Mutagenic mapping suggests a novel binding mode for selective agonists of M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

Analysing the effect caused by increasing the molecular volume in M1-AChR receptor agonists and antagonists: a structural and computational study

M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M1-AChR), a member of the G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) family, plays a crucial role in learning and memory, making it an important drug target for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and schizophrenia. M1-AChR activation and deactivation have shown modifying effects in AD and PD preclinical models, respectively. However, understanding the pharmacology associated with M1-AChR activation or deactivation is complex, because of the low selectivity among muscarinic subtypes, hampering their therapeutic applications. In this regard, we constructed two quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models, one for M1-AChR agonists (total and partial), and the other for the antagonists. The binding mode of 59 structurally different compounds, including agonists and antagonists with experimental binding affinity values (pKi), were analyzed employing computational molecular docking over different structures of M1-AChR. Furthermore, we considered the interaction energy (Einter), the number of rotatable bonds (NRB), and lipophilicity (ilogP) for the construction of the QSAR model for agonists (R2 = 89.64, QLMO2 = 78, and Qext2 = 79.1). For the QSAR model of antagonists (R2 = 88.44, QLMO2 = 82, and Qext2 = 78.1) we considered the Einter, the fraction of sp3 carbons fCsp3, and lipophilicity (MlogP). Our results suggest that the ligand volume is a determinant to establish its biological activity (agonist or antagonist), causing changes in binding energy, and determining the affinity for M1-AChR.

From structure to clinic: Design of a muscarinic M1 receptor agonist with potential to treatment of Alzheimer's disease

Current therapies for Alzheimer's disease seek to correct for defective cholinergic transmission by preventing the breakdown of acetylcholine through inhibition of acetylcholinesterase, these however have limited clinical efficacy. An alternative approach is to directly activate cholinergic receptors responsible for learning and memory. The M1-muscarinic acetylcholine (M1) receptor is the target of choice but has been hampered by adverse effects. Here we aimed to design the drug properties needed for a well-tolerated M1-agonist with the potential to alleviate cognitive loss by taking a stepwise translational approach from atomic structure, cell/tissue-based assays, evaluation in preclinical species, clinical safety testing, and finally establishing activity in memory centers in humans. Through this approach, we rationally designed the optimal properties, including selectivity and partial agonism, into HTL9936-a potential candidate for the treatment of memory loss in Alzheimer's disease. More broadly, this demonstrates a strategy for targeting difficult GPCR targets from structure to clinic.

RNA-binding protein 39: a promising therapeutic target for cancer

RNA-binding motif protein 39 (RBM39), as a key factor in tumor-targeted mRNA and protein expression, not only plays a vital role in tumorigenesis, but also has broad development prospects in clinical treatment and drug research. Moreover, since RBM39 was identified as a target of sulfonamides, it has played a key role in the emerging field of molecule drug development. Hence, it is of great significance to study the interaction between RBM39 and tumors and the clinical application of drug-targeted therapy. In this paper, we describe the possible multi-level regulation of RBM39, including gene transcription, protein translation, and alternative splicing. Importantly, the molecular function of RBM39 as an important splicing factor in most common tumors is systematically outlined. Furthermore, we briefly introduce RBM39’s tumor-targeted drug research and its clinical application, hoping to give reference significance for the molecular mechanism of RBM39 in tumors, and provide reliable ideas for in-depth research for future therapeutic strategies.

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.

Bitopic Binding Mode of an M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Agonist Associated with Adverse Clinical Trial Outcomes

The realization of the therapeutic potential of targeting the M₁ muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) for the treatment of cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease has prompted the discovery of M₁ mAChR ligands showing efficacy in alleviating cognitive dysfunction in both rodents and humans. Among these is GSK1034702 (7-fluoro-5-methyl-3-[1-(oxan-4-yl)piperidin-4-yl]-1H-benzimidazol-2-one), described previously as a potent M₁ receptor allosteric agonist, which showed procognitive effects in rodents and improved immediate memory in a clinical nicotine withdrawal test but induced significant side effects. Here we provide evidence using ligand binding, chemical biology and functional assays to establish that rather than the allosteric mechanism claimed, GSK1034702 interacts in a bitopic manner at the M₁ mAChR such that it can concomitantly span both the orthosteric and an allosteric binding site. The bitopic nature of GSK1034702, together with the intrinsic agonist activity and a lack of muscarinic receptor subtype selectivity reported here, all likely contribute to the adverse effects of this molecule in clinical trials. Although they impart beneficial effects on learning and memory, we conclude that these properties are undesirable in a clinical candidate due to the likelihood of adverse side effects. Rather, our data support the notion that “pure” positive allosteric modulators showing selectivity for the M₁ mAChR with low levels of intrinsic activity would be preferable to provide clinical efficacy with low adverse responses.

