Pathway-specific targeting of GAB(A) a receptor subtypes to somatic and dendritic synapses in the central amygdala

Neurons in the central amygdala express two distinct types of ionotropic GABA receptor. One is the classical GABA(A) receptor that is blocked by low concentrations of bicuculline and positively modulated by benzodiazepines. The other is a novel type of ionotropic GABA receptor that is less sensitive to bicuculline but blocked by the GABA(C) receptor antagonist (1,2,5,6-tetrohydropyridine-4-yl) methylphosphinic acid (TPMPA) and by benzodiazepines. In this study, we examine the distribution of these two receptor types. Recordings of GABAergic miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents (mIPSCs) showed a wide variation in amplitude. Most events had amplitudes of 100 pA. Large-amplitude events also had rise times faster than small-amplitude events. Large-amplitude events were fully blocked by 10 muM bicuculline but unaffected by TPMPA. Small amplitude events were partially blocked by both bicuculline and TPMPA. Focal application of hypertonic sucrose to the soma evoked large-amplitude mIPSCs, whereas focal dendritic application of sucrose evoked small-amplitude mIPSCs. Thus inhibitory synapses on the dendrites of neurons in the central amygdala express both types of GABA receptor, but somatic synapses expressed purely GABA(A) receptors. Minimal stimulation revealed that inhibitory inputs arising from the laterally located intercalated cells innervate dendritic synapses, whereas inhibitory inputs of medial origin innervated somatic inhibitory synapses. These results show that different types of ionotropic GABA receptors are targeted to spatially and functionally distinct synapses. Thus benzodiazepines will have different modulatory effects on different inhibitory pathways in the central amygdala.

Acromegaly: correlation between expression of somatostatin receptor subtypes and response to octreotide-lar treatment

About one-third of acromegalics are resistant to the clinically available somatostatin analogs (SA). The resistance is related to density reduction or different expression of somatostatin receptor subtypes (SSTR). This study analyzes SSTR`s expression in somatotrophinomas, comparing to SA response, hormonal levels, and tumor volume. We analyzed 39 somatotrophinomas; 49% were treated with SA. The most expressed SSTR was SSTR5, SSTR3, SSTR2, SSTR1, and SSTR4, respectively. SSTR1 and SSTR2 had higher expression in patients that had normalized GH and IGF-I. SSTR3 was more expressed in patients with tumor reduction. There was a positive correlation between the percentage of tumor reduction and SSTR1, SSTR2 and SSTR3 expression. Also, a positive correlation between SSTR2 mRNA expression and the immunohistochemical reactivity of SSTR2 was found. Our study confirmed the association between the SA response to GH and IGF-I and the SSTR2. Additionally, this finding was also demonstrated in relation to SSTR1.

A role for COX2-derived PGE2 and PGE2-receptor subtypes in head and neck squamous carcinoma cell proliferation

The overexpression of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 is a frequent event in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (HNSCC), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, which are potent inhibitors of COX-1 and COX-2, exert chemopreventive effects on HNSCC cancer development. COX-2 promotes the release of the pro-inflammatory mediator prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), which acts on its cell surface G protein-coupled receptors EP1, EP2, EP3, and EP4. Here, we investigated the role of PGE2 and its receptors in cellular proliferation in HNSCC. The expression of COX-2 and EP1-4 was examined in immortalized oral epithelial cells and in a representative panel of HNSCC cell lines, and based on these data EP1-EP3 and COX-2 expression were evaluated by immunohistochemistry in a large clinical sample collection using HNSCC tissue microarrays. The ability of selective COX-2 inhibition to block PGE2 secretion was measured by ELISA specific assays. The effects of PGE2 on cell proliferation were evaluated using PGE2, its stable analog, and EP2 and EP3-specific synthetic agonists. The results presented here show that HNSCC tumoral lesions and their derived cell lines constitutively express COX-2 and the EP1, EP2 and EP3 receptors for PGE2. HNSCC cells secrete PGE2, which can be suppressed by low concentrations of COX-2 selective inhibitors, without inhibiting cell proliferation. Exogenously added stable PGE2 and EP3-specific agonists induce DNA synthesis in all HNSCC cell lines tested. Overall, our study supports the emerging notion that PGE2 produced in the tumor microenvironment by the overexpression of COX-2 in tumoral and inflammatory cells may promote the growth of HNSCC cells in an autocrine and paracrine fashion by acting on PGE2 receptors that are widely expressed in most HNSCC cancer cells. In particular, our findings suggest that EP3 receptor may play a more prominent role in HNSCC cell growth promotion, thus providing a rationale for the future evaluation of this PGE2 receptor as a target for HNSCC prevention strategies. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Influence of angiotensin II receptor subtypes of the paraventricular nucleus on the physiological responses induced by angiotensin II injection into the medial septal area

