in the heart. Strategies for protection against myocardial ischaemia. Pharm World Sci 16: 69–76, 1994.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  56. Vinten-Johansen J, Thourani VH, Ronson RS, Jordan JE, Zhao ZQ, Nakamura M, Velez D, Guyton RA. Broad-spectrum cardioprotection with adenosine. Ann Thorac Surg 68: 1942–1948, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Yellon DM, Hausenloy DJ. Realizing the clinical potential of ischemic preconditioning and postconditioning. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med 2: 568–575, 2005.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  58. Zaugg M, Schaub, MC, Foex P. Myocardial injury and its prevention in the perioperative setting. Br J Anaesth 93: 21–33, 2004.[Free Full Text]
  59. Zhao ZQ, Vinten-Johansen J. Postconditioning: reduction of reperfusion-induced injury. Cardiovasc Res 70: 200–211, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  60. Zhu Z, Furr J, Buolamwini JK. Synthesis and flow cytometric evaluation of novel 1,2,3,4-tetrahydroisoquinoline conformationally constrained analogues of nitrobenzylmercaptopurine riboside (NBMPR) designed for probing its conformation when bound to the es nucleoside transporter. J Med Chem 46: 831–837, 2003.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  61. Zughaib ME, Abd-Elfattah AS, Jeroudi MO, Sun JZ, Sekili S, Tang XL, Bolli R. Augmentation of endogenous adenosine attenuates myocardial "stunning" independently of coronary flow or hemodynamic effects. Circulation 88: 2359–2369, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol.Home page
D. B. J. Bone and J. R. Hammond
Nucleoside and nucleobase transporters of primary human cardiac microvascular endothelial cells: characterization of a novel nucleobase transporter
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, December 1, 2007; 293(6): H3325 - H3332.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
292/6/H2921    most recent
01191.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhu, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Buolamwini, J. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhu, Z.
Right arrow Articles by Buolamwini, J. K.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2007 by the American Physiological Society.