Endogenous regulators of G protein signaling differentially modulate full and partial mu-opioid agonists at adenylyl cyclase as predicted by a collision coupling model

Mice Expressing Regulators of G protein Signaling-insensitive Gαo Define Roles of μ Opioid Receptor Gαo and Gαi Subunit Coupling in Inhibition of Presynaptic GABA Release

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins modulate signaling by G protein-coupled receptors. Using a knock-in transgenic mouse model with a mutation in Gαo that does not bind RGS proteins (RGS-insensitive), we determined the effect of RGS proteins on presynaptic μ opioid receptor (MOR)-mediated inhibition of GABA release in the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray (vlPAG). The MOR agonists [d-Ala², N-MePhe⁴, Gly-ol]-enkephalin (DAMGO) and met-enkephalin (ME) inhibited evoked inhibitory postsynaptic currents (eIPSCs) in the RGS-insensitive mice compared with wild-type (WT) littermates, respectively. Fentanyl inhibited eIPSCs similarly in both WT and RGS-insensitive mice. There were no differences in opioid agonist inhibition of spontaneous GABA release between the genotypes. To further probe the mechanism underlying these differences between opioid inhibition of evoked and spontaneous GABA release, specific myristoylated Gα peptide inhibitors for Gαo₁ and Gαi_1-3 that block receptor-G protein interactions were used to test the preference of agonists for MOR-Gα complexes. The Gαo₁ inhibitor reduced DAMGO inhibition of eIPSCs, but Gαi_1-3 inhibitors had no effect. Both Gαo₁ and Gαi_1-3 inhibitors separately reduced fentanyl inhibition of eIPSCs but had no effects on ME inhibition. Gαi_1-3 inhibitors blocked the inhibitory effects of ME and fentanyl on miniature postsynaptic current (mIPSC) frequency, but both Gαo₁ and Gαi_1-3 inhibitors were needed to block the effects of DAMGO. Finally, baclofen-mediated inhibition of GABA release is unaffected in the RGS-insensitive mice and in the presence of Gαo₁ and Gαi_1-3 inhibitor peptides, suggesting that GABA_B receptor coupling to G proteins in vlPAG presynaptic terminals is different than MOR coupling. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Presynaptic μ opioid receptors (MORs) in the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray are critical for opioid analgesia and are negatively regulated by RGS proteins. These data in RGS-insensitive mice provide evidence that MOR agonists differ in preference for Gαo versus Gαi and regulation by RGS proteins in presynaptic terminals, providing a mechanism for functional selectivity between agonists. The results further define important differences in MOR and GABA_B receptor coupling to G proteins that could be exploited for new pain therapies.

Regulators of G protein signalling as pharmacological targets for the treatment of neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain, a specific type of chronic pain resulting from persistent nervous tissue lesions, is a debilitating condition that affects about 7% of the population. This condition remains particularly difficult to treat because of the poor understanding of its underlying mechanisms. Drugs currently used to alleviate this chronic pain syndrome are of limited benefit due to their lack of efficacy and the elevated risk of side effects, especially after a prolonged period of treatment. Although drugs targeting G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) also have several limitations, such as progressive loss of efficacy due to receptor desensitization or unavoidable side effects due to wide receptor distribution, the identification of several molecular partners that contribute to the fine-tuning of receptor activity has raised new opportunities for the development of alternative therapeutic approaches. Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) act intracellularly by influencing the coupling process and activity of G proteins, and are amongst the best-characterized physiological modulators of GPCR. Changes in RGS expression have been documented in a range of models of neuropathic pain, or after prolonged treatment with diverse analgesics, and could participate in altered pain processing as well as impaired physiological or pharmacological control of nociceptive signals. The present review summarizes the experimental data that implicates RGS in the development of pain with focus on the pathological mechanisms of neuropathic pain, including the impact of neuropathic lesions on RGS expression and, reciprocally, the influence of modifying RGS on GPCRs involved in the modulation of nociception as well as on the outcome of pain. In this context, we address the question of the relevance of RGS as promising targets in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Regulators of G-Protein Signaling (RGS) Proteins Promote Receptor Coupling to G-Protein-Coupled Inwardly Rectifying Potassium (GIRK) Channels