Allosteric modulators targeting CNS muscarinic receptors

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors are G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) which are broadly expressed in the central nervous system (CNS) and other tissues in the periphery. They emerge as important drug targets for a number of diseases including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and schizophrenia. Muscarinic receptors are divided into five subtypes (M₁-M₅) of which M₁-M₄ have been crystalized. All subtypes possess at least one allosteric binding site which is located in the extracellular region of the receptor on top of the ACh (i.e. orthosteric) binding site. The former can be specifically targeted by chemical compounds (mostly small molecules) and binding of such allosteric modulators affects the affinity and/or efficacy of orthosteric ligands. This allows highly specific modulation of GPCR function and, from a drug discovery point of view, may be advantageous in terms of subtype selectivity and biased signaling. There is a plethora of allosteric modulators for all five muscarinic receptor subtypes. This review presents the basic principles of allosteric modulation of GPCRs on both the molecular and structural level focusing on allosteric modulators of the muscarinic receptor family. Further we discuss dualsteric (i.e. bitopic orthosteric/allosteric) ligands emphasizing their potential in modulating muscarinic receptor dynamics and signaling. The common mechanisms of muscarinic receptor allosteric modulation have been proven to be generalizable and are at play at many, if not all GPCRs. Given this paradigmatic role of muscarinic receptors we suggest that also new developments in muscarinic allosteric modulation may also be extended to other members of the GPCR superfamily. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Neuropharmacology on Muscarinic Receptors'.

Prediction of consensus binding mode geometries for related chemical series of positive allosteric modulators of adenosine and muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

Following insights from recent crystal structures of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, binding modes of Positive Allosteric Modulators (PAMs) were predicted under the assumption that PAMs should bind to the extracellular surface of the active state. A series of well-characterized PAMs for adenosine (A1 R, A2A R, A3 R) and muscarinic acetylcholine (M1 R, M5 R) receptors were modeled using both rigid and flexible receptor CHARMM-based molecular docking. Studies of adenosine receptors investigated the molecular basis of the probe-dependence of PAM activity by modeling in complex with specific agonist radioligands. Consensus binding modes map common pharmacophore features of several chemical series to specific binding interactions. These models provide a rationalization of how PAM binding slows agonist radioligand dissociation kinetics. M1 R PAMs were predicted to bind in the analogous M2 R PAM LY2119620 binding site. The M5 R NAM (ML-375) was predicted to bind in the PAM (ML-380) binding site with a unique induced-fit receptor conformation. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Functional interaction between nonreceptor tyrosine kinase c-Abl and SR-Rich protein RBM39

RBM39, also known as splicing factor HCC1.4, acts as a transcriptional coactivator for the steroid nuclear receptors JUN/AP-1, ESR1/ER-α and ESR2/ER-β. RBM39 is involved in the regulation of the transcriptional responses of these steroid nuclear receptors and promotes transcriptional initiation. In this paper, we report that RBM39 interacts with the nonreceptor tyrosine kinase c-Abl. Both the Src homology (SH) 2 and SH3 domains of c-Abl interact with RBM39. The major tyrosine phosphorylation sites on RBM39 that are phosphorylated by c-Abl are Y95 and Y99, as demonstrated by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) and mutational analysis. c-Abl was shown boost the transcriptional coactivation activity of RBM39 for ERα and PRβ in a tyrosine kinase-dependent manner. The results suggest that mammalian c-Abl plays an important role in steroid hormone receptor-mediated transcription by regulating RBM39.

Opportunities and challenges in the discovery of allosteric modulators of GPCRs for treating CNS disorders

Novel allosteric modulators of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are providing fundamental advances in the development of GPCR ligands with high subtype selectivity and novel modes of efficacy that have not been possible with traditional approaches. As new allosteric modulators are advancing as drug candidates, we are developing an increased understanding of the major advantages and broad range of activities that can be achieved with these agents through selective modulation of specific signalling pathways, differential effects on GPCR homodimers versus heterodimers, and other properties. This understanding creates exciting opportunities, as well as unique challenges, in the optimization of novel therapeutic agents for disorders of the central nervous system.

Mechanistic insights into allosteric structure-function relationships at the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

Benzylquinolone carboxylic acid (BQCA) is the first highly selective positive allosteric modulator (PAM) for the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR), but it possesses low affinity for the allosteric site on the receptor. More recent drug discovery efforts identified 3-((1S,2S)-2-hydroxycyclohexyl)-6-((6-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)pyridin-3-yl)methyl)benzo[h]quinazolin-4(3H)-one (referred to herein as benzoquinazolinone 12) as a more potent M1 mAChR PAM with a structural ancestry originating from BQCA and related compounds. In the current study, we optimized the synthesis of and fully characterized the pharmacology of benzoquinazolinone 12, finding that its improved potency derived from a 50-fold increase in allosteric site affinity as compared with BQCA, while retaining a similar level of positive cooperativity with acetylcholine. We then utilized site-directed mutagenesis and molecular modeling to validate the allosteric binding pocket we previously described for BQCA as a shared site for benzoquinazolinone 12 and provide a molecular basis for its improved activity at the M1 mAChR. This includes a key role for hydrophobic and polar interactions with residues Tyr-179, in the second extracellular loop (ECL2) and Trp-400(7.35) in transmembrane domain (TM) 7. Collectively, this study highlights how the properties of affinity and cooperativity can be differentially modified on a common structural scaffold and identifies molecular features that can be exploited to tailor the development of M1 mAChR-targeting PAMs.

