Human Histamine H1 Receptor Research Articles

Cellular analysis of the histamine H4 receptor in human myeloid cells

The human histamine H4 receptor (H4R) is a Gαi/o-coupled receptor which is mainly expressed on hematopoietic cells. Accordingly, the receptor is implicated in the pathology of various diseases such as autoimmune disorders, bronchial asthma and pruritus. Due to complicated receptor pharmacology, the lack of a reliable antibody and limited availability of primary cells expressing the receptor the physiology of this receptor is still poorly understood. Therefore, we aimed to assess absolute receptor mRNA expression and functionality (intracellular Ca2+ release) in various human myeloid cell types such as granulocytes, monocytes, macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs). This was put into context with the expression of the H1R and H2R. In addition, the influence of various inflammatory stimuli on H4R expression was investigated in macrophages and monocyte-derived DCs. We found that classically activated macrophages treated with pro-inflammatory stimuli down-regulated histamine receptor mRNA expression as did LPS and zymosan A matured monocyte-derived DCs. In contrast, alternatively activated macrophages (IL-4 or IL-13) upregulated H2R and H4R expression compared to controls. Consistent with existing literature, we found eosinophils to be the major source of the H4R. Since availability of primary eosinophils is limited, we developed a cell model based on the differentiated eosinophilic cell line EOL-1, in which H4R pharmacology and physiology may be studied.

In silico modeling techniques for predicting the tertiary structure of human H4 receptor.

First cloned in 2000, the human Histamine H4 Receptor (hH4R) is the last member of the histamine receptors family discovered so far, it belongs to the GPCR super-family and is involved in a wide variety of immunological and inflammatory responses. Potential hH4R antagonists are proposed to have therapeutic potential for the treatment of allergies, inflammation, asthma and colitis. So far, no hH4R ligands have been successfully introduced to the pharmaceutical market, which creates a strong demand for new selective ligands to be developed. in silico techniques and structural based modeling are likely to facilitate the achievement of this goal. In this review paper we attempt to cover the fundamental concepts of hH4R structure modeling and its implementations in drug discovery and development, especially those that have been experimentally tested and to highlight some ideas that are currently being discussed on the dynamic nature of hH4R and GPCRs, in regards to computerized techniques for 3-D structure modeling.

Structural Analysis of the Histamine H1 Receptor.

The crystal structure of the human histamine H1 receptor (H1R) has been determined in complex with its inverse agonist doxepin, a first-generation antihistamine. The crystal structure showed that doxepin sits deeply inside the ligand-binding pocket and predominantly interacts with residues highly conserved among other aminergic receptors. This binding mode is considered to result in the low selectivity of the first-generation antihistamines for H1R. The crystal structure also revealed the mechanism of receptor inactivation by the inverse agonist doxepin. On the other hand, the crystal structure elucidated the anion-binding site near the extracellular portion of the receptor. This site consists of residues not conserved among other aminergic receptors, which are specific for H1R. Docking simulation and biochemical experimentation demonstrated that a carboxyl group on the second-generation antihistamines interacts with the anion-binding site. These results imply that the anion-binding site is a key site for the development of highly selective antihistamine drugs.

2,4-Diaminopyrimidines as dual ligands at the histamine H1 and H4 receptor-H1/H4-receptor selectivity.

Distinct diaminopyrimidines, for example, 4-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-5,6-dihydrobenzo[h]quinazolin-2-amine are histamine H4 receptor (H4R) antagonists and show high affinity to the H4R, but only a moderate affinity to the histamine H1 receptor (H1R). Within previous studies it was shown that an aromatic side chain with a distinct distance to the basic amine and aromatic core is necessary for affinity to the human H1R (hH1R). Thus, a rigid aminopyrimidine with a tricyclic core was used as a lead structure. There, (1) the flexible aromatic side chain was introduced, (2) the substitution pattern of the pyrimidine core was exchanged and (3) rigidity was decreased by opening the tricyclic core. Within the present study, two compounds with similar affinity in the one digit μM range to the human H1R and H4R were identified. While the affinity at the hH1R increased about 4- to 8-fold compared to the parent diaminopyrimidine, the affinity to the hH4R decreased about 5- to 8-fold. In addition to the parent diaminopyrimidine, two selected compounds were docked into the H1R and H4R and molecular dynamic studies were performed to predict the binding mode and explain the experimental results on a molecular level. The two new compounds may be good lead structures for the development of dual H1/H4 receptor ligands with affinities in the same range.

