Nucleoside modification and concerted mutagenesis of the human A3 adenosine receptor to probe interactions between the 2-position of adenosine analogs and Gln167 in the second extracellular loop

First Potent Macrocyclic A3 Adenosine Receptor Agonists Reveal G-Protein and β-Arrestin2 Signaling Preferences

(N)-Methanocarba adenosine derivatives (A3 adenosine receptor (AR) agonists containing bicyclo[3.1.0]hexane replacing furanose) were chain-extended at N6 and C2 positions with terminal alkenes for ring closure. The resulting macrocycles of 17-20 atoms retained affinity, indicating a spatially proximal orientation of these receptor-bound chains, consistent with molecular modeling of 12. C2-Arylethynyl-linked macrocycle 19 was more A3AR-selective than 2-ether-linked macrocycle 12 (both 5'-methylamides, human (h) A3AR affinities (Ki): 22.1 and 25.8 nM, respectively), with lower mouse A3AR affinities. Functional hA3AR comparison of two sets of open/closed analogues in β-arrestin2 and Gi/o protein assays showed certain signaling preferences divergent from reference agonist Cl-IB-MECA 1. The potencies of 1 at all three Gαi isoforms were slightly less than its hA3AR binding affinity (Ki: 1.4 nM), while the Gαi1 and Gαi2 potencies of macrocycle 12 were roughly an order of magnitude higher than its radioligand binding affinity. Gαi2-coupling was enhanced in macrocycle 12 (EC50 2.56 nM, ∼40% greater maximal efficacy than 1). Di-O-allyl precursor 18 cyclized to form 19, increasing the Gαi1 potency by 7.5-fold. The macrocycles 12 and 19 and their open precursors 11 and 18 potently stimulated β-arrestin2 recruitment, with EC50 values (nM) of 5.17, 4.36, 1.30, and 4.35, respectively, and with nearly 50% greater efficacy compared to 1. This example of macrocyclization altering the coupling pathways of small-molecule (nonpeptide) GPCR agonists is the first for potent and selective macrocyclic AR agonists. These initial macrocyclic derivatives can serve as a guide for the future design of macrocyclic AR agonists displaying unanticipated pharmacology.

Structural Characterization of Agonist Binding to an A3 Adenosine Receptor through Biomolecular Simulations and Mutagenesis Experiments

The adenosine A₃ receptor (A₃R) binds adenosine and is a drug target against cancer cell proliferation. Currently, there is no experimental structure of A₃R. Here, we have generated a molecular model of A₃R in complex with two agonists, the nonselective 1-(6-amino-9H-purin-9-yl)-1-deoxy-N-ethyl-β-d-ribofuranuronamide (NECA) and the selective 1-deoxy-1-[6-[[(3-iodophenyl)methyl]amino]-9H-purin-9-yl]-N-methyl-β-d-ribofuranuronamide (IB-MECA). Molecular dynamics simulations of the wild-type A₃R in complex with both agonists, combined with in vitro mutagenic studies revealed important residues for binding. Further, molecular mechanics-generalized Born surface area calculations were able to distinguish mutations that reduce or negate agonistic activity from those that maintained or increased the activity. Our studies reveal that selectivity of IB-MECA toward A₃R requires not only direct interactions with residues within the orthosteric binding area but also with remote residues. Although V169^5.30 is considered to be a selectivity filter for A₃R binders, when it was mutated to glutamic acid or alanine, the activity of IB-MECA increased by making new van der Waals contacts with TM5. This result may have implications in the design of new A₃R agonists.

Extracellular Loop 2 of the Adenosine A1 Receptor Has a Key Role in Orthosteric Ligand Affinity and Agonist Efficacy

The adenosine A1 G protein-coupled receptor (A1AR) is an important therapeutic target implicated in a wide range of cardiovascular and neuronal disorders. Although it is well established that the A1AR orthosteric site is located within the receptor's transmembrane (TM) bundle, prior studies have implicated extracellular loop 2 (ECL2) as having a significant role in contributing to orthosteric ligand affinity and signaling for various G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). We thus performed extensive alanine scanning mutagenesis of A1AR-ECL2 to explore the role of this domain on A1AR orthosteric ligand pharmacology. Using quantitative analytical approaches and molecular modeling, we identified ECL2 residues that interact either directly or indirectly with orthosteric agonists and antagonists. Discrete mutations proximal to a conserved ECL2-TM3 disulfide bond selectively affected orthosteric ligand affinity, whereas a cluster of five residues near the TM4-ECL2 juncture influenced orthosteric agonist efficacy. A combination of ligand docking, molecular dynamics simulations, and mutagenesis results suggested that the orthosteric agonist 5'-N-ethylcarboxamidoadenosine binds transiently to an extracellular vestibule formed by ECL2 and the top of TM5 and TM7, prior to entry into the canonical TM bundle orthosteric site. Collectively, this study highlights a key role for ECL2 in A1AR orthosteric ligand binding and receptor activation.