Molecular mechanisms of bitopic ligand engagement with the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

TBPB and 77-LH-28-1 are selective agonists of the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) that may gain their selectivity through a bitopic mechanism, interacting concomitantly with the orthosteric site and part of an allosteric site. The current study combined site-directed mutagenesis, analytical pharmacology,and molecular modeling to gain further insights into the structural basis underlying binding and signaling by these agonists. Mutations within the orthosteric binding site caused similar reductions in affinity and signaling efficacy for both selective and prototypical orthosteric ligands. In contrast, the mutation of residues within transmembrane helix (TM) 2 and the second extracellular loop (ECL2) discriminated between the different classes of ligand. In particular, ECL2 appears to be involved in the selective binding of bitopic ligands and in coordinating biased agonism between intracellular calcium mobilization and ERK1/2 phosphorylation. Molecular modeling of the interaction between TBPB and the M1 mAChR revealed a binding pose predicted to extend from the orthosteric site up toward a putative allosteric site bordered by TM2, TM3, and TM7, thus consistent with a bitopic mode of binding. Overall, these findings provide valuable structural and mechanistic insights into bitopic ligand actions and receptor activation and support a role for ECL2 in dictating the active states that can be adopted by a G protein-coupled receptor. This may enable greater selective ligand design and development for mAChRs and facilitate improved identification of bitopic ligands.

Development of allosteric modulators of GPCRs for treatment of CNS disorders

The discovery of allosteric modulators of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) provides a promising new strategy with potential for developing novel treatments for a variety of central nervous system (CNS) disorders. Traditional drug discovery efforts targeting GPCRs have focused on developing ligands for orthosteric sites which bind endogenous ligands. Allosteric modulators target a site separate from the orthosteric site to modulate receptor function. These allosteric agents can either potentiate (positive allosteric modulator, PAM) or inhibit (negative allosteric modulator, NAM) the receptor response and often provide much greater subtype selectivity than orthosteric ligands for the same receptors. Experimental evidence has revealed more nuanced pharmacological modes of action of allosteric modulators, with some PAMs showing allosteric agonism in combination with positive allosteric modulation in response to endogenous ligand (ago-potentiators) as well as "bitopic" ligands that interact with both the allosteric and orthosteric sites. Drugs targeting the allosteric site allow for increased drug selectivity and potentially decreased adverse side effects. Promising evidence has demonstrated potential utility of a number of allosteric modulators of GPCRs in multiple CNS disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease, as well as psychiatric or neurobehavioral diseases such as anxiety, schizophrenia, and addiction.

Homology modeling of human muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

We have developed homology models of the acetylcholine muscarinic receptors M₁R-M₅R, based on the β₂-adrenergic receptor crystal as the template. This is the first report of homology modeling of all five subtypes of acetylcholine muscarinic receptors with binding sites optimized for ligand binding. The models were evaluated for their ability to discriminate between muscarinic antagonists and decoy compounds using virtual screening using enrichment factors, area under the ROC curve (AUC), and an early enrichment measure, LogAUC. The models produce rational binding modes of docked ligands as well as good enrichment capacity when tested against property-matched decoy libraries, which demonstrates their unbiased predictive ability. To test the relative effects of homology model template selection and the binding site optimization procedure, we generated and evaluated a naïve M₂R model, using the M₃R crystal structure as a template. Our results confirm previous findings that binding site optimization using ligand(s) active at a particular receptor, i.e. including functional knowledge into the model building process, has a more pronounced effect on model quality than target-template sequence similarity. The optimized M₁R-M₅R homology models are made available as part of the Supporting Information to allow researchers to use these structures, compare them to their own results, and thus advance the development of better modeling approaches.

Emerging paradigms in GPCR allostery: implications for drug discovery

Allosteric ligands bind to G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs; also known as seven-transmembrane receptors) at sites that are distinct from the sites to which endogenous ligands bind. The existence of allosteric ligands has enriched the ways in which the functions of GPCRs can be manipulated for potential therapeutic benefit, yet the complexity of their actions provides both challenges and opportunities for drug screening and development. Converging avenues of research in areas such as biased signalling by allosteric ligands and the mechanisms by which allosteric ligands modulate the effects of diverse endogenous ligands have provided new insights into how interactions between allosteric ligands and GPCRs could be exploited for drug discovery. These new findings have the potential to alter how screening for allosteric drugs is performed and may increase the chances of success in the development of allosteric modulators as clinical lead compounds.

Are GPCRs Still a Source of New Targets?

