On the mode of the prolactin release-inhibiting action of the serotonin receptor blockers metergoline, methysergide, and cyproheptadine.

Abstract

Using animals with large electrolytic lesions of the median eminence-mediobasal hypothalamus, we confirmed earlier findings that metergoline (ME) and methysergide (MS) inhibit PRL secretion through activation of the dopamine receptors of the pituitary lactotrophs and established, in a quantitative manner, that their dopaminergic potencies are comparable to the potency of the dopamine receptor agonist, piribedil, with ED50 in the order of 0.35 to 0.22 mg/kg. Cyproheptadine (CYP), acting by an unknown mechanism, had only a weak inhibiting effect (ED50 greater than 20.0 mg/kg) in these experimental conditions. In the second part of the study, the PRL-inhibiting actions of ME, MS, CYP, and piribedil, respectively, were tested against the PRL release-stimulating effect of activation of the central serotonergic system that was induced by administration of a large dose of L-5-hydroxytryptophan (5HTP; 100 mg/kg), a small dose of 5HTP (15 mg/kg) in rats pretreated with fluoxetine, or by the serotonin receptor agonist quipazine (10.0 mg/kg, ip). The inhibiting potencies of ME (ED50 0.019, 0.014, and 0.048 mg/kg, respectively) against these three stimuli were much larger than in the lesioned animals or than the corresponding potencies of piribedil (ED50 2.2, 0.24, and 0.41 mg/kg, respectively). It is assumed that in these experimental conditions ME inhibited PRL release by blockade of the central serotonin receptors in addition to its dopaminergic effect and that at low doses (0.1 mg/kg or less) the entire inhibiting effect of ME was probably due to its antiserotonergic activity. With MS, which is a weaker serotonin receptor blocker than ME (ED50 0.178, 0.075, and 0.55 mg/kg, respectively, for the three serotonergic stimuli of PRL release), the antiserotonergic component in its PRL-inhibiting effect was evident but less clearly separable from the dopaminergic component in experiments with 5HTP and with fluoxetine plus 5HTP, whereas in experiments with quipazine the entire action could be accounted for by its dopaminergic activity. CYP was the least potent among the three blockers (ED50 0.6, 0.4, and 1.37 mg/kg, respectively, for the three serotonergic stimuli of PRL release), but appropriate tests indicated that it acted only as a serotonin receptor blocker and not by virtue of its antihistaminic, anticholinergic properties or by a direct action on the pituitary lactotrophs. SQ 10,631, another serotonin receptor blocker that was also tested, had no PRL-inhibiting activity. Because of the dual nature of the PRL-inhibiting mechanism of ME and MS and the low effectiveness of CYP, combined possibly with other actions, the serotonin receptor blockers have limited value in studies concerning the role of the central serotonergic system in the regulation of PRL secretion.