The A3 adenosine receptor as multifaceted therapeutic target: pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, and in silico approaches

Adenosine is an ubiquitous local modulator that regulates various physiological and pathological functions by stimulating four membrane receptors, namely A(1), A(2A), A(2B), and A(3). Among these G protein-coupled receptors, the A(3) subtype is found mainly in the lung, liver, heart, eyes, and brain in our body. It has been associated with cerebroprotection and cardioprotection, as well as modulation of cellular growth upon its selective activation. On the other hand, its inhibition by selective antagonists has been reported to be potentially useful in the treatment of pathological conditions including glaucoma, inflammatory diseases, and cancer. In this review, we focused on the pharmacology and the therapeutic implications of the human (h)A(3) adenosine receptor (AR), together with an overview on the progress of hA(3) AR agonists, antagonists, allosteric modulators, and radioligands, as well as on the recent advances pertaining to the computational approaches (e.g., quantitative structure-activity relationships, homology modeling, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulations) applied to the modeling of hA(3) AR and drug design. 

The four cysteine residues in the second extracellular loop of the human adenosine A2B receptor: role in ligand binding and receptor function

The adenosine A(2B) receptor is of considerable interest as a new drug target for the treatment of asthma, inflammatory diseases, pain, and cancer. In the present study we investigated the role of the cysteine residues in the extracellular loop 2 (ECL2) of the receptor, which is particularly cysteine-rich, by a combination of mutagenesis, molecular modeling, chemical and pharmacological experiments. Pretreatment of CHO cells recombinantly expressing the human A(2B) receptor with dithiothreitol led to a 74-fold increase in the EC(50) value of the agonist NECA in cyclic AMP accumulation. In the C78(3.25)S and the C171(45.50)S mutant high-affinity binding of the A(2B) antagonist radioligand [(3)H]PSB-603 was abolished and agonists were virtually inactive in cAMP assays. This indicates that the C3.25-C45.50 disulfide bond, which is highly conserved in GPCRs, is also important for binding and function of A(2B) receptors. In contrast, the C166(45.45)S and the C167(45.46)S mutant as well as the C166(45.45)S-C167(45.46)S double mutant behaved like the wild-type receptor, while in the C154(45.33)S mutant significant, although more subtle effects on cAMP accumulation were observed - decrease (BAY60-6583) or increase (NECA) - depending on the structure of the investigated agonist. In contrast to the X-ray structure of the closely related A(2A) receptor, which showed four disulfide bonds, the present data indicate that in the A(2B) receptor only the C3.25-C45.50 disulfide bond is essential for ligand binding and receptor activation. Thus, the cysteine residues in the ECL2 of the A(2B) receptor not involved in stabilization of the receptor structure may have other functions.

Evaluation of homology modeling of G-protein-coupled receptors in light of the A(2A) adenosine receptor crystallographic structure

Homology modeling of the human A(2A) adenosine receptor (AR) based on bovine rhodopsin predicted a protein structure that was very similar to the recently determined crystallographic structure. The discrepancy between the experimentally observed orientation of the antagonist and those obtained by previous antagonist docking is related to the loop structure of rhodopsin being carried over to the model of the A(2A) AR and was rectified when the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor was used as a template for homology modeling. Docking of the triazolotriazine antagonist ligand ZM241385 1 was greatly improved by including water molecules of the X-ray structure or by using a constraint from mutagenesis. Automatic agonists docking to both a new homology modeled receptor and the A(2A) AR crystallographic structure produced similar results. Heterocyclic nitrogen atoms closely corresponded when the docked adenine moiety of agonists and 1 were overlaid. The cumulative mutagenesis data, which support the proposed mode of agonist docking, can be reexamined in light of the crystallographic structure. Thus, homology modeling of GPCRs remains a useful technique in probing the structure of the protein and predicting modes of ligand docking.