Chlorophenoxy aminoalkyl derivatives as histamine H3R ligands and antiseizure agents

A series of twenty new chlorophenoxyalkylamine derivatives (9–28) was synthesized and evaluated on their binding properties at the human histamine H3 receptor (hH3R). The spacer alkyl chain contained five to seven carbon atoms. The highest affinities have shown the 4-chloro substituted derivatives 10 and 25 (Ki=133 and 128nM, respectively) classified as antagonists in cAMP accumulation assay (EC50=72 and 75nM, respectively). Synthesized compounds were also evaluated for anticonvulsant activity in Antiepileptic Screening Program (ASP) at National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (USA). Two compounds (4-chloro substituted derivatives: 20 and 26) were the most promising and showed in the MES seizure model in rats (after ip administration) ED50 values of 14mg/kg and 13.18mg/kg, respectively. Protective indexes (PI=TD50/ED50) were 3.2 for 20 and 3.8 for 26. Moreover, molecular modeling and docking studies were undertaken to explain affinity at hH3R of target compounds, and the experimentally and in silico estimation of properties like lipophilicity and metabolism was performed. Antiproliferative effects have been also investigated in vitro for selected compounds (10 and 25). These compounds neither possessed significant antiproliferative and antitumor activity, nor modulated CYP3A4 activity up to concentration of 10μM.

3-(1′-Cyclobutylspiro[4H-1,3-benzodioxine-2,4′-piperidine]-6-yl)-5,5-dimethyl-1,4-dihydropyridazin-6-one (CEP-32215), a new wake-promoting histamine H3 antagonist/inverse agonist

CEP-32215 is a new, potent, selective, and orally bioavailable inverse agonist of the histamine H3 receptor (H3R) with drug-like properties. High affinity in human (hH3R Ki = 2.0 ± 0.2 nM) and rat (rH3R Ki = 3.6 ± 0.7 nM) H3R radioligand binding assays was demonstrated. Potent functional antagonism (Kb = 0.3 ± 0.1 nM) and inverse agonism (EC50 = 0.6 ± 0.2 nM) were demonstrated in [35S]guanosine 5′-O-(γ-thio)-triphosphate binding assays. Oral bioavailability and dose-related exposure was consistent among rat, dog, and monkey. After oral dosing, occupancy of H3R by CEP-32215 was estimated by the inhibition of ex vivo binding in rat cortical slices (ED50 = 0.1 mg/kg p.o.). Functional antagonism in brain was demonstrated by the inhibition of R-α-methylhistamine-induced drinking in the rat dipsogenia model (ED50 = 0.92 mg/kg). CEP-32215 significantly increased wake duration in the rat EEG model at 3–30 mg/kg p.o. Increased motor activity, sleep rebound or undesirable events (such as spike wave or seizure activity) was not observed following doses up to 100 mg/kg p.o., indicating an acceptable therapeutic index. CEP-32215 may have potential utility in the treatment of a variety of sleep disorders.This article is part of the Special Issue entitled ‘Histamine Receptors’.

Molecular modelling studies on 2-substituted octahydropyrazinopyridoindoles for histamine H2 receptor antagonism

The human histamine H2 receptor (hH2HR) is a G-protein coupled receptor protein with seven transmembrane (TM)-spanning helices primarily involved in regulation of gastric acid secretion. Antagonists targeting hH2HR are useful in the treatment of hyperacidic conditions such as peptic ulcers, gastresophageal reflux disease and gastrointestinal bleeding. We have previously reported the antagonism of 2-substituted pyrazinopyridoindoles at the human histamine H1 receptor and mode of binding of these compounds at the hH1HR using in silico methods. Interestingly, some of the compounds in the series also showed promising activity towards hH2HR that prompted us to investigate the mode of binding of these compounds at hH2HR. In the absence of the crystal structure of hH2HR a homology model has been constructed using multiple sequence alignment, using the X-ray crystal structures of Turkey β1-adrenergic receptor (tβ1AR), Human histamine H1 receptor (hH1HR), Human β2-adrenergic receptor (hβ2AR) and Human D3 dopamine receptor (hD3R). The important residues for binding were depicted in TMIII, TMV, TMVI and TMVII by the homology modelled hH2HR for 2-substituted pyrazinopyridoindoles. A comparative study for deducing the selectivity regarding the binding towards hH1HR and hH2HR has been carried out, which may be useful in designing of selective hH1HR/hH2HR antagonists in these classes of compounds.

