BRET-Based Biosensors to Measure Agonist Efficacies in Histamine H1 Receptor-Mediated G Protein Activation, Signaling and Interactions with GRKs and β-Arrestins

The histamine H₁ receptor (H₁R) is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and plays a key role in allergic reactions upon activation by histamine which is locally released from mast cells and basophils. Consequently, H₁R is a well-established therapeutic target for antihistamines that relieve allergy symptoms. H₁R signals via heterotrimeric G_q proteins and is phosphorylated by GPCR kinase (GRK) subtypes 2, 5, and 6, consequently facilitating the subsequent recruitment of β-arrestin1 and/or 2. Stimulation of a GPCR with structurally different agonists can result in preferential engagement of one or more of these intracellular signaling molecules. To evaluate this so-called biased agonism for H₁R, bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based biosensors were applied to measure H₁R signaling through heterotrimeric G_q proteins, second messengers (inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate and Ca²⁺), and receptor-protein interactions (GRKs and β-arrestins) in response to histamine, 2-phenylhistamines, and histaprodifens in a similar cellular background. Although differences in efficacy were observed for these agonists between some functional readouts as compared to reference agonist histamine, subsequent data analysis using an operational model of agonism revealed only signaling bias of the agonist Br-phHA-HA in recruiting β-arrestin2 to H₁R over G_q biosensor activation.

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.

A Dynamic, Split-Luciferase-Based Mini-G Protein Sensor to Functionally Characterize Ligands at All Four Histamine Receptor Subtypes

In drug discovery, assays with proximal readout are of great importance to study target-specific effects of potential drug candidates. In the field of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), the determination of GPCR-G protein interactions and G protein activation by means of radiolabeled GTP analogs ([³⁵S]GTPγS, [γ-³²P]GTP) has widely been used for this purpose. Since we were repeatedly faced with insufficient quality of radiolabeled nucleotides, there was a requirement to implement a novel proximal functional assay for the routine characterization of putative histamine receptor ligands. We applied the split-NanoLuc to the four histamine receptor subtypes (H₁R, H₂R, H₃R, H₄R) and recently engineered minimal G (mini-G) proteins. Using this method, the functional response upon receptor activation was monitored in real-time and the four mini-G sensors were evaluated by investigating selected standard (inverse) agonists and antagonists. All potencies and efficacies of the studied ligands were in concordance with literature data. Further, we demonstrated a significant positive correlation of the signal amplitude and the mini-G protein expression level in the case of the H₂R, but not for the H₁R or the H₃R. The pEC₅₀ values of histamine obtained under different mini-G expression levels were consistent. Moreover, we obtained excellent dynamic ranges (Z’ factor) and the signal spans were improved for all receptor subtypes in comparison to the previously performed [³⁵S]GTPγS binding assay.

A split luciferase-based probe for quantitative proximal determination of Gαq signalling in live cells

The earlier an activation of a G protein-dependent signalling cascade at a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) is probed, the less amplificatory effects contribute to the measured signal. This is especially useful in case of a precise quantification of agonist efficacies, and is of paramount importance, when determining agonist bias in relation to the β-arrestin pathway. As most canonical assays with medium to high throughput rely on the quantification of second messengers, and assays affording more proximal readouts are often limited in throughput, we developed a technique with a proximal readout and sufficiently high throughput that can be used in live cells. Split luciferase complementation (SLC) was applied to assess the interaction of Gα_q with its effector phospholipase C-β3. The resulting probe yielded an excellent Z' value of 0.7 and offers a broad and easy applicability to various Gα_q-coupling GPCRs (hH₁R, hM_1,3,5R, hNTS₁R), expressed in HEK293T cells, allowing the functional characterisation of agonists and antagonists. Furthermore, the developed sensor enabled imaging of live cells by luminescence microscopy, as demonstrated for the hM₃R. The versatile SLC-based probe is broadly applicable e.g. to the screening and the pharmacological characterisation of GPCR ligands as well as to molecular imaging.

