The influence of G protein subtype on agonist action at D-2 dopamine receptors

In previous studies, we have shown that agonists influence the ability of D-2 dopamine receptors to couple to G proteins and here we extend this work. The human D-2Short dopamine receptor and a natural polymorphism of this D-2Short(Ser(311)Cys), have been studied by co-expressing the receptors in insect cells with Gbeta(1)gamma(2) and either Galpha(o), Galpha(i1), Galpha(i2) or Galpha(i3) G protein subunits. These preparations have been used to study the G protein coupling profiles of the two receptors and the influence of agonists. Receptor/G protein coupling was analysed in dopamine/[H-3]spiperone competition binding experiments and through stimulation of [S-35]GTPgammaS binding. Although the Ser(311)Cys polymorphism itself had no appreciable effect on the G protein coupling specificity of the D-2 receptor, agonist stimulation of [S-35]GTPgammaS binding, revealed that both dopamine and (+)-3PPP showed a clear preference for Galpha(o) compared to the Galpha(i) subtypes, but quinpirole did not. These results indicate that agonists are able to stabilise different receptor conformations with different abilities to couple to G proteins. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mechanisms of agonist action at D-2 dopamine receptors

In this study, we investigated the biochemical mechanisms of agonist action at the G protein-coupled D-2 dopamine receptor expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Stimulation of guanosine 5'-O-(3-[S-35]thio) triphosphate ([S-35]GTPgammaS) binding by full and partial agonists was determined at different concentrations of [S-35]GTPgammaS (0.1 and 10 nM) and in the presence of different concentrations of GDP. At both concentrations of [S-35]GTPgammaS, increasing GDP decreased the [S-35]GTPgammaS binding observed with maximally stimulating concentrations of agonist, with partial agonists exhibiting greater sensitivity to the effects of GDP than full agonists. The relative efficacy of partial agonists was greater at the lower GDP concentrations. Concentration-response experiments were performed for a range of agonists at the two [S-35]GTPgammaS concentrations and with different concentrations of GDP. At 0.1 nM [S-35]GTPgammaS, the potency of both full and partial agonists was dependent on the GDP concentration in the assays. At 10 nM [S-35]GTPgammaS, the potency of full agonists exhibited a greater dependence on the GDP concentration, whereas the potency of partial agonists was virtually independent of GDP. We concluded that at the lower [S-35]GTPgammaS concentration, the rate-determining step in G protein activation is the binding of [S-35]GTPgammaS to the G protein. At the higher [S-35]GTPgammaS concentration, for full agonists, [S-35]GTPgammaS binding remains the slowest step, whereas for partial agonists, another (GDP-independent) step, probably ternary complex breakdown, becomes rate-determining.

Investigation of the mechanism of agonist and inverse agonist action at D-2 dopamine receptors

This study investigated, for the D-2 dopamine receptor, the relation between the ability of agonists and inverse agonists to stabilise different states of the receptor and their relative efficacies. K-i values for agonists were determined in competition, versus the binding of the antagonist [H-3]spiperone. Competition data were fitted best by a two-binding site model (with the exception of bromocriptine, for which a one-binding site model provided the best fit) and agonist affinities for the higher (K-h) (G protein-coupled) and lower affinity (K-l) (G protein-uncoupled) sites determined. Ki values for agonists were also determined in competition versus the binding of the agonist [H-3]N-propylnorapomorphine (NPA) to provide a second estimate of K-h,. Maximal agonist effects (E-max) and their potencies (EC50) were determined from concentration-response curves for agonist stimulation of guanosine-5'-O-(3-[S-32] thiotriphosphate) ([S-35]GTPgammaS) binding. The ability of agonists to stabilise the G protein-coupled state of the receptor (K-l/K-h, determined from ligand-binding assays) did not correlate with either of two measures of relative efficacy (relative E-max, Kl/EC50) of agonists determined in [S-35]GTPgammaS-binding assays, when the data for all of the compounds tested were analysed For a subset of compounds, however, there was a relation between K-l/K-h and E-max.. Competition-binding data versus [H-3]spiperone and [H-3]NPA for a range of inverse agonists were fitted best by a one-binding site model. K-i values for the inverse agonists tested were slightly lower in competition versus [H-3]NPA compared to [H-3]spiperone. These data do not provide support for the idea that inverse agonists act by binding preferentially to the ground state of the receptor. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Functional coupling of the human dopamine D-2 receptor with G alpha(i1), G alpha(i2), G alpha(i3) and G alpha(o) G proteins: evidence for agonist regulation of G protein selectivity