Binding pathway of histamine to the hH4R, observed by unconstrained molecular dynamics.

Histamine binds with high affinity to the human histamine H4 receptor (hH4R). We are the first to examine the complete binding pathway of histamine from the extracellular side to the orthosteric binding site of the hH4R by means of unconstrained molecular dynamic simulation. Furthermore, the simulations show that the positively charged amine moiety of the histamine interacts electrostatically with the highly conserved Asp(3.32), while the imidazole moiety forms a hydrogen bond interaction with Glu(5.46) and Gln(7.42).

The extracellular loop 2 (ECL2) of the human histamine H4 receptor substantially contributes to ligand binding and constitutive activity.

In contrast to the corresponding mouse and rat orthologs, the human histamine H4 receptor (hH4R) shows extraordinarily high constitutive activity. In the extracellular loop (ECL), replacement of F169 by V as in the mouse H4R significantly reduced constitutive activity. Stabilization of the inactive state was even more pronounced for a double mutant, in which, in addition to F169V, S179 in the ligand binding site was replaced by M. To study the role of the FF motif in ECL2, we generated the hH4R-F168A mutant. The receptor was co-expressed in Sf9 insect cells with the G-protein subunits Gαi2 and Gβ1γ2, and the membranes were studied in [3H]histamine binding and functional [35S]GTPγS assays. The potency of various ligands at the hH4R-F168A mutant decreased compared to the wild-type hH4R, for example by 30- and more than 100-fold in case of the H4R agonist UR-PI376 and histamine, respectively. The high constitutive activity of the hH4R was completely lost in the hH4R-F168A mutant, as reflected by neutral antagonism of thioperamide, a full inverse agonist at the wild-type hH4R. By analogy, JNJ7777120 was a partial inverse agonist at the hH4R, but a partial agonist at the hH4R-F168A mutant, again demonstrating the decrease in constitutive activity due to F168A mutation. Thus, F168 was proven to play a key role not only in ligand binding and potency, but also in the high constitutive activity of the hH4R.

Extended template-based modeling and evaluation method using consensus of binding mode of GPCRs for virtual screening.

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a pharmaceutically important protein family because they mediate numerous physiological functions. The crystal structures of several GPCR subtypes have been determined recently, encouraging efforts to apply structure-based virtual screening (SBVS) along with ligand-based virtual screening (LBVS) to improve the hit rate of active ligands from large chemical libraries. Three-dimensional models are also necessary for GPCR targets whose structures are unknown. Current challenges include the selection of structural templates from available structurally known GPCRs to use for accurate modeling and understanding the diversity of sites recognizing distinct ligands. We have developed and validated an extended template-based modeling and evaluation method for SBVS. Models were generated using a fragmental template procedure in addition to typical template-based modeling methods. The reliability of the models was evaluated using a virtual screening test with known active ligands and decoys and the consensus of the binding mode using the protein-ligand interaction fingerprint (PLIF) derived from the results of docking simulations. This novel workflow was applied to three targets with known structures (human dopamine receptor 3, human histamine H1 receptor, and human delta opioid receptor) and to a target with an unknown structure (human serotonin 2A receptor). In each case, model structures having high ligand selectivity with consensus binding mode were generated.

Sequential application of ligand and structure based modeling approaches to index chemicals for their hH4R antagonism.