OBJECTIVE: We determined the effects of losartan and PD 123319 (antagonists of the AT1 and AT2 angiotensin receptors, respectively), and [Sar¹, Ala8] ANG II (a relatively peptide antagonist of angiotensin receptors) injected into the paraventricular nucleus (PVN) on water and 3% NaCl intake, and the diuretic, natriuretic, and pressor effects induced by administration of angiotensin II (ANG II) into the medial septal area (MSA) of conscious rats. METHODS: Holtzman rats were used . Animals were anesthetized with tribromoethanol (20 mg) per 100 grams of body weight, ip. A stainless steel guide cannula was implanted into the MSA and PVN. All drugs were injected in 0.5-mul volumes for 10-15 seconds. Seven days after brain surgery, water and 3% NaCl intake, urine and sodium excretion, and arterial blood pressure were measured. RESULTS: Losartan (40 nmol) and [Sar¹, Ala8] ANG II (40 nmol) completely eliminated whereas PD 123319 (40 nmol) partially blocked the increase in water and sodium intake and the increase in arterial blood pressure induced by ANG II (10 nmol) injected into the MSA. The PVN administration of PD 123319 and [Sar¹, Ala8] ANG II blocked whereas losartan attenuated the diuresis and natriuresis induced by MSA administration of ANG II. CONCLUSION: MSA involvement with PVN on water and sodium homeostasis and arterial pressure modulation utilizing ANGII receptors is suggested.

Oligomerization of the alpha 1a- and alpha 1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes. Potential implications in receptor internalization.

We combined biophysical, biochemical, and pharmacological approaches to investigate the ability of the alpha 1a- and alpha 1b-adrenergic receptor (AR) subtypes to form homo- and hetero-oligomers. Receptors tagged with different epitopes (hemagglutinin and Myc) or fluorescent proteins (cyan and green fluorescent proteins) were transiently expressed in HEK-293 cells either individually or in different combinations. Fluorescence resonance energy transfer measurements provided evidence that both the alpha 1a- and alpha 1b-AR can form homo-oligomers with similar transfer efficiency of approximately 0.10. Hetero-oligomers could also be observed between the alpha 1b- and the alpha 1a-AR subtypes but not between the alpha 1b-AR and the beta2-AR, the NK1 tachykinin, or the CCR5 chemokine receptors. Oligomerization of the alpha 1b-AR did not require the integrity of its C-tail, of two glycophorin motifs, or of the N-linked glycosylation sites at its N terminus. In contrast, helix I and, to a lesser extent, helix VII were found to play a role in the alpha 1b-AR homo-oligomerization. Receptor oligomerization was not influenced by the agonist epinephrine or by the inverse agonist prazosin. A constitutively active (A293E) as well as a signaling-deficient (R143E) mutant displayed oligomerization features similar to those of the wild type alpha 1b-AR. Confocal imaging revealed that oligomerization of the alpha1-AR subtypes correlated with their ability to co-internalize upon exposure to the agonist. The alpha 1a-selective agonist oxymetazoline induced the co-internalization of the alpha 1a- and alpha 1b-AR, whereas the alpha 1b-AR could not co-internalize with the NK1 tachykinin or CCR5 chemokine receptors. Oligomerization might therefore represent an additional mechanism regulating the physiological responses mediated by the alpha 1a- and alpha 1b-AR subtypes.