Histamine H1 receptor gene polymorphism acts as a biological indicator of the prediction of therapeutic efficacy in patients with allergic rhinitis in the Chinese Han population

H1-antihistamine has been shown to be effective in treating patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), but its mechanism is still uncertain. We investigated effects of histamine H1 receptor (HRH1) gene polymorphisms on the efficacy of oral H1-antihistamine in perennial patients with AR caused by mites in the Chinese Han population for the first time. A total of 224 Han Chinese patients with AR and 165 Han Chinese healthy volunteers were selected. Genotype and allele frequency distribution of -17C/T in HRH1 gene in patients with AR, serum levels of eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), total immunoglobulin E (IgE), and specific IgE were detected. The clinical symptoms of patients with AR were evaluated with visual analogue scale (VAS). Direct counting method was applied to calculate genotype and allele frequencies. Higher levels of serum ECP and total IgE were shown in the AR group. Moreover, patients with CT, TT, or CT+TT genotype increased the risk of AR incidence in the in the -17C/T site of HRH1, and CC genotype and CT+TT genotype were associated with gender, asthma, VAS score, total IgE level, and specific IgE level in patients with AR. In addition, oral administration of H1-antihistamines improves clinical symptoms of patients with AR. At last, patients with the CC genotype showed the increased efficacy of H1-antihistamines in patients with AR. Our study provides evidence that HRH1 gene polymorphisms may correlate with oral H1-antihistamine efficacy for the treatment of patients with AR, which can be used as a biological indicator of the prediction of therapeutic efficacy of patients with AR.

Structure-Activity Relationships and Computational Investigations into the Development of Potent and Balanced Dual-Acting Butyrylcholinesterase Inhibitors and Human Cannabinoid Receptor 2 Ligands with Pro-Cognitive in Vivo Profiles

The enzyme butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) and the human cannabinoid receptor 2 (hCB₂R) represent promising targets for pharmacotherapy in the later stages of Alzheimer's disease. We merged pharmacophores for both targets into small benzimidazole-based molecules, investigated SARs, and identified several dual-acting ligands with a balanced affinity/inhibitory activity and an excellent selectivity over both hCB₁R and hAChE. A homology model for the hCB₂R was developed based on the hCB₁R crystal structure and used for molecular dynamics studies to investigate binding modes. In vitro studies proved hCB₂R agonism. Unwanted μ-opioid receptor affinity could be designed out. One well-balanced dual-acting and selective hBChE inhibitor/hCB₂R agonist showed superior in vivo activity over the lead CB₂ agonist with regards to cognition improvement. The data shows the possibility to combine a small molecule with selective and balanced GPCR-activity/enzyme inhibition and in vivo activity for the therapy of AD and may help to rationalize the development of other dual-acting ligands.

Pharmacological Characterization of Human Histamine Receptors and Histamine Receptor Mutants in the Sf9 Cell Expression System

A large problem of histamine receptor research is data heterogeneity. Various experimental approaches, the complex signaling pathways of mammalian cells, and the use of different species orthologues render it difficult to compare and interpret the published results. Thus, the four human histamine receptor subtypes were analyzed side-by-side in the Sf9 insect cell expression system, using radioligand binding assays as well as functional readouts proximal to the receptor activation event (steady-state GTPase assays and [35S]GTPγS assays). The human H1R was co-expressed with the regulators of G protein signaling RGS4 or GAIP, which unmasked a productive interaction between hH1R and insect cell Gαq. By contrast, functional expression of the hH2R required the generation of an hH2R-Gsα fusion protein to ensure close proximity of G protein and receptor. Fusion of hH2R to the long (GsαL) or short (GsαS) splice variant of Gαs resulted in comparable constitutive hH2R activity, although both G protein variants show different GDP affinities. Medicinal chemistry studies revealed profound species differences between hH1R/hH2R and their guinea pig orthologues gpH1R/gpH2R. The causes for these differences were analyzed by molecular modeling in combination with mutational studies. Co-expression of the hH3R with Gαi1, Gαi2, Gαi3, and Gαi/o in Sf9 cells revealed high constitutive activity and comparable interaction efficiency with all G protein isoforms. A comparison of various cations (Li+, Na+, K+) and anions (Cl-, Br-, I-) revealed that anions with large radii most efficiently stabilize the inactive hH3R state. Potential sodium binding sites in the hH3R protein were analyzed by expressing specific hH3R mutants in Sf9 cells. In contrast to the hH3R, the hH4R preferentially couples to co-expressed Gαi2 in Sf9 cells. Its high constitutive activity is resistant to NaCl or GTPγS. The hH4R shows structural instability and adopts a G protein-independent high-affinity state. A detailed characterization of affinity and activity of a series of hH4R antagonists/inverse agonists allowed first conclusions about structure/activity relationships for inverse agonists at hH4R. In summary, the Sf9 cell system permitted a successful side-by-side comparison of all four human histamine receptor subtypes. This chapter summarizes the results of pharmacological as well as medicinal chemistry/molecular modeling approaches and demonstrates that these data are not only important for a deeper understanding of HxR pharmacology, but also have significant implications for the molecular pharmacology of GPCRs in general.

