Delineation of agonist binding to the human histamine H4 receptor using mutational analysis, homology modeling, and ab initio calculations

Structural insights into the agonists binding and receptor selectivity of human histamine H4 receptor

Histamine is a biogenic amine that participates in allergic and inflammatory processes by stimulating histamine receptors. The histamine H4 receptor (H4R) is a potential therapeutic target for chronic inflammatory diseases such as asthma and atopic dermatitis. Here, we show the cryo-electron microscopy structures of the H4R-Gq complex bound with an endogenous agonist histamine or the selective agonist imetit bound in the orthosteric binding pocket. The structures demonstrate binding mode of histamine agonists and that the subtype-selective agonist binding causes conformational changes in Phe3447.39, which, in turn, form the "aromatic slot". The results provide insights into the molecular underpinnings of the agonism of H4R and subtype selectivity of histamine receptors, and show that the H4R structures may be valuable in rational drug design of drugs targeting the H4R.

Abolishing Dopamine D2long/D3 Receptor Affinity of Subtype-Selective Carbamoylguanidine-Type Histamine H2 Receptor Agonists

3-(2-Amino-4-methylthiazol-5-yl)propyl-substituted carbamoylguanidines are potent, subtype-selective histamine H₂ receptor (H₂R) agonists, but their applicability as pharmacological tools to elucidate the largely unknown H₂R functions in the central nervous system (CNS) is compromised by their concomitant high affinity toward dopamine D₂-like receptors (especially to the D₃R). To improve the selectivity, a series of novel carbamoylguanidine-type ligands containing various heterocycles, spacers, and side residues were rationally designed, synthesized, and tested in binding and/or functional assays at H_1-4 and D_2long/3 receptors. This study revealed a couple of selective candidates (among others 31 and 47), and the most promising ones were screened at several off-target receptors, showing good selectivities. Docking studies suggest that the amino acid residues (3.28, 3.32, E2.49, E2.51, 5.42, and 7.35) are responsible for the different affinities at the H₂- and D_2long/3-receptors. These results provide a solid base for the exploration of the H₂R functions in the brain in further studies.

Novel potent (dihydro)benzofuranyl piperazines as human histamine receptor ligands - Functional characterization and modeling studies on H3 and H4 receptors

Histamine acts through four different receptors (H₁R-H₄R), the H₃R and H₄R being the most explored in the last years as drug targets. The H₃R is a potential target to treat narcolepsy, Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, schizophrenia and several other CNS-related conditions, while H₄R blockade leads to anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. Our group has been exploring the dihydrobenzofuranyl-piperazines (LINS01 series) as human H₃R/H₄R ligands as potential drug candidates. In the present study, a set of 12 compounds were synthesized from adequate (dihydro)benzofuran synthons through simple reactions with corresponding piperazines, giving moderate to high yields. Four compounds (1b, 1f, 1g and 1h) showed high hH₃R affinity (pK_i > 7), compound 1h being the most potent (pK_i 8.4), and compound 1f showed the best efficiency (pKi 8.2, LE 0.53, LLE 5.85). BRET-based assays monitoring Gα_i activity indicated that the compounds are potent antagonists. Only one compound (2c, pK_i 7.1) presented high affinity for hH₄R. In contrast to what was observed for hH₃R, it showed partial agonist activity. Docking experiments indicated that bulky substituents occupy a hydrophobic pocket in hH₃R, while the N-allyl group forms favorable interactions with hydrophobic residues in the TM2, 3 and 7, increasing the selectivity towards hH₃R. Additionally, the importance of the indole NH in the interaction with Glu5.46 from hH₄R was confirmed by the modeling results, explaining the affinity and agonistic activity of compound 2c. The data reported in this work represent important findings for the rational design of future compounds for hH₃R and hH₄R.

4-(3-Aminoazetidin-1-yl)pyrimidin-2-amines as High-Affinity Non-imidazole Histamine H3 Receptor Agonists with in Vivo Central Nervous System Activity

Despite the high diversity of histamine H3 receptor (H3R) antagonist/inverse agonist structures, partial or full H3R agonists have typically been imidazole derivatives. An in-house screening campaign intriguingly afforded the non-imidazole 4-(3-azetidin-1-yl)pyrimidin-2-amine 11b as a partial H3R agonist. Here, the design, synthesis, and structure-activity relationships of 11b analogues are described. This series yields several non-imidazole full agonists with potencies varying with the alkyl substitution pattern on the basic amine following the in vitro evaluation of H3R agonism using a cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element-luciferase reporter gene assay. The key compound VUF16839 (14d) combines nanomolar on-target activity (pKi = 8.5, pEC50 = 9.5) with weak activity on cytochrome P450 enzymes and good metabolic stability. The proposed H3R binding mode of 14d indicates key interactions similar to those attained by histamine. In vivo evaluation of 14d in a social recognition test in mice revealed an amnesic effect at 5 mg/kg intraperitoneally. The excellent in vitro and in vivo pharmacological profiles and the non-imidazole structure of 14d make it a promising tool compound in H3R research.