The human histamine H4 receptor (hH4R), a member of the G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR) family, is an increasingly attractive drug target. It plays a key role in many cell pathways and many hH4R ligands are studied for the treatment of several inflammatory, allergic and autoimmune disorders, as well as for analgesic activity. Due to the challenging difficulties in the experimental elucidation of hH4R structure, virtual screening campaigns are normally run on homology based models. However, a wealth of information about the chemical properties of GPCR ligands has also accumulated over the last few years and an appropriate combination of these ligand-based knowledge with structure-based molecular modeling studies emerges as a promising strategy for computer-assisted drug design. Here, two chemoinformatics techniques, the Intelligent Learning Engine (ILE) and Iterative Stochastic Elimination (ISE) approach, were used to index chemicals for their hH4R bioactivity. An application of the prediction model on external test set composed of more than 160 hH4R antagonists picked from the chEMBL database gave enrichment factor of 16.4. A virtual high throughput screening on ZINC database was carried out, picking ∼4000 chemicals highly indexed as H4R antagonists' candidates. Next, a series of 3D models of hH4R were generated by molecular modeling and molecular dynamics simulations performed in fully atomistic lipid membranes. The efficacy of the hH4R 3D models in discrimination between actives and non-actives were checked and the 3D model with the best performance was chosen for further docking studies performed on the focused library. The output of these docking studies was a consensus library of 11 highly active scored drug candidates. Our findings suggest that a sequential combination of ligand-based chemoinformatics approaches with structure-based ones has the potential to improve the success rate in discovering new biologically active GPCR drugs and increase the enrichment factors in a synergistic manner.

No evidence for histamine H4 receptor in human monocytes.

The histamine H4 receptor (H4R) is a classic pertussis toxin-sensitive Gi protein-coupled receptor that mediates increases in intracellular calcium concentration ([Ca(2+)]i). The presence of H4R in human eosinophils has been rigorously documented by several independent groups. It has also been suggested that H4R is expressed in human monocytes, but this suggestion hinges in part on H4R antibodies with questionable specificity. This situation prompted us to reinvestigate H4R expression in human monocytes. As positive control, we studied human embryonic kidney 293T cells stably expressing the human H4R (hH4R). In these cells, histamine (HA) and the H4R agonist UR-PI376 (2-cyano-1-[4-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butyl]-3-[(2-phenylthio)ethyl]guanidine) induced pertussis toxin-sensitive [Ca(2+)]i increases. However, in quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction studies we failed to detect hH4R mRNA in human monocytes and U937 promonocytes. In human monocytes, ATP and N-formyl-l-methionyl-l-leucyl-l-phenylalanine increased [Ca(2+)]i, but HA, UR-PI376, and 5-methylhistamine (a dual H4R/H2 receptor agonist) did not. In U937 promonocytes and differentiated U937 cells, HA increased [Ca(2+)]i, but this increase was mediated via HA H1 receptor. In conclusion, there is no evidence for the presence of H4R in human monocytes.

Drug-likeness approach of 2-aminopyrimidines as histamine H3 receptor ligands.

A small series of compounds containing derivatives of 2,4-diamino- and 2,4,6-triaminopyrimidine (compounds 2–7) was synthesized and tested for binding affinity to human histamine H3 receptors (hH3Rs) stably expressed in HEK-293 cells and human H4Rs (hH4Rs) co-expressed with Gαi2 and Gβ1γ2 subunits in Sf9 cells. Working in part from the lead compound 6-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-N4-(3-(piperidin-1-yl)propyl)pyrimidine-2,4-diamine (compound 1) with unsatisfactory affinity and selectivity to hH3Rs, our structure-activity relationship studies revealed that replacement of 4-methylpiperazino by N-benzylamine and substitution of an amine group at the 2-position of the 2-aminopyrimidine core structure with 3-piperidinopropoxyphenyl moiety as an hH3R pharmacophore resulted in N4-benzyl-N2-(4-(3-(piperidin-1-yl)propoxy)phenyl)pyrimidine-2,4-diamine (compound 5) with high hH3R affinity (ki =4.49±1.25 nM) and H3R receptor subtype selectivity of more than 6,500×. Moreover, initial metric analyses were conducted based on their target-oriented drug-likeness for predictively quantifying lipophilicity, ligand efficiency, lipophilicity-dependent ligand efficiency, molecular size-independent efficiency, and topological molecular polar surface. As to the development of potential H3R ligands, results showed that integration of the hH3R pharmacophore in hH4R-affine structural scaffolds resulted in compounds with high hH3R affinity (4.5–650 nM), moderate to low hH4R affinity (4,500–30,000 nM), receptor subtype selectivity (ratio hH4R/hH3R; 8–6,500), and promising calculated drug-likeness properties.

Sodium binding to hH3R and hH 4R--a molecular modeling study.