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins negatively modulate presynaptic μ-opioid receptor inhibition of GABA release in the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray (vlPAG). Paradoxically, we find that G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) activation of G-protein-gated inwardly rectifying K⁺ channels (GIRKs) in the vlPAG is reduced in an agonist- and receptor-dependent manner in transgenic knock-in mice of either sex expressing mutant RGS-insensitive Gαo proteins. μ-Opioid receptor agonist activation of GIRK currents was reduced for DAMGO and fentanyl but not for [Met⁵]-enkephalin acetate salt hydrate (ME) in the RGS-insensitive heterozygous (Het) mice compared with wild-type mice. The GABA_B agonist baclofen-induced GIRK currents were also reduced in the Het mice. We confirmed the role of Gαo proteins in μ-opioid receptor and GABA_B receptor signaling pathways in wild-type mice using myristoylated peptide inhibitors of Gαo₁ and Gαi_1-3 The results using these inhibitors indicate that receptor activation of GIRK channels is dependent on the preference of the agonist-stimulated receptor for Gαo versus that for Gαi. DAMGO and fentanyl-mediated GIRK currents were reduced in the presence of the Gαo₁ inhibitor, but not the Gαi_1-3 inhibitors. In contrast, the Gαo₁ peptide inhibitor did not affect ME activation of GIRK currents, which is consistent with results in the Het mice, but the Gαi_1-3 inhibitors significantly reduced ME-mediated GIRK currents. Finally, the reduction in GIRK activation in the Het mice plays a role in opioid- and baclofen-mediated spinal antinociception, but not supraspinal antinociception. Thus, our studies indicate that RGS proteins have multiple mechanisms of modulating GPCR signaling that produce negative and positive regulation of signaling depending on the effector.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins positively modulate GPCR coupling to GIRKs, and this coupling is critical for opioid- and baclofen-mediated spinal antinociception, whereas μ-opioid receptor-mediated supraspinal antinociception depends on presynaptic inhibition that is negatively regulated by RGS proteins. The identification of these opposite roles for RGS proteins has implications for signaling via other GPCRs.

Pharmacologic Evidence for a Putative Conserved Allosteric Site on Opioid Receptors

Allosteric modulators of G protein-coupled receptors, including opioid receptors, have been proposed as possible therapeutic agents with enhanced selectivity. BMS-986122 is a positive allosteric modulator (PAM) of the μ-opioid receptor (µ-OR). BMS-986187 is a structurally distinct PAM for the δ-opioid receptor (δ-OR) that has been reported to exhibit 100-fold selectivity in promoting δ-OR over μ-OR agonism. We used ligand binding and second-messenger assays to show that BMS-986187 is an effective PAM at the μ-OR and at the κ-opioid receptor (κ-OR), but it is ineffective at the nociceptin receptor. The affinity of BMS-986187 for δ-ORs and κ-ORs is approximately 20- to 30-fold higher than for μ-ORs, determined using an allosteric ternary complex model. Moreover, we provide evidence, using a silent allosteric modulator as an allosteric antagonist, that BMS-986187 and BMS-986122 bind to a similar region on all three traditional opioid receptor types (µ-OR, δ-OR, and κ-OR). In contrast to the dogma surrounding allosteric modulators, the results indicate a possible conserved allosteric binding site across the opioid receptor family that can accommodate structurally diverse molecules. These findings have implications for the development of selective allosteric modulators.

Systematic analysis of factors influencing observations of biased agonism at the mu-opioid receptor

Biased agonism describes the ability of distinct G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) ligands to stabilise distinct receptor conformations leading to the activation of different cell signalling pathways that can deliver different physiologic outcomes. This phenomenon is having a major impact on modern drug discovery as it offers the potential to design ligands that selectively activate or inhibit the signalling pathways linked to therapeutic effects with minimal activation or blockade of signalling pathways that are linked to the development of adverse on-target effects. However, the explosion in studies of biased agonism at multiple GPCR families in recombinant cell lines has revealed a high degree of variability on descriptions of biased ligands at the same GPCR and raised the question of whether biased agonism is a fixed attribute of a ligand in all cell types. The current study addresses this question at the mu-opioid receptor (MOP). Here, we have systematically assessed the impact of differential cellular protein complement (and cellular background), signalling kinetics and receptor species on our previous descriptions of biased agonism at MOP by several opioid peptides and synthetic opioids. Our results show that all these factors need to be carefully determined and reported when considering biased agonism. Nevertheless, our studies also show that, despite changes in overall signalling profiles, ligands that previously showed distinct bias profiles at MOP retained their uniqueness across different cell backgrounds.