G-protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) still offer enormous scope for new therapeutic targets. Currently marketed agents are dominated by those with activity at aminergic receptors and yet they account for only ~10% of the family. Progress up until now with other subfamilies, notably orphans, Family A/peptide, Family A/lipid, Family B, Family C, and Family F, has been, at best, patchy. This may be attributable to the heterogeneous nature of GPCRs, their endogenous ligands, and consequently their binding sites. Our appreciation of receptor similarity has arguably been too simplistic, and screening collections have not necessarily been well suited to identifying leads in new areas. Despite the relative shortage of high-quality tool molecules in a number of cases, there is an emerging, and increasingly substantial, body of evidence associating many as yet “undrugged” receptors with a very wide range of diseases. Significant advances in our understanding of receptor pharmacology and technical advances in screening, protein X-ray crystallography, and ligand design methods are paving the way for new successes in the area. Exploitation of allosteric mechanisms; alternative signaling pathways such as G12/13, Gβγ, and β-arrestin; the discovery of “biased” ligands; and the emergence of GPCR-protein complexes as potential drug targets offer scope for new and much improved drugs.

Development of M1 mAChR allosteric and bitopic ligands: prospective therapeutics for the treatment of cognitive deficits

Since the cholinergic hypothesis of memory dysfunction was first reported, extensive research efforts have focused on elucidating the mechanisms by which this intricate system contributes to the regulation of processes such as learning, memory, and higher executive function. Several cholinergic therapeutic targets for the treatment of cognitive deficits, psychotic symptoms, and the underlying pathophysiology of neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia, have since emerged. Clinically approved drugs now exist for some of these targets; however, they all may be considered suboptimal therapeutics in that they produce undesirable off-target activity leading to side effects, fail to address the wide variety of symptoms and underlying pathophysiology that characterize these disorders, and/or afford little to no therapeutic effect in subsets of patient populations. A promising target for which there are presently no approved therapies is the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M1 mAChR). Despite avid investigation, development of agents that selectively activate this receptor via the orthosteric site has been hampered by the high sequence homology of the binding site between the five muscarinic receptor subtypes and the wide distribution of this receptor family in both the central nervous system (CNS) and the periphery. Hence, a plethora of ligands targeting less structurally conserved allosteric sites of the M1 mAChR have been investigated. This Review aims to explain the rationale behind allosterically targeting the M1 mAChR, comprehensively summarize and critically evaluate the M1 mAChR allosteric ligand literature to date, highlight the challenges inherent in allosteric ligand investigation that are impeding their clinical advancement, and discuss potential methods for resolving these issues.

GPCR activation: a mutagenic spotlight on crystal structures

The crystal structures of antagonist and agonist complexes of isolated β(2) and β(1) adrenoceptors have recently been supplemented by antagonist structures of M(2) and M(3) muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. Importantly, a structure of an agonist-ligated β(2) adrenoceptor complexed with its cognate G protein has provided the first view of a ternary complex representing the transition state in agonist-mediated G protein activation. This review interprets these G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) structures through the focus provided by extensive mutagenesis studies on muscarinic receptors, revealing an activation mechanism that is both modular and dynamic. Specific motifs, based around highly conserved residues, functionalise the seven-transmembrane architecture of these receptors. While exploiting conserved motifs, the ligand binding and signal transduction pathways work around and through water-containing cavities, an emerging feature of GPCR structures. These cavities may have undergone evolutionary selection to adapt GPCRs to particular signalling niches, and may provide targeting opportunities to enhance drug selectivity.

Stimulus bias provides evidence for conformational constraints in the structure of a G protein-coupled receptor

A key characteristic of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is that they activate a plethora of signaling pathways. It is now clear that a GPCR coupling to these pathways can be regulated selectively by ligands that differentially drive signaling down one pathway in preference to another. This concept, termed stimulus bias, is revolutionizing receptor biology and drug discovery by providing a means of selectively targeting receptor signaling pathways that have therapeutic impact. Herein, we utilized a novel quantitative method that determines stimulus bias of synthetic GPCR ligands in a manner that nullifies the impact of both the cellular background and the "natural bias" of the endogenous ligand. By applying this method to the M(2) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, a prototypical GPCR, we found that mutation of key residues (Tyr-80(2.61) and Trp-99(3.28)) in an allosteric binding pocket introduces stimulus bias in response to the atypical ligands AC-42 (4-n-butyl-1-(4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl)piperidine HCl) and 77-LH-28-1 (1-(3-(4-butyl-1-piperidinyl)propyl)- 3,3-dihydro-2(1H)-quinolinone). By comparing stimulus bias factors among receptor internalization, G protein activation, extracellular-regulated protein kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) signaling, and receptor phosphorylation, we provide evidence that Tyr-80(2.61) and Trp-99(3.28) act either as molecular switches or as gatekeeper residues that introduce constraints limiting the active conformation of the M(2) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor and thereby regulate stimulus bias. Furthermore, we provide evidence that downstream signaling pathways previously considered to be related to each other (i.e. receptor phosphorylation, internalization, and activation of ERK1/2) can act independently.