Basal Histamine H4 Receptor Activation: Agonist Mimicry by the Diphenylalanine Motif

Histamine H4 receptor (H4 R) orthologues are G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that exhibit species-dependent basal activity. In contrast to the basally inactive mouse H4 R (mH4 R), human H4 R (hH4 R) shows a high degree of basal activity. We have performed long-timescale molecular dynamics simulations and rigidity analyses on wild-type hH4 R, the experimentally characterized hH4 R variants S179M, F169V, F169V+S179M, F168A, and on mH4 R to investigate the molecular nature of the differential basal activity. H4 R variant-dependent differences between essential motifs of GPCR activation and structural stabilities correlate with experimentally determined basal activities and provide a molecular explanation for the differences in basal activation. Strikingly, during the MD simulations, F16945.55 dips into the orthosteric binding pocket only in the case of hH4 R, thus adopting the role of an agonist and contributing to the stabilization of the active state. The results shed new light on the molecular mechanism of basal H4 R activation that are of importance for other GPCRs.

Light-Switchable Antagonists for the Histamine H1 Receptor at the Isolated Guinea Pig Ileum

The histamine H₁ G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) plays an important role in allergy and inflammation. Existing drugs that address the H₁ receptor differ in their chemical structure, pharmacology, and side effects. Light-controllable spatial and temporal activity regulation of photochromic H₁ ligands may contribute to a better mechanistic understanding and the development of improved correlations between ligand structure and pharmacologic effects. We report photochromic H₁ receptor ligands, which were investigated in an organ-pharmacological assay. Initially, five photochromic azobenzene derivatives of reported dual H₁ -H₄ receptor antagonists were designed, synthesized, photochemically characterized, and organ-pharmacologically tested on the isolated guinea pig ileum. Among them, one compound [trans-19: (Z)-1-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-N-(4-((E)-phenyldiazenyl)phenyl)methanimine] retained the antagonistic activity of its non-photochromic lead, and trans-cis isomerization by irradiation induced a fourfold difference in the pharmacological response. Further structural optimization resulted in two bathochromically shifted derivatives of 19 [NO₂ -substituted 35 {(Z)-1-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)-N-(4-((E)-(4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl)phenyl)methanimine} and SO₃ ^- -substituted 41 {4-((E)-(4-(((Z)-(4-chlorophenyl)(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)methylene)amino)phenyl)diazenyl)benzenesulfonate}], which do not require the use of UV light for photoisomerization and which also have improved solubility and show reduced tissue impairment. The trans isomers of both compounds showed a remarkable increase in antagonistic activity relative to their lead trans-19; furthermore, a 46-fold difference in activity on the isolated guinea pig ileum was observed between trans- and cis-35.

Aminergic GPCR-Ligand Interactions: A Chemical and Structural Map of Receptor Mutation Data

The aminergic family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) plays an important role in various diseases and represents a major drug discovery target class. Structure determination of all major aminergic subfamilies has enabled structure-based ligand design for these receptors. Site-directed mutagenesis data provides an invaluable complementary source of information for elucidating the structural determinants of binding of different ligand chemotypes. The current study provides a comparative analysis of 6692 mutation data points on 34 aminergic GPCR subtypes, covering the chemical space of 540 unique ligands from mutagenesis experiments and information from experimentally determined structures of 52 distinct aminergic receptor-ligand complexes. The integrated analysis enables detailed investigation of structural receptor-ligand interactions and assessment of the transferability of combined binding mode and mutation data across ligand chemotypes and receptor subtypes. An overview is provided of the possibilities and limitations of using mutation data to guide the design of novel aminergic receptor ligands.

Highly Potent, Stable, and Selective Dimeric Hetarylpropylguanidine-Type Histamine H2 Receptor Agonists

On the basis of the long-known prototypic pharmacophore 3-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)propylguanidine (SK&F 91486, 2), monomeric, homodimeric, and heterodimeric bisalkylguanidine-type histamine H2 receptor (H2R) agonists with various alkyl spacers were synthesized. Aiming at increased H2R selectivity of the ligands, the imidazol-4-yl moiety was replaced by imidazol-1-yl, 2-aminothiazol-5-yl or 2-amino-4-methylthiazol-5-yl according to a bioisosteric approach. All compounds turned out to be partial or full agonists at the h/gp/rH2R. The most potent analogue, the thiazole-type heterodimeric ligand 63 (UR-Po461), was a partial agonist (Emax = 88%) and 250 times more potent than histamine (pEC50: 8.56 vs 6.16, gpH2R, atrium). The homodimeric structures 56 (UR-Po395) and 58 (UR-Po448) exhibited the highest hH2R affinities (pKi: 7.47, 7.33) in binding studies. Dimeric amino(methyl)thiazole derivatives, such as 58, generated an increased hH2R selectivity compared to the monomeric analogues, e.g., 139 (UR-Po444). Although monomeric ligands showed up lower affinities and potencies at the H2R, compounds with a short alkylic side chain like 129 (UR-Po194) proved to be highly affine hH4R ligands.