Disruption of the Na+ ion binding site as a mechanism for positive allosteric modulation of the mu-opioid receptor

Positive allosteric modulation of the mu-opioid receptor (MOPr), the site of action of all clinically used opioids, represents a potential approach for the management of pain. We recently reported on positive allosteric modulators of MOPr (mu-PAMs), a class A G protein coupled receptor (GPCR). This study was designed to examine the mechanism of allostery by comparing the degree to which opioid ligand structure governs modulation. To do this we examined the interaction of the mu-PAM, BMS-986122, with a chemically diverse range of MOPr orthosteric ligands. Generally, for full agonists BMS-986122 enhanced the binding affinity and potency to activate G protein with no alteration in the maximal effect. In contrast, lower efficacy agonists including morphine were insensitive to alterations in binding affinity and showed little to no change in potency to stimulate G protein. Instead, there was an increase in maximal G protein stimulation. Antagonists were unresponsive to the modulatory effects of BMS-986122. Sodium is a known endogenous allosteric modulator of MOPr and alters orthosteric agonist affinity and efficacy. The sensitivity of an orthosteric ligand to BMS-986122 was strongly correlated with its sensitivity to NaCl. In addition, BMS-986122 decreased the ability of NaCl to modulate agonist binding in an allosteric fashion. Overall, BMS-986122 displayed marked probe dependence that was based upon the efficacy of the orthosteric ligand and can be explained using the Monod-Wyman-Changeux two-state model of allostery. Furthermore, disruption of the Na(+) ion binding site may represent a common mechanism for allosteric modulation of class A GPCRs.

Opioid receptor interacting proteins and the control of opioid signaling

Opioid receptors are seven-transmembrane domain receptors that couple to intracellular signaling molecules by activating heterotrimeric G proteins. However, the receptor and G protein do not function in isolation but their activities are modulated by several accessory and scaffolding proteins. Examples include arrestins, kinases, and regulators of G protein signaling proteins. Accessory proteins contribute to the observed potency and efficacy of agonists, but also to the direction of signaling and the phenomenon of biased agonism. This review will present current knowledge of such proteins and how they may provide targets for future drug design.

Angiotensin II stimulates fibronectin protein synthesis via a Gβγ/arachidonic acid-dependent pathway

In rabbit proximal tubular cells, ANG II type 2-receptor (AT2)-induced arachidonic acid release is PLA2 coupled and dependent of G protein βγ (Gβγ) subunits. Moreover, ANG II activates ERK1/2 and transactivates EGFR via a c-Src-dependent mechanism. Arachidonic acid has been shown to mimic this effect, at least in part, by an undetermined mechanism. In this study, we determined the effects of ANG II on fibronectin expression in cultured rabbit proximal tubule cells and elucidated the signaling pathways associated with such expression. We found that ANG II and transfection of Gβγ subunits directly increased fibronectin protein expression, and this increase was inhibited by overexpression of β-adrenergic receptor kinase (βARK)-ct or DN-Src. Moreover, ANG II-induced fibronectin protein expression was significantly abrogated by the AT2 receptor antagonist PD123319. In addition, inhibition of cystolic PLA2 diminished ANG II-induced fibronectin expression. Endogenous arachidonic acid mimicked ANG II-induced fibronectin expression. We also found that overexpression of Gβγ subunits induced c-Src, ERK1/2, and EGFR tyrosine phosphorylation, which can be inhibited by overexpression of βARK-ct or DN-Src. Gβγ also induced c-Src SH2 domain association with the EGFR. Supporting these findings, in rabbit proximal tubular epithelium, immunoblot analysis indicated that βγ expression was significant. Interestingly, arachidonic acid- and eicosatetraenoic acid-induced responses were preserved in the presence of βARK-ct. This is the first report demonstrating the regulation of EGFR, ERK1/2, c-Src, and fibronectin by Gβγ subunits in renal epithelial cells. Moreover, this work demonstrates a role for Gβγ heterotrimeric proteins in ANG II, but not arachidonic acid, signaling in renal epithelial cells.