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.

Label-free versus conventional cellular assays: Functional investigations on the human histamine H1 receptor

A set of histamine H₁ receptor (H₁R) agonists and antagonists was characterized in functional assays, using dynamic mass redistribution (DMR), electric cell-substrate impedance sensing (ECIS) and various signaling pathway specific readouts (Fura-2 and aequorin calcium assays, arrestin recruitment (luciferase fragment complementation) assay, luciferase gene reporter assay). Data were gained from genetically engineered HEK293T cells and compared with reference data from GTPase assays and radioligand binding. Histamine and the other H₁R agonists gave different assay-related pEC₅₀ values, however, the order of potency was maintained. In the luciferase fragment complementation assay, the H₁R preferred β-arrestin2 over β-arrestin1. The calcium and the impedimetric assay depended on G_q coupling of the H₁R, as demonstrated by complete inhibition of the histamine-induced signals in the presence of the G_q inhibitor FR900359 (UBO-QIC). Whereas partial inhibition by FR900359 was observed in DMR and the gene reporter assay, pertussis toxin substantially decreased the response in DMR, but increased the luciferase signal, reflecting the contribution of both, G_q and G_i, to signaling in these assays. For antagonists, the results from DMR were essentially compatible with those from conventional readouts, whereas the impedance-based data revealed a trend towards higher pK_b values. ECIS and calcium assays apparently only reflect G_q signaling, whereas DMR and gene reporter assays appear to integrate both, G_q and G_i mediated signaling. The results confirm the value of the label-free methods, DMR and ECIS, for the characterization of H₁R ligands. Both noninvasive techniques are complementary to each other, but cannot fully replace reductionist signaling pathway focused assays.

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.

International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. XCVIII. Histamine Receptors

Histamine is a developmentally highly conserved autacoid found in most vertebrate tissues. Its physiological functions are mediated by four 7-transmembrane G protein-coupled receptors (H1R, H2R, H3R, H4R) that are all targets of pharmacological intervention. The receptors display molecular heterogeneity and constitutive activity. H1R antagonists are long known antiallergic and sedating drugs, whereas the H2R was identified in the 1970s and led to the development of H2R-antagonists that revolutionized stomach ulcer treatment. The crystal structure of ligand-bound H1R has rendered it possible to design new ligands with novel properties. The H3R is an autoreceptor and heteroreceptor providing negative feedback on histaminergic and inhibition on other neurons. A block of these actions promotes waking. The H4R occurs on immuncompetent cells and the development of anti-inflammatory drugs is anticipated.

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.

Loratadine and analogues: discovery and preliminary structure-activity relationship of inhibitors of the amino acid transporter B(0)AT2

B(0)AT2, encoded by the SLC6A15 gene, is a transporter for neutral amino acids that has recently been implicated in mood and metabolic disorders. It is predominantly expressed in the brain, but little is otherwise known about its function. To identify inhibitors for this transporter, we screened a library of 3133 different bioactive compounds. Loratadine, a clinically used histamine H1 receptor antagonist, was identified as a selective inhibitor of B(0)AT2 with an IC50 of 4 μM while being less active or inactive against several other members of the SLC6 family. Reversible inhibition of B(0)AT2 was confirmed by electrophysiology. A series of loratadine analogues were synthesized to gain insight into the structure-activity relationships. Our studies provide the first chemical tool for B(0)AT2.