Molecular Modelling Approaches for the Analysis of Histamine Receptors and Their Interaction with Ligands

Several experimental techniques to analyse histamine receptors are available, e.g. pharmacological characterisation of known or new compounds by different types of assays or mutagenesis studies. To obtain insights into the histamine receptors on a molecular and structural level, crystal structures have to be determined and molecular modelling studies have to be performed. It is widely accepted to generate homology models of the receptor of interest based on an appropriate crystal structure as a template and to refine the resulting models by molecular dynamic simulations. A lot of modelling techniques, e.g. docking, QSAR or interaction fingerprint methods, are used to predict binding modes of ligands and pharmacological data, e.g. affinity or even efficacy. However, within the last years, molecular dynamic simulations got more and more important: First of all, molecular dynamic simulations are very helpful to refine the binding mode of a ligand to a histamine receptor, obtained by docking studies. Furthermore, with increasing computational performance it got possible to simulate complete binding pathways of ions or ligands from the aqueous extracellular phase into the allosteric or orthosteric binding pocket of histamine receptors.

Dibenzo[b,f][1,4]oxazepines and dibenzo[b,e]oxepines: Influence of the chlorine substitution pattern on the pharmacology at the H1R, H4R, 5-HT2AR and other selected GPCRs

Inspired by VUF6884 (7-Chloro-11-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)dibenzo[b,f][1,4]oxazepine), reported as a dual H₁/H₄ receptor ligand (pK_i: 8.11 (human H₁R (hH₁R)), 7.55 (human H₄R (hH₄R))), four known and 28 new oxazepine and related oxepine derivatives were synthesised and pharmacologically characterized at histamine receptors and selected aminergic GPCRs. In contrast to the oxazepine series, within the oxepine series, the new compounds showed high affinity to the hH₁R (pK_i: 6.8-8.7), but no or moderate affinity to the hH₄R (pK_i:≤5.3). For one oxepine derivative (1-(2-Chloro-6,11-dihydrodibenzo[b,e]oxepin-11-yl)-4-methylpiperazine), the enantiomers were separated and the R-enantiomer was identified as the eutomer at the hH₁R (pK_i: 8.83 (R), 7.63 (S)) and the guinea-pig H₁R (gpH₁R) (pK_i: 8.82 (R), 7.41 (S)). Molecular dynamic studies suggest that the tricyclic core of the compounds is bound in a similar mode into the binding pocket, as described for doxepine in the hH₁R crystal structure. Moreover, docking studies of all oxepine derivatives at the hH₁R indicate that the oxygen and the position of the chlorine in the tricyclic core determines, if the R- or the S-enantiomer is the eutomer. For some of the oxazepines and oxepines the affinity to other aminergic GPCRs is in the same range as to hH₁R or hH₄R, thus, those compounds have to be classified as dirty drugs. However, one oxazepine derivative (3,7-Dichloro-11-(4-methylpiperazin-1-yl)dibenzo[b,f][1,4]oxazepine was identified as dual hH₁/h5-HT_2A receptor ligand (pK_i: 9.23 (hH₁R), 8.74 (h5-HT_2AR), ≤7 at other analysed GPCRs), whereas one oxepine derivative (1-(3,8-Dichloro-6,11-dihydrodibenzo[b,e]oxepin-11-yl)-4-methylpiperazine) was identified as selective hH₁R antagonist (pK_i: 8.44 (hH₁R), ≤6.7 at other analyzed GPCRs). Thus, the pharmacological results suggest that the oxazepine/oxepine moiety and additionally the chlorine substitution pattern toggles receptor selectivity and specificity.

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.

Structure-based virtual screening for fragment-like ligands of the G protein-coupled histamine H4 receptor

Structure-based virtual screening using H₁R- and β₂R-based histamine H₄R homology models identified 9 fragments with an affinity ranging from 0.14 to 6.3 μm for H₄R.

Histamine H4 receptor ligands: future applications and state of art

Histamine is a chemical transmitter found practically in whole organism and exerts its effects through the interaction with H1 to H4 histaminergic receptors. Specifically, H4 receptors are found mainly in immune cells and blood-forming tissues, thus are involved in inflammatory and immune processes, as well as some actions in central nervous system. Therefore, H4 receptor ligands can have applications in the treatment of chronic inflammatory and immune diseases and may be novel therapeutic option in these conditions. Several H4 receptor ligands have been described from early 2000's until nowadays, being imidazole, indolecarboxamide, 2-aminopyrimidine, quinazoline, and quinoxaline scaffolds the most explored and discussed in this review. Moreover, several studies of molecular modeling using homology models of H4 receptor and QSAR data of the ligands are summarized. The increasing and promising therapeutic applications are leading these compounds to clinical trials, which probably will be part of the next generation of blockbuster drugs.