Differential control of opioid antinociception to thermal stimuli in a knock-in mouse expressing regulator of G-protein signaling-insensitive Gαo protein

Regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins classically function as negative modulators of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling. In vitro, RGS proteins have been shown to inhibit signaling by agonists at the μ-opioid receptor, including morphine. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the contribution of endogenous RGS proteins to the antinociceptive effects of morphine and other opioid agonists. To do this, a knock-in mouse that expresses an RGS-insensitive (RGSi) mutant Gαo protein, Gαo(G184S) (Gαo RGSi), was evaluated for morphine or methadone antinociception in response to noxious thermal stimuli. Mice expressing Gαo RGSi subunits exhibited a naltrexone-sensitive enhancement of baseline latency in both the hot-plate and warm-water tail-withdrawal tests. In the hot-plate test, a measure of supraspinal nociception, morphine antinociception was increased, and this was associated with an increased ability of opioids to inhibit presynaptic GABA neurotransmission in the periaqueductal gray. In contrast, antinociception produced by either morphine or methadone was reduced in the tail-withdrawal test, a measure of spinal nociception. In whole-brain and spinal cord homogenates from mice expressing Gαo RGSi subunits, there was a small loss of Gαo expression and an accompanying decrease in basal G-protein activity. Our results strongly support a role for RGS proteins as negative regulators of opioid supraspinal antinociception and also reveal a potential novel function of RGS proteins as positive regulators of opioid spinal antinociceptive pathways.

μ-Opioid receptors and regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins: from a symposium on new concepts in mu-opioid pharmacology

Mu-opioid receptors (MOR) are the therapeutic target for opiate analgesic drugs and also mediate many of the side-effects and addiction liability of these compounds. MOR is a seven-transmembrane domain receptor that couples to intracellular signaling molecules by activating heterotrimeric G proteins. However, the receptor and G protein do not function in isolation but their activities are moderated by several accessory and scaffolding proteins. One important group of accessory proteins is the regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein family, a large family of more than thirty members which bind to the activated Gα subunit of the heterotrimeric G protein and serve to accelerate signal termination. This action negatively modulates receptor signaling and subsequent behavior. Several members of this family, in particular RGS4 and RGS9-2 have been demonstrated to influence MOR signaling and morphine-induced behaviors, including reward. Moreover, this interaction is not unidirectional since morphine has been demonstrated to modulate expression levels of RGS proteins, especially RGS4 and RGS9-2, in a tissue and time dependent manner. In this article, I will discuss our work on the regulation of MOR signaling by RGS protein activity in cultured cell systems in the context of other in vitro and behavioral studies. In addition I will consider implications of the bi-directional interaction between MOR receptor activation and RGS protein activity and whether RGS proteins might provide a suitable and novel target for medications to manage addictive behaviors.

μ-Opioid receptor coupling to Gα(o) plays an important role in opioid antinociception

Opioid analgesics elicit their effects via activation of the mu-opioid receptor (MOR), a G protein-coupled receptor known to interact with Gα(i/o)-type G proteins. Work in vitro has suggested that MOR couples preferentially to the abundant brain Gα(i/o) isoform, Gα(o). However, studies in vivo evaluating morphine-mediated antinociception have not supported these findings. The aim of the present work was to evaluate the contribution of Gα(o) to MOR-dependent signaling by measuring both antinociceptive and biochemical endpoints in a Gα(o) null transgenic mouse strain. Male wild-type and Gα(o) heterozygous null (Gα(o) ⁺/⁻) mice were tested for opioid antinociception in the hot plate test or the warm-water tail withdrawal test as measures of supraspinal or spinal antinociception, respectively. Reduction in Gα(o) levels attenuated the supraspinal antinociception produced by morphine, methadone, and nalbuphine, with the magnitude of suppression dependent on agonist efficacy. This was explained by a reduction in both high-affinity MOR expression and MOR agonist-stimulated G protein activation in whole brain homogenates from Gα(o) ⁺/⁻ and Gα(o) homozygous null (Gα(o)⁻/⁻) mice, compared with wild-type littermates. On the other hand, morphine spinal antinociception was not different between Gα(o) ⁺/⁻ and wild-type mice and high-affinity MOR expression was unchanged in spinal cord tissue. However, the action of the partial agonist nalbuphine was compromised, showing that reduction in Gα(o) protein does decrease spinal antinociception, but suggesting a higher Gα(o) protein reserve. These results provide the first in vivo evidence that Gα(o) contributes to maximally efficient MOR signaling and antinociception.