Distinct signalling pathways of murine histamine H1- and H4-receptors expressed at comparable levels in HEK293 cells

Histamine (HA) is recognized by its target cells via four G-protein-coupled receptors, referred to as histamine H₁-receptor (H₁R), H₂R, H₃R, and H₄R. Both H₁R and H₄R exert pro-inflammatory functions. However, their signal transduction pathways have never been analyzed in a directly comparable manner side by side. Moreover, the analysis of pharmacological properties of the murine orthologs, representing the main targets of pre-clinical research, is very important. Therefore, we engineered recombinant HEK293 cells expressing either mouse (m)H₁R or mH₄R at similar levels and analyzed HA-induced signalling in these cells. HA induced intracellular calcium mobilization via both mH₁R and mH₄R, with the mH₁R being much more effective. Whereas cAMP accumulation was potentiated via the mH₁R, it was reduced via the mH₄R. The regulation of both second messengers via the H₄R, but not the H₁R, was sensitive to pertussis toxin (PTX). The mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) ERK 1/2 were massively activated downstream of both receptors and demonstrated a functional involvement in HA-induced EGR-1 gene expression. The p38 MAPK was moderately activated via both receptors as well, but was functionally involved in HA-induced EGR-1 gene expression only in H₄R-expressing cells. Surprisingly, in this system p38 MAPK activity reduced the HA-induced gene expression. In summary, using this system which allows a direct comparison of mH₁R- and mH₄R-induced signalling, qualitative and quantitative differences on the levels of second messenger generation and also in terms of p38 MAPK function became evident.

Mathematical analysis of the sodium sensitivity of the human histamine H3 receptor

Purpose

It was shown by several experimental studies that some G protein coupled receptors (GPCR) are sensitive to sodium ions. Furthermore, mutagenesis studies or the determination of crystal structures of the adenosine A_2A or δ-opioid receptor revealed an allosteric Na⁺ binding pocket near to the highly conserved Asp^2.50. Within a previous study, the influence of NaCl concentration onto the steady-state GTPase activity at the human histamine H₃ receptor (hH₃R) in presence of the endogenous histamine or the inverse agonist thioperamide was analyzed. The purpose of the present study was to examine and quantify the Na⁺-sensitivity of hH₃R on a molecular level.

Methods

To achieve this, we developed a set of equations, describing constitutive activity and the different ligand-receptor equilibria in absence or presence of sodium ions. Furthermore, in order to gain a better understanding of the ligand- and Na⁺-binding to hH₃R on molecular level, we performed molecular dynamic (MD) simulations.

Results

The analysis of the previously determined experimental steady-state GTPase data with the set of equations presented within this study, reveals that thioperamide binds into the orthosteric binding pocket of the hH₃R in absence or presence of a Na⁺ in its allosteric binding site. However, the data suggest that thioperamide binds preferentially into the hH₃R in absence of a sodium ion in its allosteric site. These experimental results were supported by MD simulations of thioperamide in the binding pocket of the inactive hH₃R. Furthermore, the MD simulations revealed two different binding modes for thioperamide in presence or absence of a Na⁺ in its allosteric site.

Conclusion

The mathematical model presented within this study describes the experimental data regarding the Na⁺-sensitivity of hH₃R in an excellent manner. Although the present study is focused onto the Na⁺-sensitivity of the hH₃R, the resulting equations, describing Na⁺- and ligand-binding to a GPCR, can be used for all other ion-sensitive GPCRs.

Synthesis, biological evaluation, and computational studies of Tri- and tetracyclic nitrogen-bridgehead compounds as potent dual-acting AChE inhibitors and hH3 receptor antagonists

Combination of AChE inhibiting and histamine H3 receptor antagonizing properties in a single molecule might show synergistic effects to improve cognitive deficits in Alzheimer's disease, since both pharmacological actions are able to enhance cholinergic neurotransmission in the cortex. However, whereas AChE inhibitors prevent hydrolysis of acetylcholine also peripherally, histamine H3 antagonists will raise acetylcholine levels mostly in the brain due to predominant occurrence of the receptor in the central nervous system. In this work, we designed and synthesized two novel classes of tri- and tetracyclic nitrogen-bridgehead compounds acting as dual AChE inhibitors and histamine H3 antagonists by combining the nitrogen-bridgehead moiety of novel AChE inhibitors with a second N-basic fragment based on the piperidinylpropoxy pharmacophore with different spacer lengths. Intensive structure-activity relationships (SARs) with regard to both biological targets led to compound 41 which showed balanced affinities as hAChE inhibitor with IC50 = 33.9 nM, and hH3R antagonism with Ki = 76.2 nM with greater than 200-fold selectivity over the other histamine receptor subtypes. Molecular docking studies were performed to explain the potent AChE inhibition of the target compounds and molecular dynamics studies to explain high affinity at the hH3R.

