Search

Huntington disease (HD) is an inherited, autosomal dominant, neurodegenerative disorder with limited treatment options. Prior to motor symptom onset or neuronal cell loss in HD, levels of the type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1) decrease in the basal ganglia. Decreasing CB1 levels are strongly correlated with chorea and cognitive deficit. CB1 agonists are functionally selective (biased) for divergent signaling pathways. In this study, six cannabinoids were tested for signaling bias in in vitro models of medium spiny projection neurons expressing wild-type (STHdh(Q7/Q7)) or mutant huntingtin protein (STHdh(Q111/Q111)). Signaling bias was assessed using the Black and Leff operational model. Relative activity [ΔlogR (τ/KA)] and system bias (ΔΔlogR) were calculated relative to the reference compound WIN55,212-2 for Gαi/o, Gαs, Gαq, Gβγ, and β-arrestin1 signaling following treatment with 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), anandamide (AEA), CP55,940, Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and THC+CBD (1:1), and compared between wild-type and HD cells. The Emax of Gαi/o-dependent extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) signaling was 50% lower in HD cells compared with wild-type cells. 2-AG and AEA displayed Gαi/o/Gβγ bias and normalized CB1 protein levels and improved cell viability, whereas CP55,940 and THC displayed β-arrestin1 bias and reduced CB1 protein levels and cell viability in HD cells. CBD was not a CB1 agonist but inhibited THC-dependent signaling (THC+CBD). Therefore, enhancing Gαi/o-biased endocannabinoid signaling may be therapeutically beneficial in HD. In contrast, cannabinoids that are β-arrestin-biased--such as THC found at high levels in modern varieties of marijuana--may be detrimental to CB1 signaling, particularly in HD where CB1 levels are already reduced.

Activation of dopamine receptor 2 long (D2L) switches the signaling of type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1) from Gαi to Gαs, a process thought to be mediated through CB1-D2L heteromerization. Given the clinical importance of D2 antagonists, the goal of this study was to determine if D2 antagonists could modulate CB1 signaling. Interactions between CB1 and D2L, Gαi, Gαs, and β-arrestin1 were studied using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer 2 (BRET(2)) in STHdh(Q7/Q7) cells. CB1-dependent extracellular regulated kinase (ERK)1/2, CREB phosphorylation, and CB1 internalization following cotreatment of CB1 agonist and D2 antagonist were quantified. Preassembled CB1-Gαi complexes were detected by BRET(2) Arachidonyl-2'-chloroethylamide (ACEA), a selective CB1 agonist, caused a rapid and transient increase in BRET efficiency (BRETEff) between Gαi-Rluc and CB1-green fluorescent protein 2 (GFP(2)), and a Gαi-dependent increase in ERK phosphorylation. Physical interactions between CB1 and D2L were observed using BRET(2) Cotreatment of STHdh(Q7/Q7) cells with ACEA and haloperidol, a D2 antagonist, inhibited BRETEff signals between Gαi-Rluc and CB1-GFP(2) and reduced the EMax and pEC50 of ACEA-mediated Gαi-dependent ERK phosphorylation. ACEA and haloperidol cotreatments produced a delayed and sustained increase in BRETEff between Gαs-Rluc and CB1-GFP(2) and increased the EMax and pEC50 of ACEA-induced Gαs-dependent cAMP response element-binding protein phosphorylation. In cells expressing CB1 and D2L treated with ACEA, binding of haloperidol to D2 receptors switched CB1 coupling from Gαi to Gαs In addition, haloperidol treatment reduced ACEA-induced β-arrestin1 recruitment to CB1 and CB1 internalization. D2 antagonists allosterically modulate cannabinoid-induced CB1 coupling, signaling, and β-arrestin1 recruitment through binding to CB1-D2L heteromers. These findings indicate that D2 antagonism, like D2 agonists, change agonist-mediated CB1 coupling and signaling.

