Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Subscribe

Sci. STKE, 13 January 2004
Vol. 2004, Issue 215, p. pe1
[DOI: 10.1126/stke.2152004pe1]

PERSPECTIVES

Inverse Agonists: Tools to Reveal Ligand-Specific Conformations of G Protein–Coupled Receptors

Paul L. Prather*

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Mail Slot 611, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA.

Abstract: G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) traverse the plasma membrane seven times and produce intracellular effects through interaction with G proteins. Three classes of ligands bind and regulate the activity of GPCRs: agonists, antagonists, and inverse agonists. To describe the activity of these ligands at GPCRs, a two-state receptor model has been proposed in which receptors exist in an equilibrium between inactive (R) and active (R*) states. Agonists preferentially bind and stabilize the active (R*) state. This results in an enrichment of the proportion of active receptors, producing an increase in receptor activity. In contrast, inverse agonists preferentially bind and stabilize receptors in the inactive (R) state. This results in an enrichment of the proportion of inactive receptors, producing a reduction in spontaneous receptor activity. Neutral antagonists have equal preferences for both R and R* states, lack any intrinsic activity, and are able to block actions produced by either agonists or inverse agonists. Exciting observations reported in two recent manuscripts by Gbahou et al. and Azzi et al. indicate that some inverse agonists act not only in opposition to agonists by suppressing constitutive receptor activity, but may also initiate unique signal transduction cascades as well. Specifically, it is proposed that these unique ligands are able to enrich several distinct active receptor conformations, each demonstrating a preference for regulation of a discrete intracellular effector. This suggests that inverse agonists are not merely "the opposite of agonists," but instead may serve as useful tools to investigate ligand-specific conformations of GPCRs.

*Contact information. Telephone, (501)-686-5512; fax, (501)-686-5521; e-mail, pratherpaull{at}uams.edu

Citation: P. L. Prather, Inverse Agonists: Tools to Reveal Ligand-Specific Conformations of G Protein–Coupled Receptors. Sci. STKE 2004, pe1 (2004).

Read the Full Text


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
Cannabinoid Receptor Type 1- and 2-mediated Increase in Cyclic AMP Inhibits T Cell Receptor-triggered Signaling.
C. Borner, M. Smida, V. Hollt, B. Schraven, and J. Kraus (2009)
J. Biol. Chem. 284, 35450-35460
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
The Relative Potency of Inverse Opioid Agonists and a Neutral Opioid Antagonist in Precipitated Withdrawal and Antagonism of Analgesia and Toxicity.
S. Sirohi, S. V. Dighe, P. A. Madia, and B. C. Yoburn (2009)
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 330, 513-519
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Lysophosphatidylcholine-induced Surface Redistribution Regulates Signaling of the Murine G Protein-coupled Receptor G2A.
L. Wang, C. G. Radu, L. V. Yang, L. A. Bentolila, M. Riedinger, and O. N. Witte (2005)
Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 2234-2247
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »

To Advertise     Find Products


Science Signaling. ISSN 1937-9145 (online), 1945-0877 (print). Pre-2008: Science's STKE. ISSN 1525-8882