Molecular and cellular analysis of human histamine receptor subtypes

The human histamine receptors hH(1)R and hH(2)R constitute important drug targets, and hH(3)R and hH(4)R have substantial potential in this area. Considering the species-specificity of pharmacology of H(x)R orthologs, it is important to analyze hH(x)Rs. Here, we summarize current knowledge of hH(x)Rs endogenously expressed in human cells and hH(x)Rs recombinantly expressed in mammalian and insect cells. We present the advantages and disadvantages of the various systems. We also discuss problems associated with the use of hH(x)R antibodies, an issue of general relevance for G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). There is much greater overlap in activity of 'selective' ligands for other hH(x)Rs than the cognate receptor subtype than generally appreciated. Studies with native and recombinant systems support the concept of ligand-specific receptor conformations, encompassing agonists and antagonists. It is emerging that for characterization of hH(x)R ligands, one cannot rely on a single test system and a single parameter. Rather, multiple systems and parameters have to be studied. Although such studies are time-consuming and expensive, ultimately, they will increase drug safety and efficacy.

Species-dependent activities of G-protein-coupled receptor ligands: lessons from histamine receptor orthologs

Histamine is a biogenic amine that exerts its biological effects as a neurotransmitter and local mediator via four histamine receptor (HR) subtypes (H(x)Rs) - H(1)R, H(2)R, H(3)R, and H(4)R - belonging to the superfamily of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). All four H(x)Rs exhibit pronounced differences in agonist and/or antagonist pharmacology among various species orthologs. The species differences constitute a problem for animal experiments and drug development. This problem applies to GPCRs with diverse ligands. Here, we summarize our current knowledge on H(x)R orthologs as a case study for species-dependent activity of GPCR ligands. We show that species-specific pharmacology also provides unique opportunities to study important aspects of GPCR pharmacology in general, including ligand-binding sites, the roles of extracellular domains in ligand binding and receptor activation, agonist-independent (constitutive) receptor activity, thermodynamics of ligand/receptor interaction, receptor-activation mechanisms, and ligand-specific receptor conformations.

Involvement of the first transmembrane segment of human α(2) -adrenoceptors in the subtype-selective binding of chlorpromazine, spiperone and spiroxatrine

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Some large antagonist ligands (ARC239, chlorpromazine, prazosin, spiperone, spiroxatrine) bind to the human α(2A) -adrenoceptor with 10- to 100-fold lower affinity than to the α(2B)- and α(2C)-adrenoceptor subtypes. Previous mutagenesis studies have not explained this subtype selectivity.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

The possible involvement of the extracellular amino terminus and transmembrane domain 1 (TM1) in subtype selectivity was elucidated with eight chimaeric receptors: six where TM1 and the N-terminus were exchanged between the α(2)-adrenoceptor subtypes and two where only TM1 was exchanged. Receptors were expressed in CHO cells and tested for ligand binding with nine chemically diverse antagonist ligands. For purposes of interpretation, molecular models of the three human α(2)-adrenoceptors were constructed based on the β(2)-adrenoceptor crystal structure.

KEY RESULTS

The affinities of three antagonists (spiperone, spiroxatrine and chlorpromazine) were significantly improved by TM1 substitutions of the α(2A)-adrenoceptor, but reciprocal effects were not seen for chimaeric receptors based on α(2B)- and α(2C)-adrenoceptors. Molecular docking of these ligands suggested that binding occurs in the orthosteric ligand binding pocket.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

TM1 is involved in determining the low affinity of some antagonist ligands at the human α(2A)-adrenoceptor. The exact mechanism is not known, but the position of TM1 at a large distance from the binding pocket indicates that TM1 does not participate in specific side-chain interactions with amino acids within the binding pocket of the receptor or with ligands bound therein. Instead, molecular models suggest that TM1 has indirect conformational effects related to the charge distribution or overall shape of the binding pocket.

Mepyramine-JNJ7777120-hybrid compounds show high affinity to hH(1)R, but low affinity to hH(4)R

In literature, a synergism between histamine H(1) and H(4) receptor is discussed. Furthermore, it was shown, that the combined application of mepyramine, a H(1) antagonist and JNJ7777120, a H(4) receptor ligand leads to a synergistic effect in the acute murine asthma model. Thus, the aim of this study was to develop new hybrid ligands, containing one H(1) and one H(4) pharmacophor, connected by an appropriate spacer, in order to address both, H(1)R and H(4)R. Within this study, we synthesized nine hybrid compounds, which were pharmacologically characterized at hH(1)R and hH(4)R. The new compounds revealed (high) affinity to hH(1)R, but showed only low affinity to hH(4)R. Additionally, we performed molecular dynamic studies for some selected compounds at hH(1)R, in order to obtain information about the binding mode of these compounds on molecular level.