Fluorescent derivatives of AC-42 to probe bitopic orthosteric/allosteric binding mechanisms on muscarinic M1 receptors

Two fluorescent derivatives of the M1 muscarinic selective agonist AC-42 were synthesized by coupling the lissamine rhodamine B fluorophore (in ortho and para positions) to AC42-NH(2). This precursor, prepared according to an original seven-step procedure, was included in the study together with the LRB fluorophore (alone or linked to an alkyl chain). All these compounds are antagonists, but examination of their ability to inhibit or modulate orthosteric [(3)H]NMS binding revealed that para-LRB-AC42 shared several properties with AC-42. Carefully designed experiments allowed para-LRB-AC42 to be used as a FRET tracer on EGFP-fused M1 receptors. Under equilibrium binding conditions, orthosteric ligands, AC-42, and the allosteric modulator gallamine behaved as competitors of para-LRB-AC42 binding whereas other allosteric compounds such as WIN 51,708 and N-desmethylclozapine were noncompetitive inhibitors. Finally, molecular modeling studies focused on putative orthosteric/allosteric bitopic poses for AC-42 and para-LRB-AC42 in a 3D model of the human M1 receptor.

Structure and dynamics of the M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

Acetylcholine (ACh), the first neurotransmitter to be identified¹, exerts many of its physiological actions via activation of a family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) known as muscarinic ACh receptors (mAChRs). Although the five mAChR subtypes (M₁-M₅) share a high degree of sequence homology, they show pronounced differences in G protein coupling preference and the physiological responses they mediate.^2–4 Unfortunately, despite decades of effort, no therapeutic agents endowed with clear mAChR subtype selectivity have been developed to exploit these differences.^5–6 We describe here the structure of the G_q/11-coupled M₃ mAChR bound to the bronchodilator drug tiotropium and identify the binding mode for this clinically important drug. This structure, together with that of the G_i/o-coupled M₂ receptor, offers new possibilities for the design of mAChR subtype-selective ligands. Importantly, the M₃ receptor structure allows the first structural comparison between two members of a mammalian GPCR subfamily displaying different G-protein coupling selectivities. Furthermore, molecular dynamics simulations suggest that tiotropium binds transiently to an allosteric site en route to the binding pocket of both receptors. These simulations offer a structural view of an allosteric binding mode for an orthosteric GPCR ligand and raise additional opportunities for the design of ligands with different affinities or binding kinetics for different mAChR subtypes. Our findings not only offer new insights into the structure and function of one of the most important GPCR families, but may also facilitate the design of improved therapeutics targeting these critical receptors.

FRET-based detection of M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation by orthosteric and allosteric agonists

Background and Objective

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) are 7-transmembrane, G protein-coupled receptors that regulate a variety of physiological processes and represent potentially important targets for therapeutic intervention. mAChRs can be stimulated by full and partial orthosteric and allosteric agonists, however the relative abilities of such ligands to induce conformational changes in the receptor remain unclear. To gain further insight into the actions of mAChR agonists, we have developed a fluorescently tagged M₁ mAChR that reports ligand-induced conformational changes in real-time by changes in Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET).

Methods

Variants of CFP and YFP were inserted into the third intracellular loop and at the end of the C-terminus of the mouse M₁ mAChR, respectively. The optimized FRET receptor construct (M₁-cam5) was expressed stably in HEK293 cells.

Results

The variant CFP/YFP-receptor chimera expressed predominantly at the plasma membrane of HEK293 cells and displayed ligand-binding affinities comparable with those of the wild-type receptor. It also retained an ability to interact with Gα_q/11 proteins and to stimulate phosphoinositide turnover, ERK1/2 phosphorylation and undergo agonist-dependent internalization. Addition of the full agonist methacholine caused a reversible decrease in M₁ FRET (F_EYFP/F_ECFP) that was prevented by atropine pre-addition and showed concentration-dependent amplitude and kinetics. Partial orthosteric agonists, arecoline and pilocarpine, as well as allosteric agonists, AC-42 and 77-LH-28-1, also caused atropine-sensitive decreases in the FRET signal, which were smaller in amplitude and significantly slower in onset compared to those evoked by methacholine.

Conclusion

The M₁ FRET-based receptor chimera reports that allosteric and orthosteric agonists induce similar conformational changes in the third intracellular loop and/or C-terminus, and should prove to be a valuable molecular reagent for pharmacological and structural investigations of M₁ mAChR activation.

Structure-function studies of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

There has been great interest in the structure-function relationships of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) because these prototypical Family A/class 1 G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are attractive therapeutic targets for both peripheral and central nervous system disorders. A multitude of drugs that act at the mAChRs have been identified over the years, but many of these show minimal selectivity for any one of the five mAChR subtypes over the others, which has hampered their development into therapeutics due to adverse side effects. The lack of drug specificity is primarily due to high sequence similarity in this family of receptor, especially in the orthosteric binding pocket. Thus, there remains an ongoing need for a molecular understanding of how mAChRs bind their ligands, and how selectivity in binding and activation can be achieved. Unfortunately, there remains a paucity of solved high-resolution structures of GPCRs, including the mAChRs, and thus most of our knowledge of structure-function mechanisms related to this receptor family to date has been obtained indirectly through approaches such as mutagenesis. Nonetheless, such studies have revealed a wealth of information that has led to novel insights and may be used to guide future rational drug design campaigns.