RGS-insensitive Gα subunits: probes of Gα subtype-selective signaling and physiological functions of RGS proteins

The Regulator of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins were identified as a family in 1996 and humans have more than 30 such proteins. Their best known function is to suppress G Protein-Coupled Receptors (GPCR) signaling by increasing the rate of Gα turnoff through stimulation of GTPase activity (i.e., GTPase acceleration protein or GAP activity). The GAP activity of RGS proteins on the Gαi and Gαq family of G proteins can terminate signals initiated by both α and βγ subunits. RGS proteins also serve as scaffolds, assembling signal-regulating modules. Understanding the physiological roles of RGS proteins is of great importance, as GPCRs are major targets for drug development. The traditional method of using RGS knockout mice has provided some information about the role of RGS proteins but in many cases effects are modest, perhaps because of redundancy in RGS protein function. As an alternative approach, we have utilized a glycine-to-serine mutation in the switch 1 region of Gα subunits that prevents RGS binding. The mutation has no known effects on Gα binding to receptor, Gβγ, or effectors. Alterations in function resulting from the G>S mutation imply a role for both the specific mutated Gα subunit and its regulation by RGS protein activity. Mutant rodents expressing these G>S mutant Gα subunits have strong phenotypes and provide important information about specific physiological functions of Gαi2 and Gαo and their control by RGS. The conceptual framework behind this approach and a summary of recent results is presented in this chapter.

Regulator of G protein-signaling proteins and addictive drugs

Regulator of G protein-signaling (RGS) proteins are a family of more than 30 intracellular proteins that negatively modulate intracellular signaling of receptors in the G protein-coupled receptor family. This family includes receptors for opioids, cannabinoids, and dopamine that mediate the acute effects of addictive drugs or behaviors and chronic effects leading to the development of addictive disease. Members of the RGS protein family, by negatively modulating receptor signaling, influence the intracellular processes that lead to addiction. In turn, addictive drugs control the expression levels of several RGS proteins. This review will consider the distribution and mechanisms of action of RGS proteins, particularly the R4 and R7 families that have been implicated in the actions of addictive drugs, how knowledge of these proteins is contributing to an understanding of addictive processes, and whether specific RGS proteins could provide targets for the development of medications to manage and/or treat addiction.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2008

This paper is the 31st consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2008 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).

Differential modulation of mu-opioid receptor signaling to adenylyl cyclase by regulators of G protein signaling proteins 4 or 8 and 7 in permeabilised C6 cells is Galpha subtype dependent

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins act as GTPase-accelerating protein to negatively modulate G protein signaling and are defined by a conserved RGS domain with considerable amino acid diversity. To determine the effects of specific, purified RGS proteins on mu-opioid signaling, C6 cells stably expressing a mu-opioid receptor were rendered permeable to proteins by treatment with digitonin. Mu-opioid inhibition of forskolin-stimulated adenylyl cyclase by [D-Ala(2),N-Me-Phe(4),Gly-ol]-enkephalin (DAMGO), a mu-specific opioid peptide, remained fully intact in permeabilized cells. Purified RGS domain of RGS4 added to permeabilized cells resulted in a twofold loss in DAMGO potency but had no effect in cells expressing RGS-insensitive G proteins. The inhibitory effect of DAMGO was reduced to the same extent by purified RGS4 and RGS8. In contrast, the RGS domain of RGS7 had no effect and inhibited the action of RGS8 as a result of weak physical association with Galphai2 and minimal GTPase-accelerating protein activity in C6 cell membranes. These data suggest that differences in conserved RGS domains of specific RGS proteins contribute to differential regulation of opioid signaling to adenylyl cyclase and that a permeabilized cell model is useful for studying the effects of specific RGS proteins on aspects of G protein-coupled receptor signaling.

Buprenorphine is a weak partial agonist that inhibits opioid receptor desensitization

Buprenorphine is a weak partial agonist at mu-opioid receptors that is used for treatment of pain and addiction. Intracellular and whole-cell recordings were made from locus ceruleus neurons in rat brain slices to characterize the actions of buprenorphine. Acute application of buprenorphine caused a hyperpolarization that was prevented by previous treatment of slices with the irreversible opioid antagonist beta-chlornaltrexamine (beta-CNA) but was not reversed by a saturating concentration of naloxone. As expected for a partial agonist, subsaturating concentrations of buprenorphine decreased the [Met](5)enkephalin (ME)-induced hyperpolarization or outward current. When the ME-induced current was decreased below a critical value, desensitization and internalization of mu-opioid receptors was eliminated. The inhibition of desensitization by buprenorphine was not the result of previous desensitization, slow dissociation from the receptor, or elimination of receptor reserve. Treatment of slices with subsaturating concentrations of etorphine, methadone, oxymorphone, or beta-CNA also reduced the current induced by ME but did not block ME-induced desensitization. Treatment of animals with buprenorphine for 1 week resulted in the inhibition of the current induced by ME and a block of desensitization that was not different from the acute application of buprenorphine to brain slices. These observations show the unique characteristics of buprenorphine and further demonstrate the range of agonist-selective actions that are possible through G-protein-coupled receptors.

