The importance of residues 2 (arginine) and 6 (histidine) in high-affinity angiotensin II antagonists

Interaction of angiotensin II with the C-terminal 300-320 fragment of the rat angiotensin II receptor AT1a monitored by NMR

Interaction between angiotensin II (Ang II) and the fragment peptide 300-320 (fCT300-320) of the rat angiotensin II receptor AT1a was demonstrated by relaxation measurements, NOE effects, chemical shift variations, and CD measurements. The correlation times modulating dipolar interactions for the bound and free forms of Ang II were estimated by the ratio of the nonselective and single-selective longitudinal relaxation rates. The intermolecular NOEs observed in NOESY spectra between HN protons of 9Lys(fCT) and 6His(ang), 10Phe(fCT) and 8Phe(ang), HN proton of 3Tyr(fCT) and Halpha of 4Tyr(ang), 5Phe(fCT)Hdelta and Halpha of 4Tyr(ang) indicated that Ang II aromatic residues are directly involved in the interaction, as also verified by relaxation data. Some fCT300-320 backbone features were inferred by the CSI method and CD experiments revealing that the presence of Ang II enhances the existential probability of helical conformations in the fCT fragment. Restrained molecular dynamics using the simulated annealing protocol was performed with intermolecular NOEs as constraints, imposing an alpha-helix backbone structure to fCT300-320 fragment. In the built model, one strongly preferred interaction was found that allows intermolecular stacking between aromatic rings and forces the peptide to wrap around the 6Leu side chain of the receptor fragment.

Comparison of the solution structures of angiotensin I & II. Implication for structure-function relationship

Conformational analysis of angiotensin I (AI) and II (AII) peptides has been performed through 2D 1H-NMR spectroscopy in dimethylsulfoxide and 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol/H2O. The solution structural models of AI and AII have been determined in dimethylsulfoxide using NOE distance and 3JHNHalpha coupling constants. Finally, the AI family of models resulting from restrained energy minimization (REM) refinement, exhibits pairwise rmsd values for the family ensemble 0.26 +/- 0.13 A, 1.05 +/- 0.23 A, for backbone and heavy atoms, respectively, and the distance penalty function is calculated at 0.075 +/- 0.006 A2. Comparable results have been afforded for AII ensemble (rmsd values 0.30 +/- 0.22 A, 1.38 +/- 0.48 A for backbone and heavy atoms, respectively; distance penalty function is 0.029 +/- 0.003 A2). The two peptides demonstrate similar N-terminal and different C-terminal conformation as a consequence of the presence/absence of the His9-Leu10 dipeptide, which plays an important role in the different biological function of the two peptides. Other conformational variations focused on the side-chain orientation of aromatic residues, which constitute a biologically relevant hydrophobic core and whose inter-residue contacts are strong in dimethylsulfoxide and are retained even in mixed organic-aqueous media. Detailed analysis of the peptide structural features attempts to elucidate the conformational role of the C-terminal dipeptide to the different binding affinity of AI and AII towards the AT1 receptor and sets the basis for understanding the factors that might govern free- or bound-depended AII structural differentiation.

Proposals for the angiotensin II receptor-bound conformation by comparative computer modeling of AII and cyclic analogs

A conformational search using high-temperature molecular dynamics on angiotensin II(AII) and on two cyclic S-S bridged analogs, namely [Hcy3,5]AII and [Cys3,5]AII, in conjunction with a cluster analysis based on the similarities of the three-dimensional patterns of the binding and activation elements, had led to putative AII receptor-bound conformations. These conformations are characterized by a compact folded shape of the peptide backbone, and by particular relative positions of the four pharmacophore groups, namely the aromatic moieties of the Tyr4, His6 and Phe8 residues, and the C-terminal carboxyl group. This compact folded shape, arising from attractive electrostatic interactions between the desolvated N- and C-terminal groups, is similar to the crystallographically determined conformation of AII bound to the antibody Fab receptor.

