Receptors have well-conserved regions that are recognized and activated by hormones and neurotransmitters. Most drugs bind to these sites and mimic or block the action of the native ligands. Using a high-throughput functional screen, we identified a potent and selective M 1 muscarinic receptor agonist from a novel structural class. Using a series of chimeric receptors, we demonstrated that this ligand activates the receptor through a region that is not conserved among receptor subtypes, explaining its unprecedented selectivity. This region of the receptor is distinct from the conserved region that is recognized by traditional ligands. The finding that receptors for small-molecule transmitters can have multiple, structurally distinct activation sites has broad implications for the study of receptor structure/function and the potential for the discovery of novel ligands with high selectivity.G-protein-coupled receptors that bind monoamine ligands (e.g., serotonin, adrenaline, dopamine, histamine, and acetylcholine) comprise the most intensively studied and exploited receptor family for the development of therapeutic agents by the pharmaceutical industry. The natural ligands for monoamine receptors are believed to bind a highly conserved pocket located deep within the transmembrane (TM)-spanning regions and to mediate receptor activation primarily through TM3, TM5, TM6, and TM7 (Spalding et al., 1994;Baldwin et al., 1997;Gether, 2000;Lu et al., 2001). Of the amino acids in these regions, 74% are identical in all five muscarinic receptor subtypes (Bonner et al., 1988). Potent small-molecule agonists are also believed to bind monoamine receptors through the same highly conserved regions (Strader et al., 1989(Strader et al., , 1991Wess et al., 1991;Page et al., 1995;Spalding et al., 1998;Ward et al., 1999;Allman et al., 2000).The muscarinic M 1 receptor has been targeted for the discovery of therapeutics for Alzheimer's Disease, and several companies have developed M 1 -selective agonists (e.g., Tecle et al., 1998;Wood et al., 1999;Bartolomeo et al., 2000;Wienrich et al., 2001). Many potent compounds came out of these programs, and several were shown to improve cognition in animals (WAY-132983 and CI-1017; Bartolomeo et al., 2000;Weiss et al., 2000) and people (Xanomeline, Bodick et al., 1997). However, many of the compounds also produced classic muscarinic side effects such as sweating, nausea and diarrhea (Bodick et al., 1997, Bartolomeo et al., 2000Thal et al., 2000). In vitro assays have shown that these compounds activate the M 1 , M 3 , M 4 , and M 5 muscarinic receptor subtypes at similar concentrations (Table 1 and Tecle Wood et al., 1999;Bartolomeo et al., 2000;Wienrich et al., 2001). This may be a direct result of the ligands activating the receptors through regions where the amino acid sequence is almost identical. Since drug interactions with nontarget receptor subtypes are often responsible for the unwanted side effects of commercial pharmaceuticals, there is strong motivation to design more selec...

The muscarinic receptor agonist activities of NDMC are unique among antipsychotics, and provide a possible molecular basis for the superior clinical effects of clozapine pharmacotherapy.

We have completed a systematic search of the intracellular loops of a muscarinic acetylcholine receptor for domains that govern G-protein coupling. A unique feature of the second intracellular (i2) loop was an ordered cluster of residues where diverse substitutions cause constitutive activation. A second group of residues in i2 was identified where mutations compromised receptor/ G-protein coupling. The residues of each group alternate and are spaced three to four positions apart, suggesting an ␣-helical structure where these groups form opposing faces of the helix. We propose that the constitutively activating face normally constrains the receptor in the "off-state," while the other face couples Gproteins in the "on-state." Therefore, the i2 loop functions as the switch enabling G-protein activation.

Transmembrane domain 3 (TM3) plays a crucial role mediating muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation by acetylcholine, carbachol, and other muscarinic agonists. We compared the effects of point mutations throughout TM3 on the interactions of carbachol, 4-n-butyl-1-[4-(2-methylphenyl)-4-oxo-1-butyl] piperidine hydrogen chloride (AC-42), a potent structural analog of AC-42 called 4-[3-(4-butylpiperidin-1-yl)-propyl]-7-fluoro-4H-benzo[1,4]oxazin-3-one (AC-260584), N-desmethylclozapine, and clozapine with the M 1 muscarinic receptor. The binding and activation profiles of these ligands fell into three distinct patterns; one exemplified by orthosteric compounds like carbachol, another by structural analogs of AC-42, and a third by structural analogs of N-desmethylclozapine. All mutations tested severely reduced carbachol binding and activation of M 1 . In contrast, the agonist actions of AC-42 and AC-260584 were greatly potentiated by the W101A mutation, slightly reduced by Y106A, and slightly increased by S109A. Clozapine and N-desmethylclozapine displayed substantially increased maximum responses at the Y106A and W101A mutants, slightly lower activity at S109A, but no substantial changes in potency. At L102A and N110A, agonist responses to AC-42, AC-260584, clozapine, and N-desmethylclozapine were all substantially reduced, but usually less than carbachol. D105A showed no functional responses to all ligands. Displacement and dissociation rate experiments demonstrated clear allosteric properties of AC-42 and AC-260584 but not for N-desmethylclozapine and clozapine, indicating that they may contact different residues than carbachol to activate M 1 but occupy substantially overlapping spaces, in contrast to AC-42 and AC-260584, which occupy separable spaces. These results show that M 1 receptors can be activated in at least three distinct ways and that there is no requirement for potent muscarinic agonists to mimic acetylcholine interactions with TM3.