Theoretical studies on the interaction of partial agonists with the 5-HT2A receptor

A series of 51 5-HT(2A) partial agonistic arylethylamines (primary or benzylamines) from different structural classes (indoles, methoxybenzenes, quinazolinediones) was investigated by fragment regression analysis (FRA), docking and 3D-QSAR approaches. The data, pEC(50) values and intrinsic activities (E(max)) on rat arteries, show high variability of pEC(50) from 4 to 10 and of E(max) from 15 to 70%. FRA indicates which substructures affect potency or intrinsic activity. The high contribution of halogens in para position of phenethylamines to pEC(50) points to a specific hydrophobic pocket. Other results suggest the significance of hydrogen bonds of the aryl moiety for activation and the contrary effect of benzyl groups on affinity (increasing) and intrinsic activity (decreasing). Results from fragment regression and data on all available mutants were considered to derive a common binding site at the rat 5-HT(2A) receptor. After generation and MD simulations of a receptor model based on the β(2)-adrenoceptor structure, typical derivatives were docked, leading to the suggestion of common interactions, e.g., with serines in TM3 and TM5 and with a cluster of aromatic amino acids in TM5 and TM6. The whole series was aligned by docking and minimization of the complexes. The pEC(50) values correlate well with Sybyl docking energies and hydrophobicity of the aryl moieties. With this alignment, CoMFA and CoMSIA approaches based on a training set of 36 and a test set of 15 compounds were performed. The correlation of pEC(50) with steric, electrostatic, hydrophobic and H-bond acceptor fields resulted in sufficient fit (q (2): 0.75-0.8, r (2): 0.92-0.95) and predictive power (r (pred) (2) : 0.85-0.88). The important interaction regions largely reflect the patterns provided by the putative binding site. In particular, the fit of the aryl moieties and benzyl substituents to two hydrophobic pockets is evident.

Sf9 cells: a versatile model system to investigate the pharmacological properties of G protein-coupled receptors

The Sf9 cell/baculovirus expression system is widely used for high-level protein expression, often with the purpose of purification. However, proteins may also be functionally expressed in the defined Sf9 cell environment. According to the literature, the pharmacology of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) functionally reconstituted in Sf9 cells is similar to the receptor properties in mammalian cells. Sf9 cells express both recombinant GPCRs and G-proteins at much higher levels than mammalian cells. Sf9 cells can be grown in suspension culture, providing an inexpensive way of obtaining large protein amounts. Co-infection with various baculoviruses allows free combination of GPCRs with different G-proteins. The absence of constitutively active receptors in Sf9 cells provides an excellent signal-to background ratio in functional assays, allowing the detection of agonist-independent receptor activity and of small ligand-induced signals including partial agonistic and inverse agonistic effects. Insect cell Gα(i)-like proteins mostly do not couple productively to mammalian GPCRs. Thus, unlike in mammalian cells, Sf9 cells do not require pertussis toxin treatment to obtain a Gα(i)-free environment. Co-expression of GPCRs with Gα(i1), Gα(i2), Gα(i3) or Gα(o) in Sf9 cells allows the generation of a selectivity profile for these Gα(i/o)-isoforms. Additionally, GPCR-G-protein combinations can be compared with defined 1:1 stoichiometry by expressing GPCR-Gα fusion proteins. Sf9 cells can also be employed for ligand screening in medicinal chemistry programs, using radioligand binding assays or functional assays, like the steady-state GTPase- or [(35)S]GTPγS binding assay. This review shows that Sf9 cells are a versatile model system to investigate the pharmacological properties of GPCRs.

