Literature DB >> 15655507

An investigation of whether agonist-selective receptor conformations occur with respect to M2 and M4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor signalling via Gi/o and Gs proteins.

Rajendra Mistry1, Mark R Dowling, R A John Challiss.   

Abstract

1. A range of muscarinic acetylcholine (mACh) receptor agonists (methacholine (MCh), oxotremorine-M (OXO-M), oxotremorine (OXO), arecoline (AREC), bethanechol (BETH), pilocarpine (PILO)) have been investigated with respect to their binding to, and activation of, M(2) and M(4) mACh receptors, recombinantly expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells, to explore the possibility that these agonists may differentially affect mACh receptor-G(i/o) and -G(s) coupling. 2. M(2)/M(4) mACh receptor coupling to the adenylyl cyclase/cyclic AMP signalling pathway has been explored in intact cells. G(i/o)-mediated negative coupling to adenylyl cyclase was explored functionally by assessing the ability of the mACh receptor agonists to inhibit forskolin-stimulated enzymic activity. Following pertussis toxin treatment (100 ng ml(-1), 18-20 h) to inactivate G(i/o) proteins, each agonist caused a G(s)-mediated enhancement of forskolin-stimulated adenylyl cyclase activity. 3. At both M(2) and M(4) mACh receptors, all agonists tested were more potent in mediating G(i/o)- versus G(s)-coupled responses. This difference (determined as the pIC(50) (G(i/o) coupling) minus pEC(50) (G(s) coupling) value) was greatest for AREC (65-75-fold) and least for BETH and PILO (</=10-fold). 4. Using apparent binding affinities (pK(B)), and potency (EC(50)/IC(50)) and responsiveness (E(max)/I(max)) estimates, relative efficacy (e(rel)) values for each agonist with respect to M(2) and M(4) mACh receptor coupling to G(i/o)- and G(s)-mediated signalling were also calculated. While the e(rel) values obtained for MCh and OXO-M in CHO-m2 cells were similar, OXO-M behaved as a 'super-agonist' at the M(4) mACh receptor giving greater e(rel) values for both G(i/o) and G(s) coupling relative to MCh. 5. The experimental data indicate that while interesting differences between agonists with respect to M(2)/M(4) mACh receptor activation and receptor-G(i/o) and -G(s) coupling can be discerned, no clear examples of agonist trafficking of signal have emerged.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15655507      PMCID: PMC1576035          DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706090

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Pharmacol        ISSN: 0007-1188            Impact factor:   8.739


  42 in total

Review 1.  Muscarinic receptors--characterization, coupling and function.

Authors:  M P Caulfield
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 12.310

2.  Porcine m2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor-effector coupling in Chinese hamster ovary cells.

Authors:  W K Vogel; V A Mosser; D A Bulseco; M I Schimerlik
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1995-06-30       Impact factor: 5.157

3.  Distribution of m1-m4 muscarinic receptor proteins in the rat striatum: light and electron microscopic immunocytochemistry using subtype-specific antibodies.

Authors:  S M Hersch; C A Gutekunst; H D Rees; C J Heilman; A I Levey
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  A novel mechanism for coupling of m4 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors to calmodulin-sensitive adenylyl cyclases: crossover from G protein-coupled inhibition to stimulation.

Authors:  A H Dittman; J P Weber; T R Hinds; E J Choi; J C Migeon; N M Nathanson; D R Storm
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  1994-02-01       Impact factor: 3.162

Review 5.  Agonist-receptor efficacy. II. Agonist trafficking of receptor signals.

Authors:  T Kenakin
Journal:  Trends Pharmacol Sci       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 14.819

6.  Modulation of agonist binding by guanine nucleotides in CHO cells expressing muscarinic m1-m5 receptors.

Authors:  P L van Giersbergen; R Leppik
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.000

7.  Identification of a Gs coupling domain in the amino terminus of the third intracellular loop of the alpha 2A-adrenergic receptor. Evidence for distinct structural determinants that confer Gs versus Gi coupling.

Authors:  M G Eason; S B Liggett
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1995-10-20       Impact factor: 5.157

8.  Differential coupling of m2 and m4 muscarinic receptors to inhibition of adenylyl cyclase by Gi alpha and G(o)alpha subunits.

Authors:  J C Migeon; S L Thomas; N M Nathanson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1995-07-07       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Constitutive activation of a single effector pathway: evidence for multiple activation states of a G protein-coupled receptor.

Authors:  D M Perez; J Hwa; R Gaivin; M Mathur; F Brown; R M Graham
Journal:  Mol Pharmacol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.436

10.  Human muscarinic receptors expressed in A9L and CHO cells: activation by full and partial agonists.

Authors:  M H Richards; P L van Giersbergen
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 8.739

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Superagonism at G protein-coupled receptors and beyond.

Authors:  R Schrage; A De Min; K Hochheiser; E Kostenis; K Mohr
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2015-10-24       Impact factor: 8.739

2.  Membrane cholesterol content influences binding properties of muscarinic M2 receptors and differentially impacts activation of second messenger pathways.

Authors:  Pavel Michal; Vladimír Rudajev; Esam E El-Fakahany; Vladimír Dolezal
Journal:  Eur J Pharmacol       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 4.432

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

Authors:  Rachel L Thomas; Christopher J Langmead; Martyn D Wood; R A John Challiss
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 4.030

4.  Lack of association of a spontaneous mutation of the Chrm2 gene with behavioral and physiologic phenotypic differences in inbred mice.

Authors:  Ming Ding; Jennifer Arnold; Jeremy Turner; Vickram Ramkumar; Larry F Hughes; Rita A Trammell; Linda A Toth
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 0.982

5.  Quantitative analysis reveals multiple mechanisms of allosteric modulation of the mGlu5 receptor in rat astroglia.

Authors:  Sophie J Bradley; Christopher J Langmead; Jeannette M Watson; R A John Challiss
Journal:  Mol Pharmacol       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 4.436

6.  Agonists with supraphysiological efficacy at the muscarinic M2 ACh receptor.

Authors:  R Schrage; W K Seemann; J Klöckner; C Dallanoce; K Racké; E Kostenis; M De Amici; U Holzgrabe; K Mohr
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 8.739

7.  Selectivity of agonists for the active state of M1 to M4 muscarinic receptor subtypes.

Authors:  Katherine W Figueroa; Michael T Griffin; Frederick J Ehlert
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2008-09-29       Impact factor: 4.030

8.  Muscarinic inhibition of hippocampal and striatal adenylyl cyclase is mainly due to the M(4) receptor.

Authors:  Gonzalo Sánchez; Natalia Colettis; Pablo Vázquez; Carlos Cerveñansky; Alejandra Aguirre; Jorge A Quillfeldt; Diana Jerusalinsky; Edgar Kornisiuk
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2009-02-04       Impact factor: 3.996

Review 9.  Fine Tuning Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Signaling Through Allostery and Bias.

Authors:  Emma T van der Westhuizen; K H Christopher Choy; Celine Valant; Simon McKenzie-Nickson; Sophie J Bradley; Andrew B Tobin; Patrick M Sexton; Arthur Christopoulos
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 5.810

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.