» Articles » PMID: 34251810

Delineating the Ligand-Receptor Interactions That Lead to Biased Signaling at the μ-Opioid Receptor

Overview
Date 2021 Jul 12
PMID 34251810
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Biased agonists, which selectively stimulate certain signaling pathways controlled by a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), hold great promise as drugs that maximize efficacy while minimizing dangerous side effects. Biased agonists of the μ-opioid receptor (μOR) are of particular interest as a means to achieve analgesia through G protein signaling without dose-limiting side effects such as respiratory depression and constipation. Rational structure-based design of biased agonists remains highly challenging, however, because the ligand-mediated interactions that are key to activation of each signaling pathway remain unclear. We identify several compounds for which the and enantiomers have distinct bias profiles at the μOR. These compounds serve as excellent comparative tools to study bias because the identical physicochemical properties of enantiomer pairs ensure that differences in bias profiles are due to differences in interactions with the μOR binding pocket. Atomic-level simulations of compounds at μOR indicate that and enantiomers adopt different poses that form distinct interactions with the binding pocket. A handful of specific interactions with highly conserved binding pocket residues appear to be responsible for substantial differences in arrestin recruitment between enantiomers. Our results offer guidance for rational design of biased agonists at μOR and possibly at related GPCRs.

Citing Articles

Ligand-Induced Biased Activation of GPCRs: Recent Advances and New Directions from In Silico Approaches.

Hashem S, Dougha A, Tuffery P Molecules. 2025; 30(5).

PMID: 40076272 PMC: 11901715. DOI: 10.3390/molecules30051047.


Docking 14 million virtual isoquinuclidines against the mu and kappa opioid receptors reveals dual antagonists-inverse agonists with reduced withdrawal effects.

Vigneron S, Ohno S, Braz J, Kim J, Kweon O, Webb C bioRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 39868130 PMC: 11760775. DOI: 10.1101/2025.01.09.632033.


Intracellular Pocket Conformations Determine Signaling Efficacy through the μ Opioid Receptor.

Cooper D, DePaolo-Boisvert J, Nicholson S, Gad B, Minh D J Chem Inf Model. 2025; 65(3):1465-1475.

PMID: 39824514 PMC: 11817682. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01437.


Intracellular pocket conformations determine signaling efficacy through the opioid receptor.

Cooper D, DePaolo-Boisvert J, Nicholson S, Gad B, Minh D bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39677660 PMC: 11642773. DOI: 10.1101/2024.04.03.588021.


Decoding the κ Opioid Receptor (KOR): Advancements in Structural Understanding and Implications for Opioid Analgesic Development.

Li Z, Huang R, Xia M, Chang N, Guo W, Liu J Molecules. 2024; 29(11).

PMID: 38893511 PMC: 11173883. DOI: 10.3390/molecules29112635.


References
1.
Lamb K, Tidgewell K, Simpson D, Bohn L, Prisinzano T . Antinociceptive effects of herkinorin, a MOP receptor agonist derived from salvinorin A in the formalin test in rats: new concepts in mu opioid receptor pharmacology: from a symposium on new concepts in mu-opioid pharmacology. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011; 121(3):181-8. PMC: 3288203. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.10.026. View

2.
Shenoy S, Drake M, Nelson C, Houtz D, Xiao K, Madabushi S . beta-arrestin-dependent, G protein-independent ERK1/2 activation by the beta2 adrenergic receptor. J Biol Chem. 2005; 281(2):1261-73. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M506576200. View

3.
Wisler J, Xiao K, Thomsen A, Lefkowitz R . Recent developments in biased agonism. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2014; 27:18-24. PMC: 3971386. DOI: 10.1016/j.ceb.2013.10.008. View

4.
Rasmussen S, DeVree B, Zou Y, Kruse A, Chung K, Kobilka T . Crystal structure of the β2 adrenergic receptor-Gs protein complex. Nature. 2011; 477(7366):549-55. PMC: 3184188. DOI: 10.1038/nature10361. View

5.
Roe D, Cheatham 3rd T . PTRAJ and CPPTRAJ: Software for Processing and Analysis of Molecular Dynamics Trajectory Data. J Chem Theory Comput. 2015; 9(7):3084-95. DOI: 10.1021/ct400341p. View