Constitutive activity and inverse agonism at the α(₁a) and α(₁b) adrenergic receptor subtypes.

The α(1b)-adrenergic receptor (AR) was, after rhodopsin, the first G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) in which point mutations were shown to trigger constitutive (agonist-independent) activity. Constitutively activating mutations have been found in other AR subtypes as well as in several GPCRs. This chapter briefly summarizes the main findings on constitutively active mutants of the α(1a)- and α(1b)-AR subtypes and the methods used to predict activating mutations, to measure constitutive activity of Gq-coupled receptors and to investigate inverse agonism. In addition, it highlights the implications of studies on constitutively active AR mutants on elucidating the molecular mechanisms of receptor activation and drug action.

Amino acids of the alpha1B-adrenergic receptor involved in agonist binding: differences in docking catecholamines to receptor subtypes.

Site-directed mutagenesis and molecular dynamics analysis of the 3-D model of the alpha1B-adrenergic receptor (AR) were combined to identify the molecular determinants of the receptor involved in catecholamine binding. Our results indicate that the three conserved serines in the fifth transmembrane domain (TMD) of the alpha1B-AR play a distinct role in catecholamine binding versus receptor activation. In addition to the amino acids D125 in TMDIII and S207 in TMDV directly involved in ligand binding, our findings identify a large number of polar residues playing an important role in the activation process of the alpha1B-AR thus providing new insights into the structure/function relationship of G protein-coupled receptors.

Two alpha1-adrenergic receptor subtypes regulating the vasopressor response have differential roles in blood pressure regulation.

To study the functional role of individual alpha1-adrenergic (AR) subtypes in blood pressure (BP) regulation, we used mice lacking the alpha1B-AR and/or alpha1D-AR with the same genetic background and further studied their hemodynamic and vasoconstrictive responses. Both the alpha1D-AR knockout and alpha1B-/alpha1D-AR double knockout mice, but not the alpha1B-AR knockout mice, had significantly (p < 0.05) lower levels of basal systolic and mean arterial BP than wild-type mice in nonanesthetized condition, and they showed no significant change in heart rate or in cardiac function, as assessed by echocardiogram. All mutants showed a significantly (p < 0.05) reduced catecholamine-induced pressor and vasoconstriction responses. It is noteworthy that the infusion of norepinephrine did not elicit any pressor response at all in alpha1B-/alpha1D-AR double knockout mice. In an attempt to further examine alpha1-AR subtype, which is involved in the genesis or maintenance of hypertension, BP after salt loading was monitored by tail-cuff readings and confirmed at the endpoint by direct intra-arterial recording. After salt loading, alpha1B-AR knockout mice developed a comparable level of hypertension to wild-type mice, whereas mice lacking alpha1D-AR had significantly (p < 0.05) attenuated BP and lower levels of circulating catecholamines. Our data indicated that alpha1B- and alpha1D-AR subtypes participate cooperatively in BP regulation; however, the deletion of the functional alpha1D-AR, not alpha1B-AR, leads to an antihypertensive effect. The study shows differential contributions of alpha1B- and alpha1D-ARs in BP regulation.

The alpha 1a and alpha 1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes: molecular mechanisms of receptor activation and of drug action.

In this chapter we summarize some aspects of the structure-functional relationship of the alpha 1a and alpha 1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes related to the receptor activation process as well as the effect of different alpha-blockers on the constitutive activity of the receptor. Molecular modeling of the alpha 1a and alpha 1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes and computational simulation of receptor dynamics were useful to interpret the experimental findings derived from site directed mutagenesis studies.