Several aminergic GPCRs, e.g., the human histamine H3-receptor (hH3R) are sensitive to sodium ions. Based on these experimental results, including site directed mutagenesis studies, a sodium binding pocket near to the highly conserved Asp2.50 was suggested. Recently, in the crystallized adenosine A2A receptor (4EIY), a sodium ion was found in a pocket, coordinated by Asp52, Ser91, and three water molecules. Despite high homology in amino acid sequence between hH3R and hH4R, pharmacological studies revealed that the hH4R is--in contrast to hH3R--not sensitive to sodium ions. In order to obtain a deeper insight onto the differences in sodium sensitivity between hH3R and hH4R, we performed molecular modelling studies, including molecular dynamic simulations and calculation of Gibbs energy of solvation. The results of the modeling studies suggested that the amino acid at position 7.42 influences sodium binding to aminergic GPCRs in different ways. A comparison of the amino acids forming the sodium binding channel between the ligand binding pocket and the sodium binding pocket of all human aminergic GPCRs showed an 80% occurrence of glycine--in contrast to hH3R and hH4R. The Gln7.42 at hH4R disrupts a water chain, connecting the Asp3.32 of the orthosteric binding site and the Asp2.50 of the allosteric binding site. Besides, the oxygen of the glutamine side chain stabilizes the interaction of the sodium ion with the Asp3.32. Thus, the binding of the sodium into the allosteric binding site might be hindered kinetically.

Differential thermodynamic driving force of first- and second-generation antihistamines to determine their binding affinity for human H1 receptors

Differential binding sites for first- and second-generation antihistamines were indicated on the basis of the crystal structure of human histamine H1 receptors. In this study, we evaluated differences between the thermodynamic driving forces of first- and second-generation antihistamines for human H1 receptors and their structural determinants. The binding enthalpy and entropy of 20 antihistamines were estimated with the van’t Hoff equation using their dissociation constants obtained from their displacement curves against the binding of [3H]mepyramine to membrane preparations of Chinese hamster ovary cells expressing human H1 receptors at various temperatures from 4°C to 37°C. Structural determinants of antihistamines for their thermodynamic binding properties were assessed by quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) analyses. We found that entropy-dependent binding was more evident in second- than first-generation antihistamines, resulting in enthalpy–entropy compensation between the binding forces of first- and second-generation antihistamines. QSAR analyses indicated that enthalpy–entropy compensation was determined by the sum of degrees, maximal electrostatic potentials, water-accessible surface area and hydrogen binding acceptor count of antihistamines to regulate their affinity for receptors. In conclusion, it was revealed that entropy-dependent hydrophobic interaction was more important in the binding of second-generation antihistamines, even though the hydrophilicity of second-generation antihistamines is generally increased. Furthermore, their structural determinants responsible for enthalpy–entropy compensation were explored by QSAR analyses. These findings may contribute to understanding the fundamental mechanisms of how the affinity of ligands for their receptors is regulated.

Aryl-1,3,5-triazine derivatives as histamine H4 receptor ligands

A series of novel 2-amino-4-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-1,3,5-triazine derivatives with different aryl substituents in the 6-position was designed, synthesized and evaluated for histamine H4 receptor (H4R) affinity in Sf9 cells expressing human H4R co-expressed with G-protein subunits. Triazine derivative 8 with a 6-(p-chlorophenyl) substituent showed the highest affinity with hH4R Ki value of 203 nM and was classified as an antagonist in cAMP accumulation assay. This compound, identified as a new lead structure, demonstrated also anti-inflammatory properties in preliminary studies in mice (carrageenan-induced edema test) and neither possessed significant antiproliferative activity, nor modulated CYP3A4 activity up to concentration of 25 μM. In order to discuss structure–activity relationships molecular modeling and docking studies were undertaken.

Anticonvulsive effect of nonimidazole histamine H3 receptor antagonists.

