Pharmacological inhibitors are frequently used to identify the receptors, receptor subtypes, and associated signaling pathways involved in physiological cell responses. Based on the effects of such inhibitors conclusions are drawn about the involvement of their assumed target or lack thereof. While such inhibitors can be useful tools for a better physiological understanding, their uncritical use can lead to incorrect conclusions. This article reviews the concept of inhibitor selectivity and its implication for cell physiology. Specifically, we discuss the implications of using inhibitor vs. activator approaches, issues of direct vs. indirect pathway modulation, implications of inverse agonism and biased signaling, and those of orthosteric vs. allosteric, competitive vs. noncompetitive, and reversible vs. irreversible inhibition. Additional problems can result from inconsistent estimates of inhibitor potency and differences in potency between cell-free systems and intact cells. These concepts are illustrated by several examples of inhibitors displaying affinity for related but distinct targets or even unrelated targets. Of note, many of the issues being addressed are also applicable to genetic inhibition strategies. The main practical conclusion following from these concepts is that investigators should be critical in the choice of inhibitor, its concentrations, and its mode of application. When this advice is adhered to, small-molecule pharmacological inhibitors can be important experimental tools in the hand of physiologists.
Keywords: SQ22,536; SR 59,230A; U 73,122; amiloride; amiodarone; biased signaling; competitive antagonism; functional antagonism; inverse agonism; selectivity; suramin.
Copyright © 2015 the American Physiological Society.