A structural chemogenomics analysis of aminergic GPCRs: lessons for histamine receptor ligand design

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Chemogenomics focuses on the discovery of new connections between chemical and biological space leading to the discovery of new protein targets and biologically active molecules. G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a particularly interesting protein family for chemogenomics studies because there is an overwhelming amount of ligand binding affinity data available. The increasing number of aminergic GPCR crystal structures now for the first time allows the integration of chemogenomics studies with high-resolution structural analyses of GPCR-ligand complexes.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

In this study, we have combined ligand affinity data, receptor mutagenesis studies, and amino acid sequence analyses to high-resolution structural analyses of (hist)aminergic GPCR-ligand interactions. This integrated structural chemogenomics analysis is used to more accurately describe the molecular and structural determinants of ligand affinity and selectivity in different key binding regions of the crystallized aminergic GPCRs, and histamine receptors in particular.

KEY RESULTS

Our investigations highlight interesting correlations and differences between ligand similarity and ligand binding site similarity of different aminergic receptors. Apparent discrepancies can be explained by combining detailed analysis of crystallized or predicted protein-ligand binding modes, receptor mutation studies, and ligand structure-selectivity relationships that identify local differences in essential pharmacophore features in the ligand binding sites of different receptors.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

We have performed structural chemogenomics studies that identify links between (hist)aminergic receptor ligands and their binding sites and binding modes. This knowledge can be used to identify structure-selectivity relationships that increase our understanding of ligand binding to (hist)aminergic receptors and hence can be used in future GPCR ligand discovery and design.

Detailed analysis of biased histamine H₄ receptor signalling by JNJ 7777120 analogues

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The histamine H₄ receptor, originally thought to signal merely through Gαi proteins, has recently been shown to also recruit and signal via β-arrestin2. Following the discovery that the reference antagonist indolecarboxamide JNJ 7777120 appears to be a partial agonist in β-arrestin2 recruitment, we have identified additional biased hH₄R ligands that preferentially couple to Gαi or β-arrestin2 proteins. In this study, we explored ligand and receptor regions that are important for biased hH₄R signalling.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We evaluated a series of 48 indolecarboxamides with subtle structural differences for their ability to induce hH₄R-mediated Gαi protein signalling or β-arrestin2 recruitment. Subsequently, a Fingerprints for Ligands and Proteins three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis correlated intrinsic activity values with structural ligand requirements. Moreover, a hH₄R homology model was used to identify receptor regions important for biased hH₄R signalling.

KEY RESULTS

One indolecarboxamide (75) with a nitro substituent on position R7 of the aromatic ring displayed an equal preference for the Gαi and β-arrestin2 pathway and was classified as unbiased hH₄R ligand. The other 47 indolecarboxamides were β-arrestin2-biased agonists. Intrinsic activities of the unbiased as well as β-arrestin2-biased indolecarboxamides to induce β-arrestin2 recruitment could be correlated with different ligand features and hH₄R regions.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Small structural modifications resulted in diverse intrinsic activities for unbiased (75) and β-arrestin2-biased indolecarboxamides. Analysis of ligand and receptor features revealed efficacy hotspots responsible for biased-β-arrestin2 recruitment. This knowledge is useful for the design of hH₄R ligands with biased intrinsic activities and aids our understanding of the mechanism of H₄R activation.

Design and pharmacological characterization of VUF14480, a covalent partial agonist that interacts with cysteine 98(3.36) of the human histamine H₄ receptor

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The recently proposed binding mode of 2-aminopyrimidines to the human (h) histamine H₄ receptor suggests that the 2-amino group of these ligands interacts with glutamic acid residue E182(5.46) in the transmembrane (TM) helix 5 of this receptor. Interestingly, substituents at the 2-position of this pyrimidine are also in close proximity to the cysteine residue C98(3.36) in TM3. We hypothesized that an ethenyl group at this position will form a covalent bond with C98(3.36) by functioning as a Michael acceptor. A covalent pyrimidine analogue will not only prove this proposed binding mode, but will also provide a valuable tool for H4 receptor research.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We designed and synthesized VUF14480, and pharmacologically characterized this compound in hH4 receptor radioligand binding, G protein activation and β-arrestin2 recruitment experiments. The ability of VUF14480 to act as a covalent binder was assessed both chemically and pharmacologically.

KEY RESULTS

VUF14480 was shown to be a partial agonist of hH4 receptor-mediated G protein signalling and β-arrestin2 recruitment. VUF14480 bound covalently to the hH₄ receptor with submicromolar affinity. Serine substitution of C98(3.36) prevented this covalent interaction.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

VUF14480 is thought to bind covalently to the hH₄ receptor-C98(3.36) residue and partially induce hH₄ receptor-mediated G protein activation and β-arrestin2 recruitment. Moreover, these observations confirm our previously proposed binding mode of 2-aminopyrimidines. VUF14480 will be a useful tool to stabilize the receptor into an active confirmation and further investigate the structure of the active hH₄ receptor.