1 The human dopamine D-2long (D-2L) receptor was expressed with four different G proteins in Sf9 cells using the baculovirus expression system. When co-expressed with G(i)/G(o) G proteins (G(i1)alpha, G(i2)alpha, G(i3)alpha, or G(o)alpha, plus Gbeta(1) and Ggamma(2)) the receptor displayed a high-affinity binding site for the agonists (dopamine and NPA), which was sensitive to GTP (100 mum), demonstrating interaction between the receptor and the different G proteins. 2 The receptor to G protein ratio (R: G ratio) was evaluated using [H-3]-spiperone saturation binding (R) and [S-35]-GTPgammaS saturation binding (G). R: G ratios of 1: 12, 1: 3, 1: 14 and 1: 5 were found for G(i1), G(i2), G(i3), and Go preparations, respectively. However, when R:G ratios of 1:2 and 1: 12 were compared for G(i2) and G(o), no difference was found for the stimulation of [S-35]-GTPgammaS binding. 3 Several agonists were tested for their ability to stimulate [S-35]-GTPgammaS binding to membranes co-expressing the receptor and various G proteins. All the compounds tested showed agonist activity in preparations expressing G(i3) and G(o). However, for G(i2) and G(i1) preparations, compounds such as S-(-)-3-PPP and p-tyramine were unable to stimulate [S-35]-GTPyS binding. 4 Most of the compounds showed higher relative efficacies (compared to dopamine) and higher potencies in the preparation expressing G(o). Comparison of the effects of different agonists in the different preparations showed that each agonist differentially activates the four G proteins. 5 We conclude that the degree of selectivity of G protein activation by the D-2L receptor can depend on the conformation of the receptor stabilised by an agonist.

Agonist binding, agonist affinity and agonist efficacy at G protein-coupled receptors

Measurements of affinity and efficacy are fundamental for work on agonists both in drug discovery and in basic studies on receptors. In this review I wish to consider methods for measuring affinity and efficacy at G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs). Agonist affinity may be estimated in terms of the dissociation constant for agonist binding to a receptor using ligand binding or functional assays. It has, however, been suggested that measurements of affinity are always contaminated by efficacy so that it is impossible to separate the two parameters. Here I show that for many GPCRs, if receptor/G protein coupling is suppressed, experimental measurements of agonist affinity using ligand binding (K-obs) provide quite accurate measures of the agonist microscopic dissociation constant (K-A). Also in pharmacological functional studies, good estimates of agonist dissociation constants are possible. Efficacy can be quantitated in several ways based on functional data ( maximal effect of the agonist (E-max), ratio of agonist dissociation constant to concentration of agonist giving half maximal effect in functional assay ( K-obs/ EC50), a combined parameter EmaxKobs/EC50). Here I show that EmaxKobs/EC50 provides the best assessment of efficacy for a range of agonists across the full range of efficacy for full to partial agonists. Considerable evidence now suggests that ligand efficacy may be dependent on the pathway used to assess it. The efficacy of a ligand may, therefore, be multidimensional. It is still, however, necessary to have accurate measures of efficacy in different pathways.

Mechanisms underlying agonist efficacy

Agonist efficacy is a measure of how well an agonist can stimulate a response system linked to a receptor. Efficacy can be assessed in functional assays and various parameters (E-max, K-A/EC50, E-max center dot K-A/EC50) determined. The E-max center dot K-A/EC50 parameter provides a good estimate of efficacy across the full range of efficacy. A convenient assay for the efficacy of agonists for some receptors is provided by the [S-35]GTP[S] (guanosine 5'-[gamma-[S-35]thio]triphosphate)-binding assay. in this assay, the normal GTP-binding event in GPCR (G-protein-coupled receptor) activation is replaced by the binding of the non-hydrolysable analogue [S-35]GTP[S]. This assay may be used to profile ligands for their efficacy, and an example here is the D-2 dopamine receptor where an efficacy scale has been set up using this assay. The mechanisms underlying the assay have been probed. The time course of [S-35]GTP[S] binding follows a pseudo-first-order reaction with [S-35]GTP[S] binding reaching equilibrium after approx. 3 h. The [S-35]GTP[S]-binding event is the rate-deter mining step in the assay. Agonists regulate the maximal level of [S-35]GTP[S] bound, rather than the rate constant for binding. The [S-35]GTP[S]-binding assay therefore determines agonist efficacy on the basis of the amount of [S-35]GTP[S] bound rather than the rate of binding.

