Synopsis Classical pharmacological studies on animals and isolated animal tissues showed that the principal actions of parenterally-administered<unk>  included raising blood-pressure, dilating the pupil, and constricting peripheral blood vessels. There is now ample evidence(what evidence?) that<unk>  produces most of its biological effects by acting as an agonist (i.e. stimulating) at adrenergic receptors, with a distinct preference for the α1 over the α2 sub-type. However, the potency of<unk>  at these receptors is relatively low (i.e. relatively large concentrations of the drug are required to activate them). The potency of<unk>  at adrenergic receptors of the β-class (regardless of sub-type) is much lower than at α-receptors. There is some evidence that<unk>  also has weak activity at 5-HT receptors, and that it interacts with TAAR1 (trace amine-associated receptor 1). In common with virtually all other simple phenylethanolamines (β-hydroxy-phenethylamines), the (R)-(−)-, or l-, enantiomer of<unk>  is more potent than the (S)-(+)-, or d-, enantiomer in most, but not all preparations studied. However, the majority of studies have been conducted with a racemic mixture of the two enantiomers. Since the details regarding such variables as test species, receptor source, route of administration, drug concentration, and stereochemical composition are important but often incomplete in other Reviews and Abstracts of research publications, many are provided in the more technical review below, in order to support as fully as possible the broad statements made in this Synopsis. Pharmacology research Pharmacological studies on<unk>  date back to the late 1920s, when it was observed that injected<unk>  raised blood pressure, constricted peripheral blood vessels, dilated pupils, stimulated the uterus, and relaxed the intestines in experimental animals. Representative of this early work is the paper by Tainter and Seidenfeld, who were the first researchers to systematically compare the different effects of the two<unk>  enantiomers, d- and l-<unk> , as well as of the racemate, d,l-synephrine, in various animal assays. In experiments on anesthetized cats, Tainter and Seidenfeld confirmed earlier reports of the increase in blood pressure produced by intravenous doses of<unk> , showing that the median pressor doses for the isomers were: l-synephrine: 0.5 mg/kg; d,l-synephrine: 1.0 mg/kg; and d-synephrine: 2–20 mg/kg. These effects lasted 2–3 minutes, peaking at ~30 seconds after administration. l-Synephrine was thus the more potent enantiomer, with about 1/60x the potency of the standard pressor l-epinephrine in the same assay. A later study, by Lands and Grant, showed that a dose of ~0.6 mg/kg of racemic<unk> , given intravenously to anesthetized dogs, produced a rise in blood pressure of 34 mmHg lasting 5–10 minutes, and estimated that this pressor activity was about 1/300x that of epinephrine. Using cats and dogs, Tainter and Seidenfeld observed that neither d- nor l-synephrine caused any changes in the tone of normal bronchi, in situ, even at "maximum" doses. Furthermore, the marked brocho-constriction produced by injections of histamine was not reversed by either l-synephrine or d,l-synephrine. In experiments with isolated sheep carotid artery, d-, l- and d,l-synephrine all showed some vasoconstrictor activity: l-synephrine was the most potent, producing strong contractions at a concentration of 1:10000. d-Synephrine was about 1/2 as potent as the l-isomer, but d,l-synephrine (which would have been expected to have a potency of 1/2 that of l-synephrine even if the d-isomer were completely inactive) did not produce significant and irregular contractions until a concentration of 1:2500had been reached, implying an inhibitory interaction between the two enantiomers. Qualitatively similar results were obtained in a rabbit ear preparation: 25 mg l-synephrine produced significant (50%) vasoconstriction, while the same concentration of d-synephrine elicited essentially no response. In contrast, d,l-synephrine did not produce any constriction up to 25 mg, but 25 – 50 mg caused a relaxation of the blood vessels, which again suggested that the d-isomer might be inhibiting the action of the l-isomer. Experiments on strips of rabbit duodenum showed that l-synephrine caused a modest reduction in contractions at a concentration of 1:17000, but that the effects of the d- and d,l- forms were much weaker. Racemic<unk> , given intramuscularly, or by instillation, was found to significantly reduce the inflammation caused by instillation of mustard oil into the eyes of rabbits. Subcutaneous injection of racemic<unk>  into rabbits was reported to cause a large rise in blood sugar. In experiments on anesthetized cats, Papp and Szekeres found that<unk>  (stereochemistry unspecified) raised the thresholds for auricular and ventricular fibrillation, an indication of anti-arrhythmic properties. Evidence that<unk>  might have some