Search

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) remain the primary conduit by which cells detect environmental stimuli and communicate with each other. Upon activation by extracellular agonists, these seven-transmembrane-domain-containing receptors interact with heterotrimeric G proteins to regulate downstream second messenger and/or protein kinase cascades. Crystallographic evidence from a prototypic GPCR, the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR), in complex with its cognate G protein, Gs, has provided a model for how agonist binding promotes conformational changes that propagate through the GPCR and into the nucleotide-binding pocket of the G protein α-subunit to catalyse GDP release, the key step required for GTP binding and activation of G proteins. The structure also offers hints about how G-protein binding may, in turn, allosterically influence ligand binding. Here we provide functional evidence that G-protein coupling to the β2AR stabilizes a ‘closed’ receptor conformation characterized by restricted access to and egress from the hormone-binding site. Surprisingly, the effects of G protein on the hormone-binding site can be observed in the absence of a bound agonist, where G-protein coupling driven by basal receptor activity impedes the association of agonists, partial agonists, antagonists and inverse agonists. The ability of bound ligands to dissociate from the receptor is also hindered, providing a structural explanation for the G-protein-mediated enhancement of agonist affinity, which has been observed for many GPCR–G-protein pairs. Our data also indicate that, in contrast to agonist binding alone, coupling of a G protein in the absence of an agonist stabilizes large structural changes in a GPCR. The effects of nucleotide-free G protein on ligand-binding kinetics are shared by other members of the superfamily of GPCRs, suggesting that a common mechanism may underlie G-protein-mediated enhancement of agonist affinity.

Protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1) is the prototypical member of a family of G-protein-coupled receptors that mediate cellular responses to thrombin and related proteases. Thrombin irreversibly activates PAR1 by cleaving the amino-terminal exodomain of the receptor, which exposes a tethered peptide ligand that binds the heptahelical bundle of the receptor to affect G-protein activation. Here we report the 2.2 A resolution crystal structure of human PAR1 bound to vorapaxar, a PAR1 antagonist. The structure reveals an unusual mode of drug binding that explains how a small molecule binds virtually irreversibly to inhibit receptor activation by the tethered ligand of PAR1. In contrast to deep, solvent-exposed binding pockets observed in other peptide-activated G- protein-coupled receptors, the vorapaxar-binding pocket is superficial but has little surface exposed to the aqueous solvent. Protease-activated receptors are important targets for drug development. The structure reported here will aid the development of improved PAR1 antagonists and the discovery of antagonists to other members of this receptor family., Protease-activated receptors (PARs) are G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that mediate cellular responses to specific proteases (1,2). The coagulation protease thrombin activates the prototypical PAR, PAR1, by specific cleavage of the N-terminal [...]

G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) exhibit a spectrum of functional behaviours in response to natural and synthetic ligands. Recent crystal structures provide insights into inactive states of several GPCRs. Efforts to obtain an agonist-bound active-state GPCR structure have proven difficult due to the inherent instability of this state in the absence of a G protein. We generated a camelid antibody fragment (nanobody) to the human [β.sub.2] adrenergic receptor ([β.sub.2]AR) that exhibits G protein-like behaviour, and obtained an agonist-bound, active-state crystal structure of the receptor-nanobody complex. Comparison with the inactive [β.sub.2]AR structure reveals subtle changes in the binding pocket; however, these small changes are associated with an 11Å outward movement of the cytoplasmic end of transmembrane segment 6, and rearrangements of transmembrane segments 5 and 7 that are remarkably similar to those observed in opsin, an active form of rhodopsin. This structure provides insights into the process of agonist binding and activation., GPCRs activated by diffusible ligands have a spectrum of functional states (1). A GPCR may activate more than one G protein isoform or a G-protein-independent pathway such as arrestin. In [...]

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are seven-transmembrane proteins that mediate most cellular responses to hormones and neurotransmitters. They are the largest group of therapeutic targets for a broad spectrum of diseases. Recent crystal structures of GPCRs (1-5) have revealed structural conservation extending from the orthosteric ligand-binding site in the transmembrane core to the cytoplasmic G-protein-coupling domains. In contrast, the extracellular surface (ECS) of GPCRs is remarkably diverse and is therefore an ideal target for the discovery of subtype-selective drugs. However, little is known about the functional role of the ECS in receptor activation, or about conformational coupling of this surface to the native ligand-binding pocket. Here we use NMR spectroscopy to investigate ligand-specific conformational changes around a central structural feature in the ECS of the [β.sub.2] adrenergic receptor: a salt bridge linking extracellular loops 2 and 3. Small-molecule drugs that bind within the transmembrane core and exhibit different efficacies towards G-protein activation (agonist, neutral antagonist and inverse agonist) also stabilize distinct conformations of the ECS. We thereby demonstrate conformational coupling between the ECS and the orthosteric binding site, showing that drugs targeting this diverse surface could function as allosteric modulators with high subtype selectivity. Moreover, these studies provide a new insight into the dynamic behaviour of GPCRs not addressable by static, inactive-state crystal structures., In the ligand-free basal state, GPCRs exist in an equilibrium of conformations (6). Ligand binding modulates receptor function by stabilizing different intramolecular interactions and establishing a new conformational equilibrium. Activating [...]

Aminergic G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been a major focus of pharmaceutical research for many years. Due partly to the lack of reliable receptor structures, drug discovery efforts have been largely ligand-based. The recently determined X-ray structure of the [[beta].sub.2]-adrenergic receptor offers an opportunity to investigate the advantages and limitations inherent in a structure-based approach to ligand discovery against this and related GPCR targets. Approximately 1 million commercially available, 'lead-like' molecules were docked against the [[beta].sub.2]-adrenergic receptor structure. On testing of 25 high-ranking molecules, 6 were active with binding affinities docking | GPCR | inverse agonists | library bias | ligand design

In 2015, as part of the Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology, we published a Registered Report (Fung et al., 2015), that described how we intended to replicate selected experiments from the paper "Inhibition of BET recruitment to chromatin as an effective treatment for MLL-fusion leukaemia" (Dawson et al., 2011). Here, we report the results of those experiments. We found treatment of MLL-fusion leukaemia cells (MV4;11 cell line) with the BET bromodomain inhibitor I-BET151 resulted in selective growth inhibition, whereas treatment of leukaemia cells harboring a different oncogenic driver (K-562 cell line) did not result in selective growth inhibition; this is similar to the findings reported in the original study (Figure 2A and Supplementary Figure 11A,B; Dawson et al., 2011). Further, I-BET151 resulted in a statistically significant decrease in BCL2 expression in MV4;11 cells, but not in K-562 cells; again this is similar to the findings reported in the original study (Figure 3D; Dawson et al., 2011). We did not find a statistically significant difference in survival when testing I-BET151 efficacy in a disseminated xenograft MLL mouse model, whereas the original study reported increased survival in I-BET151 treated mice compared to vehicle control (Figure 4B,D; Dawson et al., 2011). Differences between the original study and this replication attempt, such as different conditioning regimens and I-BET151 doses, are factors that might have influenced the outcome. We also found I-BET151 treatment resulted in a lower median disease burden compared to vehicle control in all tissues analyzed, similar to the example reported in the original study (Supplementary Figure 16A; Dawson et al., 2011). Finally, we report meta-analyses for each result.