The E2.65A mutation disrupts dynamic binding poses of SB269652 at the dopamine D2 and D3 receptors

The dopamine D2 and D3 receptors (D2R and D3R) are important targets for antipsychotics and for the treatment of drug abuse. SB269652, a bitopic ligand that simultaneously binds both the orthosteric binding site (OBS) and a secondary binding pocket (SBP) in both D2R and D3R, was found to be a negative allosteric modulator. Previous studies identified Glu2.65 in the SBP to be a key determinant of both the affinity of SB269652 and the magnitude of its cooperativity with orthosteric ligands, as the E2.65A mutation decreased both of these parameters. However, the proposed hydrogen bond (H-bond) between Glu2.65 and the indole moiety of SB269652 is not a strong interaction, and a structure activity relationship study of SB269652 indicates that this H-bond may not be the only element that determines its allosteric properties. To understand the structural basis of the observed phenotype of E2.65A, we carried out molecular dynamics simulations with a cumulative length of ~77 μs of D2R and D3R wild-type and their E2.65A mutants bound to SB269652. In combination with Markov state model analysis and by characterizing the equilibria of ligand binding modes in different conditions, we found that in both D2R and D3R, whereas the tetrahydroisoquinoline moiety of SB269652 is stably bound in the OBS, the indole-2-carboxamide moiety is dynamic and only intermittently forms H-bonds with Glu2.65. Our results also indicate that the E2.65A mutation significantly affects the overall shape and size of the SBP, as well as the conformation of the N terminus. Thus, our findings suggest that the key role of Glu2.65 in mediating the allosteric properties of SB269652 extends beyond a direct interaction with SB269652, and provide structural insights for rational design of SB269652 derivatives that may retain its allosteric properties.

[1]  B. Brooks,et al.  Constant pressure molecular dynamics simulation: The Langevin piston method , 1995 .

[2]  M. Connor,et al.  A6V polymorphism of the human μ‐opioid receptor decreases signalling of morphine and endogenous opioids in vitro , 2015, British journal of pharmacology.

[3]  Roman A. Laskowski,et al.  LigPlot+: Multiple Ligand-Protein Interaction Diagrams for Drug Discovery , 2011, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Jonathan A. Javitch,et al.  Structure of the Human Dopamine D3 Receptor in Complex with a D2/D3 Selective Antagonist , 2010, Science.

[5]  Shailesh N Mistry,et al.  Structure-activity study of N-((trans)-4-(2-(7-cyano-3,4-dihydroisoquinolin-2(1H)-yl)ethyl)cyclohexyl)-1H-indole-2-carboxamide (SB269652), a bitopic ligand that acts as a negative allosteric modulator of the dopamine D2 receptor. , 2015, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[6]  D. Sibley,et al.  Synthesis and Pharmacological Characterization of Novel trans-Cyclopropylmethyl-Linked Bivalent Ligands That Exhibit Selectivity and Allosteric Pharmacology at the Dopamine D3 Receptor (D3R). , 2017, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[7]  Mayako Michino,et al.  Structural basis for Na(+)-sensitivity in dopamine D2 and D3 receptors. , 2015, Chemical communications.

[8]  F. Noé,et al.  Efficient Bayesian estimation of Markov model transition matrices with given stationary distribution. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[9]  Francesca Zazzeroni,et al.  The Tetrahydroisoquinoline Derivative SB269,652 Is an Allosteric Antagonist at Dopamine D3 and D2 Receptors , 2010, Molecular Pharmacology.

[10]  Vijay S Pande,et al.  Improvements in Markov State Model Construction Reveal Many Non-Native Interactions in the Folding of NTL9. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[11]  Ara M. Abramyan,et al.  The Isomeric Preference of an Atypical Dopamine Transporter Inhibitor Contributes to Its Selection of the Transporter Conformation. , 2017, ACS chemical neuroscience.

[12]  Frank Noé,et al.  Markov models of molecular kinetics: generation and validation. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[13]  John D. Scott,et al.  Endogenous N-terminal Domain Cleavage Modulates α1D-Adrenergic Receptor Pharmacodynamics* , 2016, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[14]  S. R. Nash,et al.  Dopamine receptors: from structure to function. , 1998, Physiological reviews.

[15]  J. Deschamps,et al.  Toward Understanding the Structural Basis of Partial Agonism at the Dopamine D3 Receptor. , 2017, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[16]  Marcus Weber,et al.  Fuzzy spectral clustering by PCCA+: application to Markov state models and data classification , 2013, Advances in Data Analysis and Classification.

[17]  Benoît Roux,et al.  AUTOMATED FORCE FIELD PARAMETERIZATION FOR NON-POLARIZABLE AND POLARIZABLE ATOMIC MODELS BASED ON AB INITIO TARGET DATA. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[18]  Ralf C. Kling,et al.  Molecular determinants of biased agonism at the dopamine D₂ receptor. , 2015, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[19]  V. Pande,et al.  Error analysis and efficient sampling in Markovian state models for molecular dynamics. , 2005, The Journal of chemical physics.

