Search

Background: Crystallographic structures of nuclear receptor ligand binding domains provide a static model of a receptor stably wrapped around an internalized ligand. Understanding the dynamics of a receptor at different stages of ligand binding has been hampered by the paucity of crystal structures for unliganded nuclear receptors. Molecular dynamic models have been constructed for some nuclear receptors to fill that void. Methods: The molecular simulation docking program MORDOR (MOlecular Recognition with a Driven dynamics OptimizeR)(1) was used to study the structural dynamics of the androgen receptor ligand binding domain (AR LBD) modeled from the static structure of the AR LBD bound to testosterone (T) (PDB ID: 2AM9). The goals of the study were to understand a) the dynamic interaction of the T in its binding pocket, b) AR LBD structural flexibilities that permit T entry/exit from the binding pocket and c) a model of the unliganded AR LBD. Results: Modeling AR LBD structure flexibility over time revealed possible alternative dynamic structures, including those without ligand, overlaid against the canonical nuclear receptor structure. The model dynamically tracks the structural changes as a ligand enters into the ligand binding domain and nestles into the ligand binding pocket. The model predicted the appearance of alpha helices within the AR LBD that transiently fold/unfold during the ligand entry phases. Once in the pocket, the ligand itself remains very dynamic in a still flexible pocket. The model predicted also AR LBD amino acids that sequentially interact with the ligand during its dynamic entry into the AR LBD. Intriguingly, those AR amino acids include those mutated in castration-resistant prostate tumors that continue to grow during androgen suppression therapy. Functional studies showed those mutant ARs had a primary consequence of enhancing response to lower level T, and other androgens, consistent with their role in creating a higher affinity AR that can scavenge low-level androgens in an androgen-suppressed patient. Conclusions: The molecular model of T binding to the AR LBD suggests a degree of structural dynamism not evident in the crystallographic structures commonly associated with nuclear receptors. Some AR mutations activating prostate tumor growth may do so by impacting androgen entry/exit, rather than by altering androgen fit into the ligand binding pocket. Reference: (1) Guilbert C, James TL (2008) J Chem Inf Model. 2008 48(6): 1257-1268. doi: 10.1021/ci8000327