On the Different Experimental Manifestations of Two-state 'induced-fit' Binding of Drugs to Their Cellular Targets

Overview

Journal Br J Pharmacol

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Pharmacology

Date 2016 Jan 26

PMID 26808227

Citations 10

Authors

Georges Vauquelin

Isabelle Van Liefde

David C Swinney

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

'Induced-fit' binding of drugs to a target may lead to high affinity, selectivity and a long residence time, and this mechanism has been proposed to apply to many drugs with high clinical efficacy. It is a multistep process that initially involves the binding of a drug to its target to form a loose RL complex and a subsequent isomerization/conformational change to yield a tighter binding R'L state. Equations with the same mathematical form may also describe the binding of bivalent antibodies and related synthetic drugs. Based on a selected range of 'microscopic' rate constants and variables such as the ligand concentration and incubation time, we have simulated the experimental manifestations that may go along with induced-fit binding. Overall, they validate different experimental procedures that have been used over the years to identify such binding mechanisms. However, they also reveal that each of these manifestations only becomes perceptible at particular combinations of rate constants. The simulations also show that the durable nature of R'L and the propensity of R'L to be formed repeatedly before the ligand dissociates will increase the residence time. This review may help pharmacologists and medicinal chemists obtain preliminary indications for identifying an induced-fit mechanism.

Citing Articles

Combining Fundamental Kinetics and Standard Alkylation Assays to Prioritize Lead-Like KRAS G12C Inhibitors.

Frommlet A, Nguyen L, Saabye M, Endres N, Mulvihill M, Quinn J ACS Omega. 2025; 9(52):51508-51514.

PMID: 39758649 PMC: 11696385. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.4c08774.

Blocking the CGRP Receptor: Differences across Human Vascular Beds.

de Vries T, Boucherie D, van den Bogaerdt A, Danser A, MaassenVanDenBrink A Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2023; 16(8).

PMID: 37630989 PMC: 10459004. DOI: 10.3390/ph16081075.

Ligand with Two Modes of Interaction with the Dopamine D Receptor-An Induced-Fit Mechanism of Insurmountable Antagonism.

Agren R, Zeberg H, Stepniewski T, Free R, Reilly S, Luedtke R ACS Chem Neurosci. 2020; 11(19):3130-3143.

PMID: 32865974 PMC: 7553383. DOI: 10.1021/acschemneuro.0c00477.

Probe dependency in the determination of ligand binding kinetics at a prototypical G protein-coupled receptor.

Bosma R, Stoddart L, Georgi V, Bouzo-Lorenzo M, Bushby N, Inkoom L Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1):7906.

PMID: 31133718 PMC: 6536503. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44025-5.

Link between a high for drug binding and a fast clinical action: to be or not to be?.

Vauquelin G Medchemcomm. 2018; 9(9):1426-1438.

PMID: 30288218 PMC: 6151451. DOI: 10.1039/c8md00296g.

References

Nunez S, Venhorst J, Kruse C . Target-drug interactions: first principles and their application to drug discovery. Drug Discov Today. 2011; 17(1-2):10-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2011.06.013. View

Verheijen I, Tourlousse D, Vanderheyden P, De Backer J, Vauquelin G . Effect of saponin and filipin on antagonist binding to AT 1 receptors in intact cells. Biochem Pharmacol. 2004; 67(8):1601-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2004.01.004. View

Vauquelin G, Van Liefde I, Swinney D . On the different experimental manifestations of two-state 'induced-fit' binding of drugs to their cellular targets. Br J Pharmacol. 2016; 173(8):1268-85. PMC: 4940813. DOI: 10.1111/bph.13445. View

Fierens F, Vanderheyden P, De Backer J, Vauquelin G . Binding of the antagonist [3H]candesartan to angiotensin II AT1 receptor-transfected [correction of tranfected] Chinese hamster ovary cells. Eur J Pharmacol. 1999; 367(2-3):413-22. DOI: 10.1016/s0014-2999(98)00965-0. View

Neubig R, Spedding M, Kenakin T, Christopoulos A . International Union of Pharmacology Committee on Receptor Nomenclature and Drug Classification. XXXVIII. Update on terms and symbols in quantitative pharmacology. Pharmacol Rev. 2003; 55(4):597-606. DOI: 10.1124/pr.55.4.4. View

Cusack K, Wang Y, Hoemann M, Marjanovic J, Heym R, Vasudevan A . Design strategies to address kinetics of drug binding and residence time. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2015; 25(10):2019-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2015.02.027. View

Van Liefde I, Vauquelin G . Sartan-AT1 receptor interactions: in vitro evidence for insurmountable antagonism and inverse agonism. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2008; 302(2):237-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.mce.2008.06.006. View

Kenakin T, Jenkinson S, Watson C . Determining the potency and molecular mechanism of action of insurmountable antagonists. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006; 319(2):710-23. DOI: 10.1124/jpet.106.107375. View

Copeland R, Pompliano D, Meek T . Drug-target residence time and its implications for lead optimization. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006; 5(9):730-9. DOI: 10.1038/nrd2082. View

10.

Garcia-Perez J, Rueda P, Staropoli I, Kellenberger E, Alcami J, Arenzana-Seisdedos F . New insights into the mechanisms whereby low molecular weight CCR5 ligands inhibit HIV-1 infection. J Biol Chem. 2010; 286(7):4978-90. PMC: 3037610. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.168955. View

11.

Hudson P, Kortt A . High avidity scFv multimers; diabodies and triabodies. J Immunol Methods. 2000; 231(1-2):177-89. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-1759(99)00157-x. View

12.

Machleidt T, Woodroofe C, Schwinn M, Mendez J, Robers M, Zimmerman K . NanoBRET--A Novel BRET Platform for the Analysis of Protein-Protein Interactions. ACS Chem Biol. 2015; 10(8):1797-804. DOI: 10.1021/acschembio.5b00143. View

13.

Tummino P, Copeland R . Residence time of receptor-ligand complexes and its effect on biological function. Biochemistry. 2008; 47(20):5481-92. DOI: 10.1021/bi8002023. View

14.

Hirschberg B, Schimerlik M . A kinetic model for oxotremorine M binding to recombinant porcine m2 muscarinic receptors expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells. J Biol Chem. 1994; 269(42):26127-35. View

15.

Maeda K, Das D, Ogata-Aoki H, Nakata H, Miyakawa T, Tojo Y . Structural and molecular interactions of CCR5 inhibitors with CCR5. J Biol Chem. 2006; 281(18):12688-98. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M512688200. View

16.

Patching S . Surface plasmon resonance spectroscopy for characterisation of membrane protein-ligand interactions and its potential for drug discovery. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013; 1838(1 Pt A):43-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2013.04.028. View

17.

Fierens F, Vanderheyden P, De Backer J, Vauquelin G . Insurmountable angiotensin AT1 receptor antagonists: the role of tight antagonist binding. Eur J Pharmacol. 1999; 372(2):199-206. DOI: 10.1016/s0014-2999(99)00205-8. View

18.

Copeland R . The dynamics of drug-target interactions: drug-target residence time and its impact on efficacy and safety. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2012; 5(4):305-10. DOI: 10.1517/17460441003677725. View

19.

Ojima M, Igata H, Tanaka M, Sakamoto H, Kuroita T, Kohara Y . In vitro antagonistic properties of a new angiotensin type 1 receptor blocker, azilsartan, in receptor binding and function studies. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2010; 336(3):801-8. DOI: 10.1124/jpet.110.176636. View

20.

Galper J, Klein W, Catterall W . Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in developing chick heart. J Biol Chem. 1977; 252(23):8692-9. View