[20]  Frank Noé,et al.  An Introduction to Markov State Models and Their Application to Long Timescale Molecular Simulation , 2014, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology.

[21]  Lei Shi,et al.  A Single Glycine in Extracellular Loop 1 Is the Critical Determinant for Pharmacological Specificity of Dopamine D2 and D3 Receptors , 2013, Molecular Pharmacology.

[22]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Update of the CHARMM all-atom additive force field for lipids: validation on six lipid types. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[23]  Toni Giorgino,et al.  Identification of slow molecular order parameters for Markov model construction. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[24]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. , 1998, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[25]  Arthur Christopoulos,et al.  Allosteric modulators of GPCRs: a novel approach for the treatment of CNS disorders , 2009, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[26]  Marta Filizola,et al.  Dopamine D2 receptors form higher order oligomers at physiological expression levels , 2008, The EMBO journal.

[27]  Lei Shi,et al.  Novel Bivalent Ligands Based on the Sumanirole Pharmacophore Reveal Dopamine D2 Receptor (D2R) Biased Agonism. , 2017, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[28]  Helgi B. Schiöth,et al.  Structural diversity of G protein-coupled receptors and significance for drug discovery , 2008, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[29]  R. Stevens,et al.  Structure-function of the G protein-coupled receptor superfamily. , 2013, Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology.

[30]  Lei Shi,et al.  Molecular determinants of selectivity and efficacy at the dopamine D3 receptor. , 2012, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[31]  R. Friesner,et al.  Novel procedure for modeling ligand/receptor induced fit effects. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[32]  Harel Weinstein,et al.  Computational approaches to detect allosteric pathways in transmembrane molecular machines. , 2016, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[33]  P. Sexton,et al.  A new mechanism of allostery in a G protein-coupled receptor dimer , 2014, Nature chemical biology.

[34]  A. Newman,et al.  Current perspectives on selective dopamine D3 receptor antagonists as pharmacotherapeutics for addictions and related disorders , 2010, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Arthur Christopoulos,et al.  Bridging the gap: bitopic ligands of G-protein-coupled receptors. , 2013, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[36]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Extending the treatment of backbone energetics in protein force fields: Limitations of gas‐phase quantum mechanics in reproducing protein conformational distributions in molecular dynamics simulations , 2004, J. Comput. Chem..

[37]  R. McGibbon,et al.  Variational cross-validation of slow dynamical modes in molecular kinetics. , 2014, The Journal of chemical physics.

[38]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  CHARMM general force field: A force field for drug‐like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all‐atom additive biological force fields , 2009, J. Comput. Chem..

[39]  V. Setola,et al.  Role of the N-Terminal Region in G Protein–Coupled Receptor Functions: Negative Modulation Revealed by 5-HT2B Receptor Polymorphisms , 2013, Molecular Pharmacology.

[40]  Shailesh N Mistry,et al.  Discovery of a Novel Class of Negative Allosteric Modulator of the Dopamine D2 Receptor Through Fragmentation of a Bitopic Ligand. , 2015, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[41]  M. Connor,et al.  Buprenorphine signalling is compromised at the N40D polymorphism of the human μ opioid receptor in vitro , 2014, British journal of pharmacology.

[42]  Frank Noé,et al.  PyEMMA 2: A Software Package for Estimation, Validation, and Analysis of Markov Models. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[43]  J. Ballesteros,et al.  [19] Integrated methods for the construction of three-dimensional models and computational probing of structure-function relations in G protein-coupled receptors , 1995 .

[44]  Frank Noé,et al.  Variational Approach to Molecular Kinetics. , 2014, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[45]  Noel M. Paul,et al.  Investigation of the binding and functional properties of extended length D3 dopamine receptor-selective antagonists , 2015, European Neuropsychopharmacology.

[46]  Frank Noé,et al.  A Variational Approach to Modeling Slow Processes in Stochastic Dynamical Systems , 2012, Multiscale Model. Simul..

[47]  Lei Shi,et al.  What Can Crystal Structures of Aminergic Receptors Tell Us about Designing Subtype-Selective Ligands? , 2015, Pharmacological Reviews.

[48]  J. Beaulieu,et al.  Dopamine receptors – IUPHAR Review 13 , 2015, British journal of pharmacology.

[49]  R. Gainetdinov,et al.  The Physiology, Signaling, and Pharmacology of Dopamine Receptors , 2011, Pharmacological Reviews.

[50]  Alexander D. MacKerell,et al.  Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone φ, ψ and side-chain χ(1) and χ(2) dihedral angles. , 2012, Journal of chemical theory and computation.