Effects of peptidase inhibition on angiotensin receptor agonist and antagonist potency in rabbit isolated thoracic aorta

1. Experiments were performed with peptidase inhibitors on rabbit aortic strip preparations, to determine whether endogenous peptidase activity can influence the potency estimates for angiotensin receptor agonists and antagonists in this tissue. 2. Angiotensin II (A II) and angiotensin III (A III) both induced concentration-related contractions of rabbit aortic strip preparations. A III was approximately 38 fold less potent than A II, and the gradient of the A III concentration-response curve (1.00 +/- 0.04) was significantly more shallow than that (1.76 +/- 0.05) of the A II curve. 3. Neither the aminopeptidase-A and -M inhibitor, amastatin, nor the aminopeptidase-B and -M inhibitor, bestatin, affected the potency of, or the maximum response to, A II. In contrast, the potency of A III was increased by both amastatin and bestatin. Amastatin had the most marked effect and at 10 microM caused approximately a 12 fold increase in the potency of A III (EC50 values, 102 nM and 8.6 nM in the absence and presence of amastatin, respectively), and also significantly steepened the gradient of the A III concentration-response curve. Amastatin did not affect the position or shape of the concentration-response curve to the alpha 1-adrenoceptor agonist, phenylephrine. Finally, the carboxypeptidase-N inhibitor, D-L-mercaptomethyl-3-guanidine-ethylpropanoic acid (MERGETPA) did not change the position or shape of the concentration-response curves to either A II or A III.4. In the presence of amastatin, the potency of the peptide angiotensin receptor antagonist, Ile7-A III (100nM-l microM ), was increased approximately 13 fold (pA2, with A II as the agonist, 7.0 +/- 0.1 and 8.1 +/- 0.1, in the absence and presence of amastatin, respectively). However, the potency of the nonpeptide angiotensin receptor antagonist, DuP 753 (30-300 nM), was little affected by amastatin (pA2, 8.2 +/- 0.1 and 8.1 +/- 0.1 in the absence and presence of amastatin, respectively).5. The results of this study suggest that endogenous aminopeptidase activity in the rabbit thoracic aorta can profoundly affect estimates of the potency of peptide angiotensin receptor agonists and antagonists.A suitable aminopeptidase inhibitor should therefore be included in studies, using this tissue, which aim to classify angiotensin receptor subtype(s) based on the rank order of peptide angiotensin receptor agonist and/or antagonist potencies.

Importance of the N-terminal domain of the type I angiotension II antagonist [Sar1,Ile8]ANG II for receptor blockade

Analogues of the Type I angiotensin (ANG) antagonist, [Sar1,Ile8]ANG II, in which the N-terminal dipeptide was modified were synthesized by the solid phase method and purified by reversed-phase HPLC. Antagonist potencies (pA2) of the peptides were determined on the rat isolated uterus using ANG II as the agonist. Substitution of the Arg residue occupying position 2 of [Sar1,Ile8]ANG II (pA2 8.1) by Gly, Ala, Nle, Phe, Pro or Sar reduced the antagonist potency to pA2 = 7.0, 6.8, 6.7, 6.8, 5.8 and 5.3, respectively. Deletion of the N-terminal Sar residue in these same peptides gave pA2 = 6.8, 5.7, 5.5, 5.9, 6.1 and 7.5, respectively. The characteristically long duration of action of [Sar1,Ile8] was absent for all of these analogues including (des1, Sar2, Ile8]ANG II. These findings demonstrate that the antagonist potencies of Type I angiotensin antagonists for smooth muscle receptors, and also the long duration of action, are dependent on the location of positive charges within the peptide and on the conformation of the molecule in determining favorable electrostatic interactions with the receptor. A model is proposed in which the two positively charged loci on the angiotensin molecule (N-terminus and Arg) interact with two corresponding anionic binding sites on the smooth muscle receptor. The possibility that the prolonged duration of action of [Sar1, Ile8]ANG II results from binding to a different site on the angiotensin receptor from that occupied by ANG II is discussed in relation to the present findings.