To determine the potential of histamine H3 receptor (H3R) ligands as new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), aromatic ether, and diether derivatives (1-12) belonging to the nonimidazole class of ligands, with high in-vitro binding affinity at human H3R, were tested for their in-vivo anticonvulsive activity in the maximal electroshock (MES)-induced and pentylenetetrazole (PTZ)-kindled seizure models in rats. The anticonvulsive effects of a systemic injection of 1-12 on MES-induced and PTZ-kindled seizures were evaluated against the reference AED phenytoin (PHT) and the structurally related H3R antagonist/inverse agonist pitolisant (PIT). Among the most promising ligands 2, 4, 5, and 11, there was a significant and dose-dependent reduction in the duration of tonic hind limb extension (THLE) in MES-induced seizure subsequent to administration of 4 and 5 [(5, 10, and 15 mg/kg, intraperitoneally (i.p.)]. The protective effects observed for the 1-(3-(3-(4-chlorophenyl)propoxy)propyl)-3-methylpiperidine derivative 11 at 10 mg/kg, i.p. were significantly greater than those of PIT, and were reversed by pretreatment with the central nervous system penetrant H1R antagonist pyrilamine (PYR) (10 mg/kg). Moreover, the protective action of the reference AED PHT, at a dose of 5 mg/kg (without considerable protection in the MES model), was significantly augmented when coadministered with derivative 11 (5 mg/kg, i.p.). Surprisingly, pretreatment with derivative 7 (10 mg/kg, i.p.), an ethylphenoxyhexyl-piperidine derivative without considerable protection in the MES model, potently altered PTZ-kindled seizure, significantly prolonged myoclonic latency time, and clearly shortened the total seizure time when compared with control, PHT, and PIT. These interesting results highlight the potential of H3R ligands as new AEDs or as adjuvants to available AED therapeutics.

Mathematical analysis of the sodium sensitivity of the human histamine H3 receptor.

PurposeIt was shown by several experimental studies that some G protein coupled receptors (GPCR) are sensitive to sodium ions. Furthermore, mutagenesis studies or the determination of crystal structures of the adenosine A2A or δ-opioid receptor revealed an allosteric Na+ binding pocket near to the highly conserved Asp2.50. Within a previous study, the influence of NaCl concentration onto the steady-state GTPase activity at the human histamine H3 receptor (hH3R) in presence of the endogenous histamine or the inverse agonist thioperamide was analyzed. The purpose of the present study was to examine and quantify the Na+-sensitivity of hH3R on a molecular level.MethodsTo achieve this, we developed a set of equations, describing constitutive activity and the different ligand-receptor equilibria in absence or presence of sodium ions. Furthermore, in order to gain a better understanding of the ligand- and Na+-binding to hH3R on molecular level, we performed molecular dynamic (MD) simulations.ResultsThe analysis of the previously determined experimental steady-state GTPase data with the set of equations presented within this study, reveals that thioperamide binds into the orthosteric binding pocket of the hH3R in absence or presence of a Na+ in its allosteric binding site. However, the data suggest that thioperamide binds preferentially into the hH3R in absence of a sodium ion in its allosteric site. These experimental results were supported by MD simulations of thioperamide in the binding pocket of the inactive hH3R. Furthermore, the MD simulations revealed two different binding modes for thioperamide in presence or absence of a Na+ in its allosteric site.ConclusionThe mathematical model presented within this study describes the experimental data regarding the Na+-sensitivity of hH3R in an excellent manner. Although the present study is focused onto the Na+-sensitivity of the hH3R, the resulting equations, describing Na+- and ligand-binding to a GPCR, can be used for all other ion-sensitive GPCRs.

Ergoline‐Derived Inverse Agonists of the Human H3 Receptor for the Treatment of Narcolepsy

Ergoline derivative (6aR,9R)-4-(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl)-N-phenyl-9-(pyrrolidine-1-carbonyl)-6,6a,8,9-tetrahydroindolo[4,3-fg]quinoline-7(4H)-carboxamide (1), a CXCR3 antagonist, also inhibits human histamine H3 receptors (H3R) and represents a structurally novel H3R inverse agonist chemotype. It displays favorable pharmacokinetic and in vitro safety profiles, and served as a lead compound in a program to explore ergoline derivatives as potential drug candidates for the treatment of narcolepsy. A key objective of this work was to enhance the safety and efficacy profiles of 1, while minimizing its duration of action to mitigate the episodes of insomnia documented with previously reported clinical candidates during the night following administration. Modifications to the ergoline core at positions 1, 6 and 8 were systematically investigated, and derivative 23 (1-((4aR,8R,9aR)-8-(hydroxymethyl)-1-(2-((R)-2-methylpyrrolidin-1-yl)ethyl)-4,4a,7,8,9,9a-hexahydroindolo[1,14-fg]quinolin-6(1H)-yl)ethanone) was identified as a promising lead compound. Derivative 23 has a desirable pharmacokinetic profile and demonstrated efficacy by enhancing brain concentrations of tele-methylhistamine, a major histamine metabolite. This validates the potential of the ergoline scaffold to serve as a template for the development of H3R inverse agonists.