central effects comes from the research of Song and co-workers, who studied the effects of<unk>  in mouse models of anti-depressant activity. These researchers observed that oral doses of 0.3 – 10 mg/kg of racemic<unk>  were effective in shortening the duration of immobility produced in the assays, but did not cause any changes in spontaneous motor activity in separate tests. This characteristic immobility could be counteracted by the pre-administration of prazosin. Subsequent experiments using the individual enanatiomers of<unk>  revealed that although the d-isomer significantly reduced the duration of immobility in the tail suspension test, at an oral dose of 3 mg/kg, the l-isomer had no effect at the same dose. In mice pre-treated with reserpine, an oral dose of 0.3 mg/kg d-synephrine significantly reversed the hypothermia, while l-synephrine required a dose of 1 mg/kg to be effective. Experiments with slices of cerebral cortex taken from rat brain showed that d-synephrine inhibited the uptake of 3H-norepinephrine with an IC50 = 5.8 μM; l-synephrine was less potent (IC50 = 13.5 μM). d-Synephrine also competitively inhibited the binding of nisoxetine to rat brain cortical slices, with a Ki = 4.5 μM; l-synephrine was less potent (Ki = 8.2 μM). In experiments on the release of 3H-norepinephrine from rat brain cortical slices, however, the l-isomer of<unk>  was a more potent enhancer of the release (EC50 = 8.2 μM) than the d-isomer (EC50 = 12.3 μM). This enhanced release by l-synephrine was blocked by nisoxetine. Burgen and Iversen, examining the effect of a broad range of phenethylamine-based drugs on 14C-norepinephrine-uptake in the isolated rat heart, observed that racemic<unk>  was a relatively weak inhibitor (IC50 = 0.12 μM) of the uptake. Another receptor-oriented study by Wikberg revealed that<unk>  (stereochemistry unspecified) was a more potent agonist at guinea pig aorta α1 receptors (pD2 = 4.81) than at ileum α2 receptors (pD2 = 4.48), with a relative affinity ratio of α2/α1 = 0.10. Although clearly indicating a selectivity of<unk>  for α1 receptors, its potency at this receptor sub-class is still relatively low, in comparison with that of phenylephrine (pD2 at α1 = 6.32). Brown and co-workers examined the effects of the individual enantiomers of<unk>  on α1 receptors in rat aorta, and on α2 receptors in rabbit saphenous vein. In the aorta preparation, l-synephrine gave a pD2 = 5.38 (potency relative to norepinephrine = 1/1000), while d-synephrine had a pD2 = 3.50 (potency relative to norepinephrine = 1/50000); in comparison, l-phenylephrine had pD2 = 7.50 (potency relative to norepinephrine ≃ 1/6). No antagonism of norepinephrine was produced by concentrations of l-synephrine up to 10−6 M. In the rabbit saphenous assay, the pD2 of l-synephrine was 4.36 (potency relative to norepinephrine ≃ 1/1700), and that of d-synephrine was 2 = 5.45 (potency relative to norepinephrine ≃ 1/140). No antagonism of norepinephrine was produced by concentrations of l-synephrine up to 10−5 M. A study of the effects of<unk>  (stereochemistry unspecified) on strips of guinea pig aorta and on the field-stimulated guinea pig ileum showed that<unk>  had an agonist potency of −logKa = 3.75 in the aorta assay. In comparison, epinephrine had a potency of −logKa = 5.70. There was no significant effect on the ileum at<unk>  concentrations up to about 2 × 10−4 M, indicating selectivity for the α1 receptor, but relatively low potency. In binding experiments with central adrenergic receptors, using a preparation from rat cerebral cortex, l-synephrine had pIC50 = 3.35, and d-synephrine had pIC50 = 2.42 in competition against 3H-prazosin (standard α1 ligand); against 3H-yohimbine (standard α2 ligand), l-synephrine showed a pIC50 = 5.01, and d-synephrine showed a pIC50 = 4.17. Experiments conducted by Hibino and co-workers also showed that<unk>  (stereochemistry unspecified) produced a dose-dependent constriction of isolated rat aorta strips, in the concentration range 10−5–3 × 10−6 M. This constriction was found to be competitively antagonized by prazosin (a standard α1 antagonist) and ketanserin, with prazosin being the more potent antagonist (pA2 = 9.38, vs pA2 = 8.23 for ketanserin).<unk>  constrictions were also antagonized by BRL-15,572, but not by SB-216,641 (used here as a selective 5-HT1B antagonist), or by propranolol (a common β antagonist). In studies on guinea pig atria and trachea, Jordan and co-workers also found that<unk>  had negligible activity on β1 and β2 receptors, being about 40000x less potent than norepinephrine. Experiments with cultured white fat cells from several animal species, including human, by Carpéné and co-workers showed that racemic<unk>  produced lipolytic effects, but only at high concentrations (0.1-1 mM). The potency, expressed in terms of pD2 of<unk>  in these species was as follows: rat:
Synephrine
Norepinephrine
Norepinephrine 
Dopamine
Dopamine 
Adrenomedullin
Catecholamine
Octopamine