Mechanisms of inverse agonist action at D-2 dopamine receptors

1 Mechanisms of inverse agonist action at the D-2(short) dopamine receptor have been examined. 2 Discrimination of G-protein-coupled and -uncoupled forms of the receptor by inverse agonists was examined in competition ligand-binding studies versus the agonist [H-3]NPA at a concentration labelling both G-protein-coupled and -uncoupled receptors. 3 Competition of inverse agonists versus [H-3] NPA gave data that were fitted best by a two-binding site model in the absence of GTP but by a one-binding site model in the presence of GTP. K-i values were derived from the competition data for binding of the inverse agonists to G-protein-uncoupled and -coupled receptors. K-coupled and K-uncoupled were statistically different for the set of compounds tested ( ANOVA) but the individual values were different in a post hoc test only for (+)-butaclamol. 4 These observations were supported by simulations of these competition experiments according to the extended ternary complex model. 5 Inverse agonist efficacy of the ligands was assessed from their ability to reduce agonist-independent [S-35]GTPγ S binding to varying degrees in concentration-response curves. Inverse agonism by (+)-butaclamol and spiperone occurred at higher potency when GDP was added to assays, whereas the potency of (-)-sulpiride was unaffected. 6 These data show that some inverse agonists ((+)-butaclamol, spiperone) achieve inverse agonism by stabilising the uncoupled form of the receptor at the expense of the coupled form. For other compounds tested, we were unable to define the mechanism.

Mechanisms of G protein activation via the D-2 dopamine receptor: evidence for persistent receptor/G protein interaction after agonist stimulation

Background and purpose: The aim of this report is to study mechanisms of G protein activation by agonists. Experimental approach: The association and dissociation of guanosine 5'-O-(3-[S-35] thio) triphosphate ([S-35] GTP gamma S) binding at G proteins in membranes of CHO cells stably transfected with the human dopamine D-2short receptor was studied in the presence of a range of agonists. Key results: Binding of [S-35] GTPgS was dissociable in the absence of agonist and dissociation was accelerated both in rate and extent by dopamine, an effect which was blocked by the dopamine D-2 receptor antagonist raclopride and by suramin, which inhibits receptor/G protein interaction. A range of agonists of varying efficacy increased the rate of dissociation of [S-35] GTPgS binding, with the more efficacious agonists resulting in faster dissociation. Agonists were able to dissociate about 70% of the pre-bound [S-35] GTPgS, leaving a component which may not be accessible to the agonist-bound receptor. The dissociable component of the [S-35] GTPgS binding was reduced with longer association times and increased [S-35] GTPgS concentrations. Conclusions and implications: These data are consistent with [S-35] GTPgS binding being initially to receptor-linked G proteins and then to G proteins which have separated from the agonist bound receptor. Under the conditions used typically for [S-35] GTPgS binding assays, therefore, much of the agonist-receptor complex remains in proximity to G proteins after they have been activated by agonist.

Agonist-selective, receptor-specific interaction of human P-2Y receptors with beta-arrestin-1 and-2

Interaction of G-protein-coupled receptors with beta-arrestins is an important step in receptor desensitization and in triggering "alternative" signals. By means of confocal microscopy and fluorescence resonance energy transfer, we have investigated the internalization of the human P2Y receptors 1, 2, 4, 6, 11, and 12 and their interaction with beta-arrestin-1 and -2. Co-transfection of each individual P2Y receptor with beta-arrestin-1-GFP or beta-arrestin-2-YFP into HEK-293 cells and stimulation with the corresponding agonists resulted in a receptor-specific interaction pattern. The P2Y(1) receptor stimulated with ADP strongly translocated beta-arrestin-2-YFP, whereas only a slight translocation was observed for beta-arrestin-1-GFP. The P2Y(4) receptor exhibited equally strong translocation for beta-arrestin-1-GFP and beta-arrestin-2YFP when stimulated with UTP. The P2Y(6), P2Y(11), and P2Y(12) receptor internalized only when GRK2 was additionally cotransfected, but beta-arrestin translocation was only visible for the P2Y(6) and P2Y(11) receptor. The P2Y(2) receptor showed a beta-arrestin translocation pattern that was dependent on the agonist used for stimulation. UTP translocated beta-arrestin-1-GFP and beta-arrestin-2-YFP equally well, whereas ATP translocated beta-arrestin-1-GFP to a much lower extent than beta-arrestin2- YFP. The same agonist-dependent pattern was seen in fluorescence resonance energy transfer experiments between the fluorescently labeled P2Y(2) receptor and beta-arrestins. Thus, the P2Y(2) receptor would be classified as a class A receptor when stimulated with ATP or as a class B receptor when stimulated with UTP. The ligand-specific recruitment of beta-arrestins by ATP and UTP stimulation of P2Y(2) receptors was further found to result in differential stimulation of ERK phosphorylation. This suggests that the two different agonists induce distinct active states of this receptor that show differential interactions with beta-arrestins.