Inverse agonism and neutral antagonism at alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-adrenergic receptor subtypes.

We have characterized the pharmacological antagonism, i.e., neutral antagonism or inverse agonism, displayed by a number of alpha-blockers at two alpha1-adrenergic receptor (AR) subtypes, alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR. Constitutively activating mutations were introduced into the alpha(1a)-AR at the position homologous to A293 of the alpha(1b)-AR where activating mutations were previously described. Twenty-four alpha-blockers differing in their chemical structures were initially tested for their effect on the agonist-independent inositol phosphate response mediated by the constitutively active A271E and A293E mutants expressed in COS-7 cells. A selected number of drugs also were tested for their effect on the small, but measurable spontaneous activity of the wild-type alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR expressed in COS-7 cells. The results of our study demonstrate that a large number of structurally different alpha-blockers display profound negative efficacy at both the alpha(1a)- and alpha(1b)-AR subtypes. For other drugs, the negative efficacy varied at the different constitutively active mutants. The most striking difference concerns a group of N-arylpiperazines, including 8-[2-[4-(5-chloro-2-methoxyphenyl)-1-piperazinyl]ethyl]-8-azaspiro [4, 5] decane-7,9-dione (REC 15/3039), REC 15/2739, and REC 15/3011, which are inverse agonists with profound negative efficacy at the wild-type alpha(1b)-AR, but not at the alpha(1a)-AR.

Different internalization properties of the alpha1a- and alpha1b-adrenergic receptor subtypes: the potential role of receptor interaction with beta-arrestins and AP50.

The internalization properties of the alpha1a- and alpha1b-adrenergic receptors (ARs) subtypes transiently expressed in human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells were compared using biotinylation experiments and confocal microscopy. Whereas the alpha1b-AR displayed robust agonist-induced endocytosis, the alpha1a-AR did not. Constitutive internalization of the alpha1a-AR was negligible, whereas the alpha1b-AR displayed significant constitutive internalization and recycling. We investigated the interaction of the alpha1-AR subtypes with beta-arrestins 1 and 2 as well as with the AP50 subunit of the clathrin adaptor complex AP2. The results from both coimmunoprecipitation experiments and beta-arrestin translocation assays indicated that the agonistinduced interaction of the alpha1a-AR with beta-arrestins was much weaker than that of the alpha1b-AR. In addition, the alpha1a-AR did not bind AP50. The alpha1b-AR mutant M8, lacking the main phosphorylation sites in the receptor C tail, was unable to undergo endocytosis and was profoundly impaired in binding beta-arrestins despite its binding to AP50. In contrast, the alpha1b-AR mutant DeltaR8, lacking AP50 binding, bound beta-arrestins efficiently, and displayed delayed endocytosis. RNA interference showed that beta-arrestin 2 plays a prominent role in alpha1b-AR endocytosis. The findings of this study demonstrate differences in internalization between the alpha1a- and alpha1b-AR and provide evidence that the lack of significant endocytosis of the alpha1a-AR is linked to its poor interaction with beta-arrestins as well as with AP50. We also provide evidence that the integrity of the phosphorylation sites in the C tail of the alpha1b-AR is important for receptor/beta-arrestin interaction and that this interaction is the main event triggering receptor internalization.

Molecular mechanisms involved in the activation and regulation of the alpha 1-adrenergic receptor subtypes.

The adrenergic receptors (ARs) belong to the superfamily of membrane-bound G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs). Our investigation has focused on the structure-function relationship of the alpha 1b-AR subtype used as the model system for other GPCRs. Site-directed mutagenesis studies have elucidated the structural domains of the alpha 1b-AR involved in ligand binding, G protein coupling or desensitization. In addition, a combined approach using site-directed mutagenesis and molecular dynamics analysis of the alpha 1b-AR has provided information about the potential mechanisms underlying the activation process of the receptor, i.e. its transition from the 'inactive' to the 'active' conformation.