Ligand binding assays at equilibrium: validation and interpretation

The focus of this review paper is factors affecting data interpretation in ligand binding assays under equilibrium conditions. Protocols for determining K(d) (the equilibrium dissociation constant) and K(dA) (the equilibrium inhibitor constant) for receptor ligands are discussed. The basic theory describing the interaction of a radiotracer and an unlabelled competitor ligand with a receptor is developed. Inappropriate experimental design may result in ligand depletion and non-attainment of equilibrium, distorting the calculation of K(d) and K(dA) . Strategies, both theoretical and practical, will be given to avoid and correct such errors, thus leading to the determination of reliable values for these constants. In determining K(dA) from competition binding studies, two additional concepts are discussed. First, the necessity to measure an adequate specific binding signal from the bound radiotracer ligand limits the range of affinity constants that can be measured: a particular set of assay conditions may lead to an upper limit on the apparent affinity of unlabelled ligands. Second, an extension of the basic assay methodology can indicate whether the interaction between the tracer and a test ligand is mediated by a competitive or an allosteric mechanism. Finally, the review ends with a discussion of two factors that are often overlooked: buffer composition and the temperature at which the assay is conducted, and the impact these can have on affinity measurements and the understanding of drug interactions.

The best of both worlds? Bitopic orthosteric/allosteric ligands of g protein-coupled receptors

It is now acknowledged that G protein-coupled receptors, the largest class of drug targets, adopt multiple active states that can be preferentially stabilized by orthosteric ligands or allosteric modulators, thus giving rise to the phenomenon of pathway-biased signaling. In the past few years, researchers have begun to explore the potential of linking orthosteric and allosteric pharmacophores to yield bitopic hybrid ligands. This approach is an extension of the more traditional bivalent ligand concept and shares some of the same challenges, including the choice and role of the linker between the two pharmacophores and the validation of mechanism of action. Nonetheless, the promise of bitopic ligands is the generation of novel chemical tools that have improved affinity and/or selectivity profiles. Previously identified functionally selective compounds (and medicines) also may act via a bitopic mechanism, suggesting that the phenomenon is more widespread than currently appreciated.

The use of G-protein coupled receptor models in lead optimization

With the emerging new crystal structures of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), the number of reported in silico receptor models vastly increases every year. The use of these models in lead optimization (LO) is investigated here. Although there are many studies where GPCR models are used to identify new chemotypes by virtual screening, the classical application in LO is rarely reported. The reason for this may be that the quality of a model, which is appropriate for atomistic modeling, must be very high, and the biology of GPCR ligand-dependent signaling is still not fully understood. However, the few reported studies show that GPCR models can be used efficiently in LO for various problems, such as affinity optimization or tuning of physicochemical parameters.

Helix 8 of the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor: scanning mutagenesis delineates a G protein recognition site

We have used alanine-scanning mutagenesis followed by functional expression and molecular modeling to analyze the roles of the 14 residues, Asn422 to Cys435, C-terminal to transmembrane (TM) helix 7 of the M(1) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. The results suggest that they form an eighth (H8) helix, associated with the cytoplasmic surface of the cell membrane in the active state of the receptor. We suggest that the amide side chain of Asn422 may act as a cap to the C terminus of TM7, stabilizing its junction with H8, whereas the side chain of Phe429 may restrict the relative movements of H8 and the C terminus of TM7 in the inactive ground state of the receptor. We have identified four residues, Phe425, Arg426, Thr428, and Leu432, which are important for G protein binding and signaling. These may form a docking site for the C-terminal helix of the G protein α subunit, and collaborate with G protein recognition residues elsewhere in the cytoplasmic domain of the receptor to form a coherent surface for G protein binding in the activated state of the receptor.

Allosteric Modulation of Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors

An allosteric modulator is a ligand that binds to an allosteric site on the receptor and changes receptor conformation to produce increase (positive cooperativity) or decrease (negative cooperativity) in the binding or action of an orthosteric agonist (e.g., acetylcholine). Since the identification of gallamine as the first allosteric modulator of muscarinic receptors in 1976, this unique mode of receptor modulation has been intensively studied by many groups. This review summarizes over 30 years of research on the molecular mechanisms of allosteric interactions of drugs with the receptor and for new allosteric modulators of muscarinic receptors with potential therapeutic use. Identification of positive modulators of acetylcholine binding and function that enhance neurotransmission and the discovery of highly selective allosteric modulators are mile-stones on the way to novel therapeutic agents for the treatment of schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease and other disorders involving impaired cognitive function.

Allosteric activators of muscarinic receptors as novel approaches for treatment of CNS disorders

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) represent exciting therapeutic targets for the treatment of multiple CNS disorders. The high degree of conservation of amino acids comprising the orthosteric acetylcholine (ACh) binding site between individual mAChR subtypes has hindered the development of subtype-selective compounds that bind to this site. As a result, many academic and industry researchers are now focusing on developing allosteric activators of mAChRs including both positive allosteric modulators (PAMs) and allosteric agonists. In the past 10 years major advances have been achieved in the discovery of allosteric ligands that possess much greater selectivity for individual mAChR subtypes when compared to previously developed orthosteric agents. These novel allosteric modulators of mAChRs may provide therapeutic potential for treatment of a number of CNS disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia.