Comparison of the pharmacological properties of human and rat histamine H(3)-receptors

Ligand pharmacology of histamine H(3)-receptors is species-dependent. In previous studies, two amino acids in transmembrane domain 3 (TM III) were shown to play a significant role. In this study, we characterized human and rat histamine H(3)-receptors (hH(3)R and rH(3)R, respectively), co-expressed with mammalian G proteins in Sf9 insect cell membranes. We compared a series of imidazole-containing H(3)R ligands in radioligand binding and steady-state GTPase assays. H(3)Rs similarly coupled to Gα(i/o)-proteins. Affinities and potencies of the agonists histamine, N(α)-methylhistamine and R-(α)-methylhistamine were in the same range. Imetit was only a partial agonist. The pharmacology of imetit and proxifan was similar at both species. However, impentamine was more potent and efficacious at rH(3)R. The inverse agonists ciproxifan and thioperamide showed higher potency but lower efficacy at rH(3)R. Clobenpropit was not species-selective. Strikingly, imoproxifan was almost full agonist at hH(3)R, but an inverse agonist at rH(3)R. Imoproxifan was docked into the binding pocket of inactive and active hH(3)R- and rH(3)R-models and molecular dynamic simulations were performed. Imoproxifan bound to hH(3)R and rH(3)R in E-configuration, which represents the trans-isomer of the oxime-moiety as determined in crystallization studies, and stabilized active hH(3)R-, but inactive rH(3)R-conformations. Large differences in electrostatic surfaces between TM III and TM V cause differential orientation of the oxime-moiety of imoproxifan, which then differently interacts with the rotamer toggle switch Trp(6.48) in TM VI. Collectively, the substantial species differences at H(3)Rs are explained at a molecular level by the use of novel H(3)R active-state models.

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.

Contribution of binding enthalpy and entropy to affinity of antagonist and agonist binding at human and guinea pig histamine H(1)-receptor

For several GPCRs, discrimination between agonism and antagonism is possible on the basis of thermodynamics parameters, such as binding enthalpy and entropy. In this study, we analyze whether agonists and antagonists can also be discriminated thermodynamically at the histamine H(1) receptor (H(1)R). Because previous studies revealed species differences in pharmacology between human H(1)R (hH(1)R) and guinea pig H(1)R (gpH(1)R), we analyzed a broad spectrum of H(1)R antagonists and agonists at hH(1)R and gpH(1)R. [(3)H]Mepyramine competition binding assay were performed at five different temperatures in a range from 283.15 to 303.15 K. In addition, we performed a temperature-dependent three-dimensional quantitative structure activity relationship study to predict binding enthalpy and entropy for histaprodifen derivatives, which can bind to H(1)R in two different orientations. Our studies revealed significant species differences in binding enthalpy and entropy between hH(1)R and gpH(1)R for some antagonists and agonists. Furthermore, in some cases, we found changes in heat capacity of the binding process that were different from zero. Differences in flexibility of the ligands may be responsible for this observation. For most ligands, the binding process to hH(1)R and gpH(1)R is clearly entropy-driven. In contrast, for the endogenous ligand histamine, the binding process is significantly enthalpy-driven at both species isoforms. Thus, a definite discrimination between antagonism and agonism based on thermodynamic parameters is possible for neither hH(1)R nor gpH(1)R, but thermodynamic analysis of ligand-binding may be a novel approach to dissect agonist- and antagonist-specific receptor conformations.

Functional selectivity of GPCR ligand stereoisomers: new pharmacological opportunities

It is now well established that any given ligand for a G-protein-couple receptor (GPCR) does not simply possess a single defined efficacy. Rather, a ligand possesses multiple efficacies, depending on the specific down-stream signal transduction pathway analyzed. This diversity may be based on ligand-specific GPCR conformations and is often referred to as "functional selectivity." It has been known for a century that stereoisomers of catecholamines differ in their potency and, in some systems, also in their efficacy. However, the molecular basis for efficacy differences of GPCR ligand stereoisomers has remained poorly defined. In an elegant study published in this issue of Molecular Pharmacology, Woo et al. (p. 158) show that stereoisomers of the beta(2)-adrenoceptor selective agonist fenoterol differentially activates G(s)- and G(i)-proteins in native rat cardiomyocytes. This study is so important because it is the first report to show that even the subtle structural differences within a ligand stereoisomer pair are sufficient to discriminate between GPCR conformations with distinct G-protein coupling properties. The study highlights of how important it is to examine the "more active" (eutomer) and the "less active" (distomer) stereoisomer to understand the mechanisms of action and the cellular effects of GPCR ligands. The study by Woo et al. will ignite a renaissance of the analysis of ligand stereoisomers, using sensitive pharmacological and biophysical assays. The available literature supports the notion that meticulous analysis of ligand stereoisomers is a goldmine for understanding mechanisms of GPCR activation, analysis of signal transduction pathways, development of new therapies for important diseases, and drug safety.