Bispyrimidines as potent histamine H(4) receptor ligands: delineation of structure-activity relationships and detailed H(4) receptor binding mode

The basic methylpiperazine moiety is considered a necessary substructure for high histamine H4 receptor (H4R) affinity. This moiety is however also the metabolic hot spot for various classes of H4R ligands (e.g., indolcarboxamides and pyrimidines). We set out to investigate whether mildly basic 2-aminopyrimidines in combination with the appropriate linker can serve as a replacement for the methylpiperazine moiety. In the series of 2-aminopyrimidines, the introduction of an additional 2-aminopyrimidine moiety in combination with the appropriate linker lead to bispyrimidines displaying pKi values for binding the human H4R up to 8.2. Furthermore, the methylpiperazine replacement results in compounds with improved metabolic properties. The attempt to transfer the knowledge generated in the class of bispyrimidines to the indolecarboxamides failed. Combining the derived structure-activity relationships with homology modeling leads to new detailed insights in the molecular aspects of ligand-H4R binding in general and the binding mode of the described bispyrimidines in specific.

Mapping histamine H4 receptor–ligand binding modes

Computational prediction of ligand binding modes in G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) remains a challenging task. Systematic consideration of different protein modelling templates, ligand binding poses, and ligand protonation states in extensive molecular dynamics (MD) simulation studies enabled the prediction of ligand-specific mutation effects in the histamine H₄ receptor, a key player in inflammation.

Small and colorful stones make beautiful mosaics: fragment-based chemogenomics

Smaller stones with a wide variety of colors make a higher resolution mosaic. In much the same way, smaller chemical entities that are structurally diverse are better able to interrogate protein binding sites. This feature article describes the construction of a diverse fragment library and an analysis of the screening of six representative protein targets belonging to three diverse target classes (G protein-coupled receptors ADRB2, H1R, H3R, and H4R, the ligand-gated ion channel 5-HT3R, and the kinase PKA) using chemogenomics approaches. The integration of experimentally determined bioaffinity profiles across related and unrelated protein targets and chemogenomics analysis of fragment binding and protein structure allow the identification of: (i) unexpected similarities and differences in ligand binding properties, and (ii) subtle ligand affinity and selectivity cliffs. With a wealth of fragment screening data being generated in industry and academia, such approaches will contribute to a more detailed structural understanding of ligand-protein interactions.

Homology modeling a fast tool for drug discovery: current perspectives

Major goal of structural biology involve formation of protein-ligand complexes; in which the protein molecules act energetically in the course of binding. Therefore, perceptive of protein-ligand interaction will be very important for structure based drug design. Lack of knowledge of 3D structures has hindered efforts to understand the binding specificities of ligands with protein. With increasing in modeling software and the growing number of known protein structures, homology modeling is rapidly becoming the method of choice for obtaining 3D coordinates of proteins. Homology modeling is a representation of the similarity of environmental residues at topologically corresponding positions in the reference proteins. In the absence of experimental data, model building on the basis of a known 3D structure of a homologous protein is at present the only reliable method to obtain the structural information. Knowledge of the 3D structures of proteins provides invaluable insights into the molecular basis of their functions. The recent advances in homology modeling, particularly in detecting and aligning sequences with template structures, distant homologues, modeling of loops and side chains as well as detecting errors in a model contributed to consistent prediction of protein structure, which was not possible even several years ago. This review focused on the features and a role of homology modeling in predicting protein structure and described current developments in this field with victorious applications at the different stages of the drug design and discovery.

Structural modelling and dynamics of proteins for insights into drug interactions

Proteins are the workhorses of biomolecules and their function is affected by their structure and their structural rearrangements during ligand entry, ligand binding and protein-protein interactions. Hence, the knowledge of protein structure and, importantly, the dynamic behaviour of the structure are critical for understanding how the protein performs its function. The predictions of the structure and the dynamic behaviour can be performed by combinations of structure modelling and molecular dynamics simulations. The simulations also need to be sensitive to the constraints of the environment in which the protein resides. Standard computational methods now exist in this field to support the experimental effort of solving protein structures. This review presents a comprehensive overview of the basis of the calculations and the well-established computational methods used to generate and understand protein structure and function and the study of their dynamic behaviour with the reference to lung-related targets.