Agonist-dependent internalization of D2 receptors: Imaging quantification by confocal microscopy

In positron emission tomography and single photon emission computed tomography studies using D2 dopamine (DA) receptor radiotracers, a decrease in radiotracer binding potential (BP) is usually interpreted in terms of increased competition with synaptic DA. However, some data suggest that this signal may also reflect agonist (DA)-induced increases in D2 receptor (D2R) internalization, a process which would presumably also decrease the population of receptors available for binding to hydrophilic radioligands. To advance interpretation of alterations in D2 radiotracer BP, direct methods of assessment of D2R internalization are required. Here, we describe a confocal microscopy-based approach for the quantification of agonist-dependent receptor internalization. The method relies upon double-labeling of the receptors with antibodies directed against intracellular as well as extracellular epitopes. Following agonist stimulation, DA D2R internalization was quantified by differentiating, in optical cell sections, the signal due to the staining of the extracellular from intracellular epitopes of D2Rs. Receptor internalization was increased in the presence of the D2 agonists DA and bromocriptine, but not the D1 agonist SKF38393. Pretreatment with either the D2 antagonist sulpiride, or inhibitors of internalization (phenylarsine oxide and high molarity sucrose), blocked D2-agonist induced receptor internalization, thus validating this method in vitro. This approach therefore provides a direct and streamlined methodology for investigating the pharmacological and mechanistic aspects of D2R internalization, and should inform the interpretation of results from in vivo receptor imaging studies.

CB1 receptor allosteric modulators display both agonist and signaling pathway specificity

We have previously identified allosteric modulators of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor (Org 27569, PSNCBAM-1) which display a contradictory pharmacological profile: increasing the specific binding of the CB1 receptor agonist [3H]CP55940 but producing a decrease in CB1 receptor agonist efficacy. Here we investigated the effect one or both compounds in a broad range of signalling endpoints linked to CB1 receptor activation. We assessed the effect of these compounds on CB1 receptor agonist-induced [35S]GTPγS binding, inhibition and stimulation of forskolin stimulated cAMP production, phosphorylation of ERK, and β arrestin recruitment. We also investigated the effect of these allosteric modulators on CB1 agonist binding kinetics. Both compounds display ligand dependence, being significantly more potent as modulators of CP55940 signalling as compared to WIN55212 and having little effect on [3H]WIN55212 binding. Org 27569 displays biased antagonism whereby it inhibits: agonist-induced [35S]GTPγS binding, simulation (Gαs mediated) and inhibition (Gαi mediated) of cAMP production and β arrestin recruitment. In contrast, it acts as an enhancer of agonist-induced ERK phosphoryation. Alone, the compound can act also as an allosteric agonist, increasing cAMP production and ERK phosphorylation. We find that in both saturation and kinetic binding experiments, the Org 27569 and PSNCBAM-1 appeared to influence only orthosteric ligand maximum occupancy rather than affinity. The data indicate that the allosteric modulators share a common mechanism whereby they increase available high affinity CB1 agonist binding sites. The receptor conformation stabilised by the allosterics appears to induce signalling and also selectively traffics orthosteric agonist signalling via the ERK phosphorylation pathway.