DNA binding properties of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor subtypes on various natural peroxisome proliferator response elements. Importance of the 5'-flanking region.

The three subtypes of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARalpha, beta/delta, and gamma) form heterodimers with the 9-cis-retinoic acid receptor (RXR) and bind to a common consensus response element, which consists of a direct repeat of two hexanucleotides spaced by one nucleotide (DR1). As a first step toward understanding the molecular mechanisms determining PPAR subtype specificity, we evaluated by electrophoretic mobility shift assays the binding properties of the three PPAR subtypes, in association with either RXRalpha or RXRgamma, on 16 natural PPAR response elements (PPREs). The main results are as follows. (i) PPARgamma in combination with either RXRalpha or RXRgamma binds more strongly than PPARalpha or PPARbeta to all natural PPREs tested. (ii) The binding of PPAR to strong elements is reinforced if the heterodimerization partner is RXRgamma. In contrast, weak elements favor RXRalpha as heterodimerization partner. (iii) The ordering of the 16 natural PPREs from strong to weak elements does not depend on the core DR1 sequence, which has a relatively uniform degree of conservation, but correlates with the number of identities of the 5'-flanking nucleotides with respect to a consensus element. This 5'-flanking sequence is essential for PPARalpha binding and thus contributes to subtype specificity. As a demonstration of this, the PPARgamma-specific element ARE6 PPRE is able to bind PPARalpha only if its 5'-flanking region is exchanged with that of the more promiscuous HMG PPRE.

Differential effects of GABAB receptor subtypes, {gamma}-hydroxybutyric Acid, and Baclofen on EEG activity and sleep regulation.

The role of GABA(B) receptors in sleep is still poorly understood. GHB (γ-hydroxybutyric acid) targets these receptors and is the only drug approved to treat the sleep disorder narcolepsy. GABA(B) receptors are obligate dimers comprised of the GABA(B2) subunit and either one of the two GABA(B1) subunit isoforms, GABA(B1a) and GABA(B1b). To better understand the role of GABA(B) receptors in sleep regulation, we performed electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings in mice devoid of functional GABA(B) receptors (1(-/-) and 2(-/-)) or lacking one of the subunit 1 isoforms (1a(-/-) and 1b(-/-)). The distribution of sleep over the day was profoundly altered in 1(-/-) and 2(-/-) mice, suggesting a role for GABA(B) receptors in the circadian organization of sleep. Several other sleep and EEG phenotypes pointed to a more prominent role for GABA(B1a) compared with the GABA(B1b) isoform. Moreover, we found that GABA(B1a) protects against the spontaneous seizure activity observed in 1(-/-) and 2(-/-) mice. We also evaluated the effects of the GHB-prodrug GBL (γ-butyrolactone) and of baclofen (BAC), a high-affinity GABA(B) receptor agonist. Both drugs induced a state distinct from physiological sleep that was not observed in 1(-/-) and 2(-/-) mice. Subsequent sleep was not affected by GBL whereas BAC was followed by a delayed hypersomnia even in 1(-/-) and 2(-/-) mice. The differential effects of GBL and BAC might be attributed to differences in GABA(B)-receptor affinity. These results also indicate that all GBL effects are mediated through GABA(B) receptors, although these receptors do not seem to be involved in mediating the BAC-induced hypersomnia.

Structural determinants involved in the activation and regulation of G protein-coupled receptors: lessons from the alpha1-adrenegic receptor subtypes.

The aim of a large number of studies on G protein-coupled receptors was centered on understanding the structural basis of their main functional properties. Here, we will briefly review the results obtained on the alpha1-adrenergic receptor subtypes belonging to the rhodopsin-like family of receptors. These findings contribute, on the one hand, to further understand the molecular basis of adrenergic transmission and, on the other, to provide some generalities on the structure-functional relationship of G protein-coupled receptors.