Molecular recognition in the P2Y(14) receptor: Probing the structurally permissive terminal sugar moiety of uridine-5'-diphosphoglucose

The P2Y(14) receptor, a nucleotide signaling protein, is activated by uridine-5'-diphosphoglucose 1 and other uracil nucleotides. We have determined that the glucose moiety of 1 is the most structurally permissive region for designing analogues of this P2Y(14) agonist. For example, the carboxylate group of uridine-5'-diphosphoglucuronic acid proved to be suitable for flexible substitution by chain extension through an amide linkage. Functionalized congeners containing terminal 2-acylaminoethylamides prepared by this strategy retained P2Y(14) activity, and molecular modeling predicted close proximity of this chain to the second extracellular loop of the receptor. In addition, replacement of glucose with other sugars did not diminish P2Y(14) potency. For example, the [5'']ribose derivative had an EC(50) of 0.24muM. Selective monofluorination of the glucose moiety indicated a role for the 2''- and 6''-hydroxyl groups of 1 in receptor recognition. The beta-glucoside was twofold less potent than the native alpha-isomer, but methylene replacement of the 1''-oxygen abolished activity. Replacement of the ribose ring system with cyclopentyl or rigid bicyclo[3.1.0]hexane groups abolished activity. Uridine-5'-diphosphoglucose also activates the P2Y(2) receptor, but the 2-thio analogue and several of the potent modified-glucose analogues were P2Y(14)-selective.

Molecular modeling of a PAMAM-CGS21680 dendrimer bound to an A2A adenosine receptor homodimer

The theoretical possibility of bivalent binding of a dendrimer, covalently appended with multiple copies of a small ligand, to a homodimer of a G protein-coupled receptor was investigated with a molecular modeling approach. A molecular model was constructed of a third generation (G3) poly(amidoamine) (PAMAM) dendrimer condensed with multiple copies of the potent A(2A) adenosine receptor agonist CGS21680. The dendrimer was bound to an A(2A) adenosine receptor homodimer. Two units of the nucleoside CGS21680 could occupy the A(2A) receptor homodimer simultaneously. The binding mode of CGS21680 moieties linked to the PAMAM dendrimer and docked to the A(2A) receptor was found to be similar to the binding mode of a monomeric CGS21680 ligand.

Molecular modeling of adenosine receptors: new results and trends

Adenosine is a ubiquitous neuromodulator, which carries out its biological task by stimulating four cell surface receptors (A(1), A(2A), A(2B), and A(3)). Adenosine receptors (ARs) are members of the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Their discovery opened up new avenues for potential drug treatment of a variety of conditions such as asthma, neurodegenerative disorders, chronic inflammatory diseases, and many other physiopathological states that are believed to be associated with changes in adenosine levels. Knowledge of the 3D structure of ARs could be of great help in the task of understanding their function and in the rational design of specific ligands. However, since GPCRs are membrane-bound proteins, high-resolution structural characterization is still an extremely difficult task. For this reason, great importance has been placed on molecular modeling studies and, particularly in the last few years, on homology modeling (HM) techniques. The publication of the first high-resolution crystal structure for bovine rhodopsin (bRh), a GPCR superfamily member, provides the option of utilizing HM to generate 3D models based on detailed structural information. In this review we report, analyze, and compare the main experimental data, computational HM procedures and validation methods used for ARs, describing in detail the most successful results.

Molecular modeling of the second extracellular loop of G-protein coupled receptors and its implication on structure-based virtual screening

The current study describes the validation of high-throughput modeling procedures for the construction of the second extracellular loop (ecl2) of all nonolfactory human G Protein-coupled receptors. Our modeling flowchart is based on the alignment of essential residues determining the particular ecl2 fold observed in the bovine rhodopsin (bRho) crystal structure. For a set of GPCR targets, the dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2), adenosine A3 receptor (AA3R), and the thromboxane A2 receptor (TA2R), the implications of including ecl2 atomic coordinates is evaluated in terms of structure-based virtual screening accuracy: the suitability of the 3D models to distinguish between known antagonists and randomly chosen decoys using automated docking approaches. The virtual screening results of different models describing increasingly exhaustive receptor representations (seven helices only, seven helices and ecl2 loop, full model) have been compared. Explicit modeling of the ecl2 loop was found to be important in only one of three test cases whereas a loopless model was shown to be accurate enough in the two other receptors. An exhaustive comparison of ecl2 loops of 365 receptors to that of bRho suggests that explicit ecl2 loop modeling should be reserved to receptors where loop building can be guided by experimental restraints.