Agonist-induced endocytosis of rat somatostatin receptor 1

Somatostatin-receptor 1 (sst1) is an autoreceptor in the central nervous system that regulates the release of somatostatin. Sst1 is present intracellularly and at the cell surface. To investigate sst1 trafficking, rat sst1 tagged with epitope was expressed in rat insulinoma cells 1046-38 (RIN-1046-38) and tracked by antibody labeling. Confocal microscopic analysis revealed colocalization of intracellularly localized rat sst1-human simplex virus (HSV) with Rab5a-green fluorescent protein and Rab11a-green fluorescent protein, indicating the distribution of the receptor in endocytotic and recycling organelles. Somatostatin-14 induced internalization of cell surface receptors and reduction of binding sites on the cell surface. It also stimulated recruitment of intracellular sst1-HSV to the plasma membrane. Confocal analysis of sst1-HSV revealed that the receptor was initially transported within superficial vesicles. Prolonged stimulation of the cells with the peptide agonist induced intracellular accumulation of somatostatin-14. Because the number of cell surface binding sites did not change during prolonged stimulation, somatostatin-14 was internalized through a dynamic process of continuous endocytosis, recycling, and recruitment of intracellularly present sst1-HSV. Accumulated somatostatin-14 bypassed degradation via the endosomal-lysosomal route and was instead rapidly released as intact and biologically active somatostatin-14. Our results show for the first time that sst1 mediates a dynamic process of endocytosis, recycling, and re-endocytosis of its cognate ligand.

Recycling and resensitization of the neurokinin 1 receptor: influence of agonist concentration and Rab GTPases

Substance P (SP) induces endocytosis and recycling of the neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1R) in endothelial cells and spinal neurons at sites of inflammation and pain, and it is thus important to understand the mechanism and function of receptor trafficking. We investigated how the SP concentration affects NK1R trafficking and determined the role of Rab GTPases in trafficking. NK1R trafficking was markedly influenced by the SP concentration. High SP (10 nM) induced translocation of the NK1R and beta-arrestin 1 to perinuclear sorting endosomes containing Rab5a, where NK1R remained for >60 min. Low SP (1 nM) induced translocation of the NK1R to early endosomes located immediately beneath the plasma membrane that also contained Rab5a and beta-arrestin 1, followed by rapid recycling of the NK1R. Overexpression of Rab5a promoted NK1R translocation to perinuclear sorting endosomes, whereas the GTP binding-deficient mutant Rab5aS34N caused retention of the NK1R in superficial early endosomes. NK1R translocated from superficial early endosomes to recycling endosomes containing Rab4a and Rab11a, and Rab11aS25N inhibited NK1R recycling. Rapid NK1R recycling coincided with resensitization of SP-induced Ca2+ mobilization and with the return of surface SP binding sites. Resensitization was minimally affected by inhibition of vacuolar H(+)-ATPase and phosphatases but was markedly suppressed by disruption of Rab4a and Rab11a. Thus, whereas beta-arrestins mediate NK1R endocytosis, Rab5a regulates translocation between early and sorting endosomes, and Rab4a and Rab11a regulate trafficking through recycling endosomes. We have thus identified a new function of Rab5a as a control protein for directing concentration-dependent trafficking of the NK1R into different intracellular compartments and obtained evidence that Rab4a and Rab11a contribute to G-protein-coupled receptor recycling from early endosomes.

Trypsin IV, a novel agonist of protease-activated receptors 2 and 4

Certain serine proteases signal to cells by cleaving protease-activated receptors (PARs) and thereby regulate hemostasis, inflammation, pain and healing. However, in many tissues the proteases that activate PARs are unknown. Although pancreatic trypsin may be a physiological agonist of PAR(2) and PAR(4) in the small intestine and pancreas, these receptors are expressed by cells not normally exposed pancreatic trypsin. We investigated whether extrapancreatic forms of trypsin are PAR agonists. Epithelial cells lines from prostate, colon, and airway and human colonic mucosa expressed mRNA encoding PAR(2), trypsinogen IV, and enteropeptidase, which activates the zymogen. Immunoreactive trypsinogen IV was detected in vesicles in these cells. Trypsinogen IV was cloned from PC-3 cells and expressed in CHO cells, where it was also localized to cytoplasmic vesicles. We expressed trypsinogen IV with an N-terminal Igkappa signal peptide to direct constitutive secretion and allow enzymatic characterization. Treatment of conditioned medium with enteropeptidase reduced the apparent molecular mass of trypsinogen IV from 36 to 30 kDa and generated enzymatic activity, consistent with formation of trypsin IV. In contrast to pancreatic trypsin, trypsin IV was completely resistant to inhibition by polypeptide inhibitors. Exposure of cell lines expressing PAR(2) and PAR(4) to trypsin IV increased [Ca(2+)](i) and strongly desensitized cells to PAR agonists, whereas there were no responses in cells lacking these receptors. Thus, trypsin IV is a potential agonist of PAR(2) and PAR(4) in epithelial tissues where its resistance to endogenous trypsin inhibitors may permit prolonged signaling.