Discovery of novel histamine H4 and serotonin transporter ligands using the topological feature tree descriptor

Ligand-based approaches are particularly important in the hit identification process of drug discovery when no structural information on the target is available. Pharmacophore descriptors that use a topological representation of the ligands are usually fast enough to screen large compound libraries effectively when seeking novel lead candidates. One example of this kind is the Feature Tree descriptor, a reduced graph representation implemented in the FTrees software. In this study, we tested the screening efficiency of FTrees by both retrospective and prospective screens using known histamine H4 antagonists and serotonin transporter (SERT) inhibitors as query molecules. Our results demonstrate that FTrees can effectively find actives. Particularly when combined with a subsequent 2D fingerprint-based diversity selection, FTrees was found to be extremely effective at discovering a diverse set of scaffolds. Prospective screening of our in-house compound deck provided several novel H4 and SERT ligands that could serve as suitable starting points for further optimization.

Structure-based prediction of subtype selectivity of histamine H3 receptor selective antagonists in clinical trials

Histamine receptors (HRs) are excellent drug targets for the treatment of diseases, such as schizophrenia, psychosis, depression, migraine, allergies, asthma, ulcers, and hypertension. Among them, the human H(3) histamine receptor (hH(3)HR) antagonists have been proposed for specific therapeutic applications, including treatment of Alzheimer's disease, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), epilepsy, and obesity. However, many of these drug candidates cause undesired side effects through the cross-reactivity with other histamine receptor subtypes. In order to develop improved selectivity and activity for such treatments, it would be useful to have the three-dimensional structures for all four HRs. We report here the predicted structures of four HR subtypes (H(1), H(2), H(3), and H(4)) using the GEnSeMBLE (GPCR ensemble of structures in membrane bilayer environment) Monte Carlo protocol, sampling ∼35 million combinations of helix packings to predict the 10 most stable packings for each of the four subtypes. Then we used these 10 best protein structures with the DarwinDock Monte Carlo protocol to sample ∼50 000 × 10(20) poses to predict the optimum ligand-protein structures for various agonists and antagonists. We find that E206(5.46) contributes most in binding H(3) selective agonists (5, 6, 7) in agreement with experimental mutation studies. We also find that conserved E5.46/S5.43 in both of hH(3)HR and hH(4)HR are involved in H(3)/ H(4) subtype selectivity. In addition, we find that M378(6.55) in hH(3)HR provides additional hydrophobic interactions different from hH(4)HR (the corresponding amino acid of T323(6.55) in hH(4)HR) to provide additional subtype bias. From these studies, we developed a pharmacophore model based on our predictions for known hH(3)HR selective antagonists in clinical study [ABT-239 1, GSK-189,254 2, PF-3654746 3, and BF2.649 (tiprolisant) 4] that suggests critical selectivity directing elements are: the basic proton interacting with D114(3.32), the spacer, the aromatic ring substituted with the hydrophilic or lipophilic groups interacting with lipophilic pockets in transmembranes (TMs) 3-5-6 and the aliphatic ring located in TMs 2-3-7. These 3D structures for all four HRs should help guide the rational design of novel drugs for the subtype selective antagonists and agonists with reduced side effects.

Molecular determinants of ligand binding modes in the histamine H(4) receptor: linking ligand-based three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) models to in silico guided receptor mutagenesis studies

The histamine H(4) receptor (H(4)R) is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that plays an important role in inflammation. Similar to the homologous histamine H(3) receptor (H(3)R), two acidic residues in the H(4)R binding pocket, D(3.32) and E(5.46), act as essential hydrogen bond acceptors of positively ionizable hydrogen bond donors in H(4)R ligands. Given the symmetric distribution of these complementary pharmacophore features in H(4)R and its ligands, different alternative ligand binding mode hypotheses have been proposed. The current study focuses on the elucidation of the molecular determinants of H(4)R-ligand binding modes by combining (3D) quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR), protein homology modeling, molecular dynamics simulations, and site-directed mutagenesis studies. We have designed and synthesized a series of clobenpropit (N-(4-chlorobenzyl)-S-[3-(4(5)-imidazolyl)propyl]isothiourea) derivatives to investigate H(4)R-ligand interactions and ligand binding orientations. Interestingly, our studies indicate that clobenpropit (2) itself can bind to H(4)R in two distinct binding modes, while the addition of a cyclohexyl group to the clobenpropit isothiourea moiety allows VUF5228 (5) to adopt only one specific binding mode in the H(4)R binding pocket. Our ligand-steered, experimentally supported protein modeling method gives new insights into ligand recognition by H(4)R and can be used as a general approach to elucidate the structure of protein-ligand complexes.

Fragment library screening reveals remarkable similarities between the G protein-coupled receptor histamine H₄ and the ion channel serotonin 5-HT₃A

A fragment library was screened against the G protein-coupled histamine H(4) receptor (H(4)R) and the ligand-gated ion channel serotonin 5-HT(3A) (5-HT(3A)R). Interestingly, significant overlap was found between H(4)R and 5-HT(3A)R hit sets. The data indicates that dual active H(4)R and 5 HT(3A)R fragments have a higher complexity than the selective compounds which has important implications for chemical genomics approaches. The results of our fragment-based library screening study illustrate similarities in ligand recognition between H(4)R and 5-HT(3A)R and have important consequences for selectivity profiling in ongoing drug discovery efforts on H(4)R and 5-HT(3A)R. The affinity profiles of our fragment screening studies furthermore match the chemical properties of the H(4)R and 5-HT(3A)R binding sites and can be used to define molecular interaction fingerprints to guide the in silico prediction of protein-ligand interactions and structure.

