Comparison of the effects of a selective muscarinic receptor antagonist and hyoscine (scopolamine) on motion sickness, skin conductance and heart rate.

AIMS Hyoscine (scopolamine), which is effective in the prophylaxis of motion sickness, shows similar binding affinities to all of the five known muscarinic receptor sub-types. The effectiveness of hyoscine was compared with zamifenacin (UK-76654), which binds selectively to the muscarinic M3 and m5 receptors. METHODS Eighteen subjects received hyoscine hydrobromide 0.6 mg, zamifenacin 20 mg, or placebo (double-blind cross-over design). Sessions were 1 week apart and the drug (oral) was given 90 min prior to a motion sickness test. Motion sickness was elicited by cross-coupled stimulation on a turntable. The rotational velocity was incremented by 2 degrees s-1 every 30 s, and a sequence (seq) of eight head movements of 45 degrees was completed every 30 s. Motion tolerance was assessed as the number of sequences of head movement required to achieve moderate nausea. Pulse rate was recorded before and at 1 and 2 h after drug administration. Skin conductance activity in the frequency band 0.005-0.48 Hz, an index of sweat gland activity, was measured using Ag/AgCl electrodes on the palmar surfaces of fingers and across the forehead. RESULTS Both zamifenacin and hyoscine produced an increase in tolerance to the motion challenge (P < 0.01) with no significant difference between the two drugs (5.0 +/- 1.6 vs 5.7 +/- 1.6 seqs. respectively, mean +/- s.e.mean). Compared with placebo or zamifenacin, pulse rate fell following hyoscine administration (9 beats min-1, P < 0.01). Skin conductance was reduced following hyoscine compared with zamifenacin or placebo (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that compounds with selective M3 and/or m5 antagonism possess activity against motion sickness. Antagonism at these receptors may be the basis of the anti-motion sickness action of hyoscine.

[1]  J F Golding,et al.  A comparison of the nauseogenic potential of low-frequency vertical versus horizontal linear oscillation. , 1992, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[2]  A. Brambilla,et al.  Muscarinic M3 receptors mediate secretion from sweat glands in the rat. , 1991, Pharmacological research.

[3]  J. Lucot,et al.  Idaverine, an M2- vs. M3-selective muscarinic antagonist, does not prevent motion sickness in cats , 1991, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[4]  G. Barnes A procedure for the analysis of nystagmus and other eye movements. , 1981, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[5]  S. Nahorski The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 8th Edition , 1990 .

[6]  G R Barnes,et al.  The effect on motion sickness and oculomotor function of GR 38032F, a 5-HT3-receptor antagonist with anti-emetic properties. , 1989, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[7]  Golding Jf,et al.  Phasic skin conductance activity and motion sickness. , 1992 .

[8]  L. Goodman,et al.  The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics , 1941 .

[9]  J F Golding,et al.  Phasic skin conductance activity and motion sickness. , 1992, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[10]  G. Barnes,et al.  Predictive velocity estimation in the pursuit reflex response to pseudo‐random and step displacement stimuli in man. , 1987, The Journal of physiology.

[11]  N. Birdsall,et al.  Muscarinic receptor subtypes. , 1990, Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology.

[12]  M. Nordin,et al.  Sympathetic discharges in the human supraorbital nerve and their relation to sudo‐ and vasomotor responses. , 1990, The Journal of physiology.