PCS1055

PCS1055 : Antagonist of M4 receptor

Structure

Information

  • CHRM4
  • Antagonist
  • up to 300 nM
  • Reviewer recommended concentration: 100 nM

In Vitro Validations

Uniprot ID: P08173
Target Class: GPCR
Target SubClass: Muscarinic receptor
Potency: Ki
Potency Value: 6.53 ± 0.797 nM
Potency Assay: Competitive radioligand binding assays
PDB ID for probe-target interaction (3D structure): --
Target aliases:
Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M4, CHRM4, ACM4_ ...

DOI Reference: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2016.04.022

In Cell Validations

In Vivo Data

Off-Target Selectivity Assesments

Potency assay (off target): Selectivity within family: 130 fold to M1, 31.2 fold to M2, 426 fold to M3, 1580 fold to M5 in in vitro assay and 255-, 69.1-, 342-and >1000-over the M1-, M2-, M3-and M5 receptors, in a functional assay (GTP-γ-[35S] binding assays in the presence of 100 μM agonist,)
I have extra information to add

SERP ratings and comments


SERP Ratings

In Cell Rating
In Model Organisms

SERP Comments:

This is a reasonably selective, and potent (6nM) M4 antagonist - selectivity for M4 is difficult to achieve, so this in itself makes this worth considering. It is well characterised pharmacologically and is a neutral competitive antagonist at the M4 receptor. It shows 30-fold selectivity vs M2, and better against the other muscarinic receptors. However, there are two reasons I cannot unambiguously recommend it as an in vitro probe - one is the acetylcholinesterase activity (20-fold selective, 120nM), and the second is the complete lack of broader selectivity information. The paper somewhat unhelpfully states: "Further bio-activity profiling studies conducted during our studies with PCS1055 did not note any significant potency or activity across a panel of other targets (data not shown). I would advise using it as a secondary probe alongside another compound - see below. In vivo the compound shows reasonable exposure; however its brain exposure at the reported 30mpk ip dose is too low to be useful as described in the paper, probably due to efflux (brain:plasma unbound ratio is <<1). In the absence of other probes, my recommendation would be using this compound alongside one of the probes in this publication from Vanderbilt- https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.1c00363 - the lead compound is potent and more selective vs M2, but does have a liability against sigma-1.

(last updated: 17 Nov 2023 )

SERP+ Ratings

In Cell Rating
In Model Organisms

SERP+ Comments:

This could be a good in cell probe for the target, however, insufficient selectivity data against unrelated targets has been presented (although there is mention of this being conducted). At the dose tested in vivo, adequate brain exposure is not attained (< cellular IC50) but peripheral exposure greater than/equal to the IC50 is achieved for at least 2 hours. Additionally, no pharmacodynamic data has been reported for the probe. A more recent publication reports probe VU6021625, which may be better suited to the study of M4 receptors since it has been more comprehensively tested for selectivity and in vivo pharmacodynamic effects, and exhibits better CNS penetration.

(last updated: 14 Oct 2025 )