The M1 muscarinic receptor allosteric agonists AC-42 and 1-[1'-(2-methylbenzyl)-1,4'-bipiperidin-4-yl]-1,3-dihydro-2H-benzimidazol-2-one bind to a unique site distinct from the acetylcholine orthosteric site

Activation of M1 muscarinic receptors occurs through orthosteric and allosteric binding sites. To identify critical residues, site-directed mutagenesis and chimeric receptors were evaluated in functional calcium mobilization assays to compare orthosteric agonists, acetylcholine and xanomeline, M1 allosteric agonists AC-42 (4-n-butyl-1-[4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl]-piperidine hydrogen chloride), TBPB (1-[1'-(2-methylbenzyl)-1,4'-bipiperidin-4-yl]-1,3-dihydro-2H-benzimidazol-2-one), and the clozapine metabolite N-desmethylclozapine. A minimal epitope has been defined for AC-42 that comprises the first 45 amino acids, the third extracellular loop, and seventh transmembrane domain (Mol Pharmacol 61:1297-1302, 2002). Using chimeric M1 and M3 receptor constructs, the AC-42 minimal epitope has been extended to also include transmembrane II. Phe77 was identified as a critical residue for maintenance of AC-42 and TBPB agonist activity. In contrast, the functional activity of N-desmethylclozapine did not require Phe77. To further map the binding site of AC-42, TBPB, and N-desmethylclozapine, point mutations previously reported to affect activities of M1 orthosteric agonists and antagonists were studied. Docking into an M1 receptor homology model revealed that AC-42 and TBPB share a similar binding pocket adjacent to the orthosteric binding site at the opposite face of Trp101. In contrast, the activity of N-desmethylclozapine was generally unaffected by the point mutations studied, and the docking indicated that N-desmethylclozapine bound to a site distinct from AC-42 and TBPB overlapping with the orthosteric site. These results suggest that structurally diverse allosteric agonists AC-42, TBPB, and N-desmethylclozapine may interact with different subsets of residues, supporting the hypothesis that M1 receptor activation can occur through at least three different binding domains.

Orthosteric and allosteric modes of interaction of novel selective agonists of the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

Recent years have witnessed the discovery of novel selective agonists of the M(1) muscarinic acetylcholine (ACh) receptor (mAChR). One mechanism invoked to account for the selectivity of such agents is that they interact with allosteric sites. We investigated the molecular pharmacology of two such agonists, 1-[3-(4-butyl-1-piperidinyl)propyl]-3,4-dihydro-2(1H)-quinolinone (77-LH-28-1) and 4-n-butyl-1-[4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl] piperidine hydrogen chloride (AC-42), at the wild-type M(1) mAChR and three mutant M(1) mAChRs. Both agonists inhibited the binding of the orthosteric antagonist [(3)H]N-methyl scopolamine ([(3)H]NMS) in a manner consistent with orthosteric competition or high negative cooperativity. Functional interaction studies between 77-LH-28-1 and ACh also indicated a competitive mechanism. Dissociation kinetics assays revealed that the agonists could bind allosterically when the orthosteric site was prelabeled with [(3)H]NMS and that 77-LH-28-1 competed with the prototypical allosteric modulator heptane-1,7-bis-[dimethyl-3'-phthalimidopropyl]-ammonium bromide under these conditions. Mutation of the key orthosteric site residues Y(381)A (transmembrane helix 6) and W(101)A (transmembrane helix 3) reduced the affinity of prototypical orthosteric agonists but increased the affinity of the novel agonists. Divergent effects were also noted on agonist signaling efficacies at these mutants. We identified a novel mutation, F(77)I (transmembrane helix 2), which selectively reduced the efficacy of the novel agonists in mediating intracellular Ca(2+) elevation and phosphorylation of extracellular signal regulated kinase 1/2. Molecular modeling suggested a possible "bitopic" binding mode, whereby the agonists extend down into the orthosteric site as well as up toward extracellular receptor regions associated with an allosteric site. It is possible that this bitopic mode may explain the pharmacology of other selective mAChR agonists.

Identification of orthosteric and allosteric site mutations in M2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors that contribute to ligand-selective signaling bias