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and putative mechanisms of action of tetracycline and minocycline in inhibiting retinal cell apoptosis after glutamate-induced excitotoxicity and trophic factor deprivation in a retinal cell line (E1A-NR.3) and in primary mixed retinal cell cultures. In addition, a differentiated PC-12 cell line was used to determine whether minocycline was neuroprotective after trophic withdrawal in a pure neuronal cell line devoid of glia. Results from this study demonstrated that minocycline, but not tetracycline, is protective in in vitro models of excitotoxicity-induced retinal cell apoptosis. Moreover, the protective effects provided by minocycline in retinal cells seemed independent of actions on N -methyl-d-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) and glutamate receptor-mediated Ca 2+ influx. Doses of the NMDAR antagonist MK-801 (dizocilpine) and minocycline that alone provided no significant neuroprotection resulted in enhanced retinal cell survival when applied concurrently, suggestive of distinct signaling pathways, and minocycline was without effect on glutamate-induced Ca 2+ influx, as assessed by calcium imaging. Minocycline was also neuroprotective after trophic factor withdrawal, producing a decrease in apoptosis and caspase-3 activation in both retinal cells and the PC-12 neuronal-like cell line. These results support a role for minocycline as a retinal neuroprotectant and demonstrate that the antiapoptotic actions of minocycline in retinal cells do not arise from the blockage of NMDARs or glutamate receptor-mediated Ca 2+ influx but do involve inhibition of caspase-3 activation. In addition, the survival-promoting actions of minocycline may arise via actions on both neuronal and non-neuronal cell targets.

We show that mitogenic cells expressing T-type Ca(2+) channels (T-channels) are more sensitive to the antiproliferative effects of the drugs pimozide and mibefradil than cells without significant T-channel expression. The growth of Y79 and WERI-Rb1 retinoblastoma cells, as well as MCF7 breast cancer epithelial cells, all of which express T-channel current and mRNA for T-channel subunits, is inhibited by pimozide and mibefradil with IC(50) values between 0.6 and 1.5 microM. Proliferation of glioma C6 cells, which show little T-channel expression, is less sensitive to these drugs (IC(50) = 8 and 5 microM for pimozide and mibefradil, respectively). Neither drug seems to alter cell cycle or the expression of cyclins. Although this strong correlation between T-channel expression and growth inhibition exists, the following results suggest that the drugs inhibit cell growth via different cytotoxic pathways: 1) pimozide and mibefradil have additive effects on T-channel current inhibition, whereas the antiproliferative activity of the drugs together is synergistic; 2) an increase in the number of apoptotic Y79 and MCF7 cells and a decrease in the mRNA for the antiapoptotic gene Bcl-2 is detected only in pimozide-treated cells, whereas in mibefradil-treated cells, the toxicity is primarily necrotic; and 3) growth inhibition by mibefradil is reduced in Y79 cells transfected with T-channel antisense and in differentiated Y79 cells (which have decreased T-channel expression), but growth inhibition by pimozide is affected to a lesser extent. These results suggest that pimozide and mibefradil inhibit cell proliferation via different cytotoxic pathways and that in the case of pimozide, it is unlikely that this effect is mediated solely by T-channel inhibition.

Seven-transmembrane G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent the single largest family of cell surface receptors. Signaling through these receptors is controlled by changes in the conformation of the receptor from inactive to active conformations, which in turn lead to the activation of multiple downstream signaling pathways. To facilitate greater diversity in signaling responses, many of these receptors are capable of adopting several distinct active conformations, in which each couples preferentially to its own set of downstream signaling partners. Because these unique signaling responses result from specific receptor active conformations, GPCR signaling may be directed toward these selective responses through either strength-of-signal effects resulting from partial agonism or through biased agonism and functional selectivity, resulting from the selective stabilization of one active conformation over the others. This review uses the CB 1 cannabinoid receptor as a specific example to highlight the contribution of two important aspects of GPCR function—orthosteric ligand binding and receptor heterodimerization—toward directed GPCR signaling.