Non-peptidic antagonists of the CGRP receptor, BIBN4096BS and MK-0974, interact with the calcitonin receptor-like receptor via methionine-42 and RAMP1 via tryptophan-74

The receptor for calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been the target for the development of novel small molecule antagonists for the treatment of migraine. Two such antagonists, BIBN4096BS and MK-0974, have shown great promise in clinical trials and hence a deeper understanding of the mechanism of their interaction with the receptor is now required. The structure of the CGRP receptor is unusual since it is comprised of a hetero-oligomeric complex between the calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CRL) and an accessory protein (RAMP1). Both the CLR and RAMP1 components have extracellular domains which interact with each other and together form part of the peptide-binding site. It seems likely that the antagonist binding site will also be located on the extracellular domains and indeed Trp-74 of RAMP1 has been shown to form part of the binding site for BIBN4096BS. However, despite a chimeric study demonstrating the role of the N-terminal domain of CLR in antagonist binding, no specific residues have been identified. Here we carry out a mutagenic screen of the extreme N-terminal domain of CLR (residues 23-63) and identify a mutant, Met-42-Ala, which displays 48-fold lower affinity for BIBN4096BS and almost 900-fold lower affinity for MK-0974. In addition, we confirm that the Trp-74-Lys mutation at human RAMP1 reduces BIBN4096BS affinity by over 300-fold and show for the first time a similar effect for MK-0974 affinity. The data suggest that the non-peptide antagonists occupy a binding site close to the interface of the N-terminal domains of CLR and RAMP1.

Corporate political activity in less developed countries:The Volta River Project in Ghana, 1958-66

The article expands existing categorisations of political and economic governance by including literature on less developed countries (LDCs). In four consecutive negotiations between the US multinational Kaisers and the US and Ghana governments in the early 1960s, it is argued that the company reached levels of influence that are at odds with existing explanations. In order to understand corporate political activities in LDCs, analysis needs to go beyond static factors (political risk) and include dynamic factors such as diplomatic relations and 'arenas of power', and consider the role of the investor's home country relative to the host economy.