The histamine H₄ receptor: targeting inflammatory disorders

The discovery of the histamine H(4) receptor has added a new chapter to the century of extensive biogenic amine research. The human histamine H(4) receptor is mainly expressed in cells of the human immune system (e.g. mast cells, eosinophils, monocytes, dendritic cells, T cells) and mediates several effects on chemotaxis with numerous cell types. The distinct expression pattern and the immunomodulatory role highlight its physiological relevance in inflammatory and immunological processes. Inflammatory conditions, e.g. allergy, asthma and autoimmune diseases, were for a long time thought to be mainly mediated by activation of the histamine H(1) receptor subtype. However, in the treatment of diseases as chronic pruritus, asthma and allergic rhinitis the use of histamine H(1) receptor antagonists is unsatisfying. Selective H(4) receptor ligands and/or synergism of histamine H(1) and H(4) receptor modulation may be more effective in such pathophysiological conditions. Promising preclinical studies underline its role as an attractive target in the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune disorders. Meanwhile, first histamine H(4) receptor antagonist has reached clinical phases for the treatment of respiratory diseases.

Triazole ligands reveal distinct molecular features that induce histamine H4 receptor affinity and subtly govern H4/H3 subtype selectivity

The histamine H(3) (H(3)R) and H(4) (H(4)R) receptors attract considerable interest from the medicinal chemistry community. Given their relatively high homology yet widely differing therapeutic promises, ligand selectivity for the two receptors is crucial. We interrogated H(4)R/H(3)R selectivities using ligands with a [1,2,3]triazole core. Cu(I)-assisted "click chemistry" was used to assemble diverse [1,2,3]triazole compounds (6a-w and 7a-f), many containing a peripheral imidazole group. The imidazole ring posed some problems in the click chemistry putatively due to Cu(II) coordination, but Boc protection of the imidazole and removal of oxygen from the reaction mixture provided effective strategies. Pharmacological studies revealed two monosubstituted imidazoles (6h,p) with <10 nM H(4)R affinities and >10-fold H(4)R/H(3)R selectivity. Both compounds possess a cycloalkylmethyl group and appear to target a lipophilic pocket in H(4)R with high steric precision. The use of the [1,2,3]triazole scaffold is further demonstrated by the notion that simple changes in spacer length or peripheral groups can reverse the selectivity toward H(3)R. Computational evidence is provided to account for two key selectivity switches and to pinpoint a lipophilic pocket as an important handle for H(4)R over H(3)R selectivity.

Molecular determinants of ligand binding to H4R species variants

The histamine H(4) receptor (H(4)R) is the latest identified histamine receptor to emerge as a potential drug target for inflammatory diseases. Animal models are employed to validate this potential drug target. Concomitantly, various H(4)R orthologs have been cloned, including the human, mouse, rat, guinea pig, monkey, pig, and dog H(4)Rs. In this article, we expressed all these H(4)R orthologs in human embryonic kidney 293T cells and compared their interactions with currently used standard H(4)R ligands, including the H(4)R agonists histamine, 4-methylhistamine, guanidinylethyl isothiourea (VUF 8430), the H(4)R antagonists 1-[(5-chloro-1H-indol-2-yl)carbonyl]-4-methylpiperazine (JNJ 7777120) and [(5-chloro-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl)carbonyl]-4-methylpiperazine (VUF 6002), and the inverse H(4)R agonist thioperamide. Most of the evaluated ligands display significantly different affinities at the different H(4)R orthologs. These "natural mutants" of H(4)R were used to study ligand-receptor interactions by using chimeric human-pig-human and pig-human-pig H(4)R proteins and site-directed mutagenesis. Our results are a useful reference for ligand selection for studies in animal models of diseases and offer new insights in the understanding of H(4)R-ligand receptor interactions.