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors contain at least one allosteric site that is topographically distinct from the acetylcholine, orthosteric binding site. Although studies have investigated the basis of allosteric modulation at these receptors, less is known about putative allosteric ligands that activate the receptor in their own right. We generated M(2) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor mutations in either the orthosteric site in transmembrane helices 3 and 6 (TM3 and -6) or part of an allosteric site involving the top of TM2, the second extracellular (E2) loop, and the top of TM7 and investigated their effects on the binding and function of the novel selective (putative allosteric) agonists (AC-42 (4-n-butyl-1-(4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl)piperidine HCl), 77-LH-28-1 (1-(3-(4-butyl-1-piperidinyl)propyl)-3,3-dihydro-2(1H)-quinolinone), and N-desmethylclozapine) as well as the bitopic orthosteric/allosteric ligand, McN-A-343 (4-(m-chlorophenyl-carbamoyloxy)-2-butynyltrimethylammonium). Four classes of agonists were identified, depending on their response to the mutations, suggesting multiple, distinct modes of agonist-receptor interaction. Interestingly, with the exception of 77-LH-28-1, allosteric site mutations had no effect on the affinity of any of the agonists tested, but some mutations in the E2 loop influenced the efficacy of both orthosteric and novel selective agonists, highlighting a role for this region of the receptor in modulating activation status. Two point mutations (Y104(3.33)A (Ballesteros and Weinstein numbers in superscript) in the orthosteric and Y177A in the allosteric site) unmasked ligand-selective and signaling pathway-selective effects, providing evidence for the existence of pathway-specific receptor conformations. Molecular modeling of 77-LH-28-1 and N-desmethylclozapine yielded novel binding poses consistent with the possibility that the functional selectivity of such agents may arise from a bitopic mechanism.

Discovery and characterization of novel subtype-selective allosteric agonists for the investigation of M(1) receptor function in the central nervous system

Cholinergic transmission in the forebrain is mediated primarily by five subtypes of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs), termed M(1)-M(5). Of the mAChR subtypes, M(1) is among the most heavily expressed in regions that are critical for learning and memory, and has been viewed as the most critical mAChR subtype for memory and attention mechanisms. Unfortunately, it has been difficult to develop selective activators of M(1) and other individual mAChR subtypes, which has prevented detailed studies of the functional roles of selective activation of M(1). Using a functional HTS screen and subsequent diversity-oriented synthesis approach we have discovered a novel series of highly selective M(1) allosteric agonists. These compounds activate M(1) with EC(50) values in the 150 nM to 500 nM range and have unprecedented, clean ancillary pharmacology (no substantial activity at 10μM across a large panel of targets). Targeted mutagenesis revealed a potentially novel allosteric binding site in the third extracellular loop of the M(1) receptor for these allosteric agonists. Optimized compounds, such as VU0357017, provide excellent brain exposure after systemic dosing and have robust in vivo efficacy in reversing scopolamine-induced deficits in a rodent model of contextual fear conditioning. This series of selective M(1) allosteric agonists provides critical research tools to allow dissection of M(1)-mediated effects in the CNS and potential leads for novel treatments for Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia.

Contrasting effects of allosteric and orthosteric agonists on m1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor internalization and down-regulation

A new class of subtype-selective muscarinic acetylcholine (mACh) receptor agonist that activates the receptor through interaction at a site distinct from the orthosteric acetylcholine binding site has been reported recently. Here, we have compared the effects of orthosteric (oxotremorine-M, arecoline, pilocarpine) and allosteric [4-n-butyl-1-[4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl] piperidine (AC-42); 1-[3-(4-butyl-1-piperidinyl)propyl]-3,4-dihydro-2(1H)-quinolinone (77-LH-28-1)] agonists on M(1) mACh receptor internalization and down-regulation, as well as functional coupling in a Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell line. In contrast to full and partial orthosteric agonists, which cause significant receptor internalization and down-regulation, prolonged exposure to AC-42 did not significantly alter either cell-surface or total cellular M(1) mACh receptor expression. 77-LH-28-1, an AC-42 homolog, did cause some receptor internalization, but not down-regulation. The presence of atropine completely prevented the orthosteric agonist-induced adaptive changes in receptor populations; however, in contrast, the copresence of atropine and AC-42 significantly increased both cell-surface receptor and total M(1) mACh receptor expression. Maximal phosphoinositide hydrolysis responses to the partial agonist arecoline were similar in CHO-M(1) cells pretreated for 24 h with either AC-42 or vehicle; in contrast, these responses were markedly reduced when cells were pretreated with oxotremorine-M or pilocarpine. These data indicate that, whereas AC-42 binding to the M(1) mACh receptor can initiate signal transduction, the AC-42-liganded receptor is resistant to the usual mechanisms regulating receptor internalization and down-regulation. In addition, our data suggest unusual interactions between allosteric agonists and orthosteric antagonists to regulate cell-surface and total cellular receptor expression.

Subtype-selective allosteric modulators of muscarinic receptors for the treatment of CNS disorders

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) have long been viewed as viable targets for novel therapeutic agents for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other disorders involving impaired cognitive function. More recent evidence indicates that mAChR activators might also have utility in treating psychosis and other symptoms associated with schizophrenia and other central nervous system (CNS) disorders. Efforts to develop mAChR subtype-selective agonists have been hampered by difficulty in achieving high selectivity for individual mAChR subtypes important for CNS function (M(1) and M(4)) and adverse effects due to activation of peripheral mAChRs (especially M(2) and M(3)). Major advances have now been achieved in the discovery of allosteric agonists and positive allosteric modulators of M(1) and M(4) that show greater selectivity for individual mAChR subtypes than do previous mAChR agonists. Early studies indicate that these allosteric mAChR activators have properties needed for optimization as potential clinical candidates and have robust effects in animal models that predict efficacy in the treatment of AD, schizophrenia and related disorders.