Histamine in the brain.

Brain histamine promotes wakefulness and orchestrates disparate behaviors and homeostatic functions. Recent evidence suggests that aberrant histamine signaling in the brain may also be a key factor in addictive behaviors and degenerative disease such as Parkinson's diseases and multiple sclerosis. The intent of this research Topic is to provide an overview of the recent advances in the understanding of the many functions of brain histamine and to propose neurobiological substrates and mechanisms of action that might explain the reasons why the histaminergic system is a potential target for therapeutic interventions. This may justify the search for new histaminergic compounds. The authors that contributed to this e-book offered several approaches to the study of brain histamine function. Tomasch et al. (2012) synthesized a novel fluorescent ligand of the human histamine H3 receptor with potential to be used as pharmacological tools for visualization in different tissues. Shibuya et al. (2012) by using positron emission tomography (PET) in the human brain examined whether the levels of neuronal release of histamine might change binding of [(11)C]doxepin to the H1 receptors (a standard method for measuring H1 distribution) under the influence of physiological stimuli. Histamine acts as a modulator of several neurotransmitters in the brain and its role in promoting wakefulness has for long overshadowed other important functions. In fact, histamine signaling controls feeding behavior in a complex fashion and it has been considered for long a satiety system as brain histamine decreases the drive to consume food. In their paper, Ishizuka and Yamatodani (2012) demonstrated the fine regulation of histamine release during feeding and in taste perception. Furthermore, they showed that histamine neurons respond to both mechanical and chemical sensory input from the oral cavity, as may be expected for a danger detection system. Brain histamine is crucial for motivation and goal-directed behaviors as reviewed by Torrealba et al. (2012). The authors evaluated recent works demonstrating that histamine is differentially involved in the appetitive, food anticipatory responses, and in food consumption, suggesting that it may have an important role in abnormal appetites not only for food but also for substances of abuse. Indeed, preclinical studies on both rats and mice are hinting at a possible role of the histaminergic system in alcohol consumption, as blockade of the H3 receptor (which regulates histamine and other neurotransmitters' release), decreases alcohol drinking in several behavioral tasks, like operant alcohol administration and “drinking in the dark” paradigm (Nuutinen et al., 2012). However, the authors caution that despite the evidence that the H3 receptor is a key element in alcohol drinking and place preference, the role of histamine in these behaviors is poorly understood and deserves further investigation. The importance of H3 receptor signaling in the brain to acquire and store short- and long- term memories has been documented extensively. However a limited number of studies have investigated the role of the H3 receptor in anxiety. By using novel behavioral test, Abuhamdah et al. (2012) present their results with selective agonist and antagonist for the H3 receptor providing new evidence that the H3R may have a role in fear-induced avoidance responses, but not in anxiety. In addition, Vohora and Bhowmik (2012) provided comprehensive neurobiological/neurochemical evidence of the role of histaminergic H3 receptor antagonists in the physiopathology of cognitive dysfunction and motor impairments. Dysfunctions of the histaminergic system may also contribute to the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis and its murine model of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, although the role of the different histamine receptors is complex and still controversial (Passani and Ballerini, 2012). Histaminergic neurons are sensitive to CO2, Yanovsky et al. (2012) showed the complex mechanism of histaminergic neuron activation by acidification in murine brain slices. Their results contribute to understand the neuronal mechanisms controling acid/CO2-induced arousal in hepatic encephalopathy and obstructive sleep apnoea. Recent evidence summarized by Blandina et al. (2012) suggest that such a complexity of the brain histamine system may be served by different neuronal subpopulations that are recruited at different times during the unfolding of a specific behavior. Histamine neurons send broad projections within the CNS that are organized in functionally distinct circuits impinging on different brain regions. This implies independent functions of subsets of histamine neurons according to their terminal projections and their selective participation in different aspects of behavioral responses. In conclusion, we believe that this Research Topic offered an inter-disciplinary forum that improved our current knowledge of the role of brain histamine. It also provided the necessary drive to stimulate innovation in clinical practice to manage and treat neurological disorders.