Synthesis and structure-activity relationships of cyanoguanidine-type and structurally related histamine H4 receptor agonists

Recently, we identified high-affinity human histamine H3 (hH3R) and H4 receptor (hH4R) ligands among a series of NG-acylated imidazolylpropylguanidines, which were originally designed as histamine H2 receptor (H2R) agonists. Aiming at selectivity for hH4R, the acylguanidine group was replaced with related moieties. Within a series of cyanoguanidines, 2-cyano-1-[4-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)butyl]-3-[(2-phenylthio)ethyl]guanidine (UR-PI376, 67) was identified as the most potent hH4R agonist (pEC50 = 7.47, alpha = 0.93) showing negligible hH1R and hH2R activities and significant selectivity over the hH3R (pKB = 6.00, alpha = -0.28), as determined in steady-state GTPase assays using membrane preparations of hH(x)R-expressing Sf9 cells. In contrast to previously described selective H4R agonists, this compound and other 3-substituted derivatives are devoid of agonistic activity at the other HR subtypes. Modeling of the binding mode of 67 suggests that the cyanoguanidine moiety forms charge-assisted hydrogen bonds not only with the conserved Asp-94 but also with the hH4R-specific Arg-341 residue. 2-Carbamoyl-1-[2-(1H-imidazol-4-yl)ethyl]-3-(3-phenylpropyl)guanidine (UR-PI97, 88) was unexpectedly identified as a highly potent and selective hH3R inverse agonist (pKB = 8.42, >300-fold selectivity over the other HR subtypes).

Interactions of histamine H1-receptor agonists and antagonists with the human histamine H4-receptor

The human histamine H(4)-receptor (hH(4)R) possesses high constitutive activity and, like the human H(1)-receptor (hH(1)R), is involved in the pathogenesis of type-I allergic reactions. The study aims were to explore the value of dual H(1)/H(4)R antagonists as antiallergy drugs and to address the question of whether H(1)R ligands bind to hH(4)R. In an acute murine asthma model, the H(1)R antagonist mepyramine and the H(4)R antagonist 1-[(5-chloro-1H-indol-2-yl)carbonyl]-4-methyl-piperazine (JNJ 7777120) exhibited synergistic inhibitory effects on eosinophil accumulation in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. At the hH(4)R expressed in Sf9 insect cells, 18 H(1)R antagonists and 22 H(1)R agonists showed lower affinity to hH(4)R than to hH(1)R as assessed in competition binding experiments. For a small number of H(1)R antagonists, hH(4)R partial agonism was observed in the steady-state GTPase assay. Most compounds were neutral antagonists or inverse agonists. Twelve phenylhistamine-type hH(1)R partial agonists were also hH(4)R partial agonists. Four histaprodifen-type hH(1)R partial agonists were hH(4)R inverse agonists. Dimeric histaprodifen was a more efficacious hH(4)R inverse agonist than the reference compound thioperamide. Suprahistaprodifen was the only histaprodifen acting as hH(4)R partial agonist. Suprahistaprodifen was docked into the binding pocket of inactive and active hH(4)R models in two different orientations, predominantly stabilizing the active state of hH(4)R. Collectively, the synergistic effects of H(1)R and H(4)R antagonists in an acute asthma model and the overlapping interaction of structurally diverse H(1)R ligands with hH(1)R and hH(4)R indicate that the development of dual H(1)R/H(4)R antagonists is a worthwhile and technically feasible goal for the treatment of type-I allergic reactions.

Pharmacological characterization of the new histamine H4 receptor agonist VUF 8430

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We compare the pharmacological profiles of a new histamine H4 receptor agonist 2-(2-guanidinoethyl)isothiourea (VUF 8430) with that of a previously described H4 receptor agonist, 4-methylhistamine.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Radioligand binding and functional assays were performed using histamine H4 receptors expressed in mammalian cell lines. Compounds were also evaluated ex vivo in monocyte-derived dendritic cells endogenously expressing H4 receptors and in vivo in anaesthetized rats for gastric acid secretion activity.

KEY RESULTS

Both VUF 8430 and 4-methylhistamine were full agonists at human H4 receptors with lower affinity at rat and mouse H4 receptors. Both compounds induced chemotaxis of monocyte-derived dendritic cells. VUF 8430 also showed reasonable affinity and was a full agonist at the H3 receptor. Agmatine is a metabolite of arginine, structurally related to VUF 8430, and was a H4 receptor agonist with micromolar affinity. At histamine H3 receptors, agmatine was a full agonist, whereas 4-methylhistamine was an agonist only at high concentrations. Both VUF 8430 and agmatine were inactive at H1 and H2 receptors, whereas 4-methylhistamine is as active as histamine at H2 receptors. In vivo, VUF 8430 only caused a weak secretion of gastric acid mediated by H2 receptors, whereas 4-methylhistamine, dimaprit, histamine and amthamine, at equimolar doses, induced 2.5- to 6-fold higher output than VUF 8430.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our results suggest complementary use of 4-methylhistamine and VUF 8430 as H4 receptor agonists. Along with H4 receptor antagonists, both agonists can serve as useful pharmacological tools in studies of histamine H4 receptors.

Molecular and biochemical pharmacology of the histamine H4 receptor

The elucidation of the human genome has had a major impact on histamine receptor research. The identification of the human H4 receptor by several groups has been instrumental for a new appreciation of the role of histamine in the modulation of immune function. In this review, we summarize the historical developments and the molecular and biochemical pharmacology of the H4 receptor.