RGS9-2: probing an intracellular modulator of behavior as a drug target

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS proteins) comprise a large family of signal transduction molecules that modulate G-protein-coupled-receptor (GPCR) function. Among the RGS proteins expressed in the brain, RGS9-2 is very abundant in the striatum, a brain region involved in movement, motivation, mood and addiction. This protein negatively modulates signal transduction thus playing a key part in striatal function and resultant behavioral responses. In particular, there is evidence of important interactions with mu-opioid- and dopamine D(2)-receptor signaling pathways. Several studies indicate that manipulations of RGS9-2 levels in the striatum might greatly affect pharmacological responses. These findings indicate that treatment strategies targeting RGS9-2 levels or activity might be used to enhance responses to drugs acting at GPCRs and/or prevent undesired drug actions.

Regulator of G protein signaling protein suppression of Galphao protein-mediated alpha2A adrenergic receptor inhibition of mouse hippocampal CA3 epileptiform activity

Activation of G protein-coupled alpha(2) adrenergic receptors (ARs) inhibits epileptiform activity in the hippocampal CA3 region. The specific mechanism underlying this action is unclear. This study investigated which subtype(s) of alpha(2)ARs and G proteins (Galpha(o) or Galpha(i)) are involved in this response using recordings of mouse hippocampal CA3 epileptiform bursts. Application of epinephrine (EPI) or norepinephrine (NE) reduced the frequency of bursts in a concentration-dependent manner: (-)EPI > (-)NE >>> (+)NE. To identify the alpha(2)AR subtype involved, equilibrium dissociation constants (pK(b)) were determined for the selective alphaAR antagonists atipamezole (8.79), rauwolscine (7.75), 2-(2,6-dimethoxyphenoxyethyl)aminomethyl-1,4-benzodioxane hydrochloride (WB-4101; 6.87), and prazosin (5.71). Calculated pK(b) values correlated best with affinities determined previously for the mouse alpha(2A)AR subtype (r = 0.98, slope = 1.07). Furthermore, the inhibitory effects of EPI were lost in hippocampal slices from alpha(2A)AR-but not alpha(2C)AR-knockout mice. Pretreatment with pertussis toxin also reduced the EPI-mediated inhibition of epileptiform bursts. Finally, using knock-in mice with point mutations that disrupt regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) binding to Galpha subunits to enhance signaling by that G protein, the EPI-mediated inhibition of bursts was significantly more potent in slices from RGS-insensitive Galpha(o)(G184S) heterozygous (Galpha(o)+/GS) mice compared with either Galpha(i2)(G184S) heterozygous (Galpha(i2)+/GS) or control mice (EC(50) = 2.5 versus 19 and 23 nM, respectively). Together, these findings indicate that the inhibitory effect of EPI on hippocampal CA3 epileptiform activity uses an alpha(2A)AR/Galpha(o) protein-mediated pathway under strong inhibitory control by RGS proteins. This suggests a possible role for RGS inhibitors or selective alpha(2A)AR agonists as a novel antiepileptic drug therapy.

Modulation of opioid receptor function by protein-protein interactions

Opioid receptors, MORP, DORP and KORP, belong to the family A of G protein coupled receptors (GPCR), and have been found to modulate a large number of physiological functions, including mood, stress, appetite, nociception and immune responses. Exogenously applied opioid alkaloids produce analgesia, hedonia and addiction. Addiction is linked to alterations in function and responsiveness of all three opioid receptors in the brain. Over the last few years, a large number of studies identified protein-protein interactions that play an essential role in opioid receptor function and responsiveness. Here, we summarize interactions shown to affect receptor biogenesis and trafficking, as well as those affecting signal transduction events following receptor activation. This article also examines protein interactions modulating the rate of receptor endocytosis and degradation, events that play a major role in opiate analgesia. Like several other GPCRs, opioid receptors may form homo or heterodimers. The last part of this review summarizes recent knowledge on proteins known to affect opioid receptor dimerization.