Nurr1 is a nuclear hormone receptor (NucHR) strongly implicated in the growth, maintenance, and survival of dopaminergic neurons. Nurr1 may be unable to bind ligands directly, but it forms heterodimers with other NucHRs that do. Using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays to directly monitor interactions of Nurr1 with other NucHRs, we found the cancer drug bexarotene (Targretin, also LGD1069) displayed biased interactions with Nurr1-RXR heterodimers compared with RXR-RXR homodimers. Remarkably, at doses up to 100-fold lower than those effective in rodent cancer models, bexarotene rescued dopamine neurons and reversed behavioral deficits in 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) lesioned rats. Compared to the high doses used in cancer therapy, low doses of bexarotene have significantly milder side effects including a reduced increase in plasma triglycerides and less suppression of thyroid function. On the basis of extrapolations from rat to human doses, we hypothesize that low oral doses of bexarotene may provide an effective and tolerated therapy for Parkinson's disease (PD).

G-protein-coupled receptors spontaneously switch between active and inactive conformations. Agonists stabilize the active conformation, whereas antagonists stabilize the inactive conformation. In a systematic search for residues that participate in receptor function, several regions of the m5 muscarinic receptor were randomly mutated and tested for their functional properties. Mutations spanning one face of transmembrane 6 (TM6) were found to induce high levels of receptor activity in the absence of agonists (constitutive activity). The same face of TM6 contained several residues crucial for receptor activation by agonists and one residue identified as a contact site for both agonists and antagonists. In addition, one mutation induced agonist-like responses from the receptor when exposed to classical antagonists. These results suggest that TM6 is a switch that defines the activation state of the receptor, and that ligand interactions with TM6 stabilize the receptor in either an active or an inactive conformation.Although the primary structures of the five muscarinic receptor subtypes (m1-m5) have been known for a decade (1-4), relatively little is known about either their three-dimensional structures or their activation mechanisms. The muscarinic receptors belong to the family of G-protein-coupled receptors that have significant sequence and functional homology with the visual pigment rhodopsin. There is considerable physical and modeling data to suggest that G-protein-coupled receptors have seven transmembrane domains (TM1-7) 1 and these are ␣-helical (5, 6), but because of difficulties in crystallization, there currently exists only a low resolution model of the three-dimensional structure of these receptors (6). Interactions between muscarinic receptors and G-proteins are believed to be mediated by cytoplasmic loops (i1-i3) linking the transmembrane domains (7,8). The second internal loop (i2) and a small number of amino acids adjacent to TM5 and TM6 in the N-and C-terminal regions of the third cytoplasmic loop (N-i3 and C-i3) appear to make the largest contribution to receptor-G-protein coupling (9 -11). Interactions with ligands are mediated by the transmembrane domains. Both agonist and antagonist ligands have been shown to interact with an aspartate residue in TM3 through their positively charged nitrogen headgroups (12-14), whereas other residues necessary for functional interactions with ligands have been identified in TM2,5,6, and 7 (12,[15][16][17][18].A limitation of data collected from classical site-directed mutagenesis is that since relatively few residues have actually been tested, the relative contribution of the individual residues and even the overall domains is difficult to gauge in a broad context. To gain such a broad perspective, it would be necessary to systematically mutate at least a significant proportion of the residues of a receptor and test the relative functional consequences of those mutations. The combination of random mutagenesis with high throughput assays of receptor function ...

We have examined the effects of raising G protein concentration on the pharmacology of a series of agonist and antagonist ligands at the m1, m3, and m5 muscarinic subtypes using a functional assay. Overexpression of G(alpha q) induced constitutive activity of these receptors. The constitutive activity was reversed completely by every muscarinic antagonist tested, which indicates that they are all negative antagonists (inverse agonists). The potencies of antagonists for reversing G protein-induced activity and agonist-induced activity were identical, suggesting the same mechanism of action. Overexpression of G(alpha q) increased the potencies of every tested agonist and the efficacies of all partial agonists. The fold-gains in potency were positively correlated with ligand efficacy with the most efficacious agonists displaying the greatest potency gains. In addition, the efficacies of partial agonists approached those of full agonists. Constitutive activity of receptors has been explained by allosteric models in which receptors exist in spontaneous equilibrium between active and inactive conformations that are stabilized by agonists and antagonists, respectively. In this context, drug efficacy and potency are interrelated because they both depend on the same parameters, namely the absolute and relative affinities of a compound for receptors in active and inactive states and the ratio and concentrations of receptors in active and inactive states. All of our data are consistent with this model, in which raising G protein levels favors formation of the active conformation of receptors. Based on our findings, regulation of G protein concentration may be an important means of controlling receptor activity in vivo. These results define the functional relationship between G protein levels and muscarinic receptor pharmacology.

The m5 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor was constitutively activated by a wide range of amino acid substitutions at a residue (serine 465) that is positioned at the junction of the sixth transmembrane domain and the extracellular loop. Of 13 substitutions tested, 11 produced significant increases in constitutive activity. Replacement of serine 465 with large (phenylalanine and valine) or basic residues (arginine and lysine) increased the constitutive activity of the receptor to between 55 and 110% of the maximum response of the wild-type receptor to the agonist carbachol. Other substitutions (e.g., cysteine and leucine) increased the constitutive activity to an intermediate level (30%), while small and acidic residues (glycine, aspartate, and glutamate) caused small or insignificant increases. The increase in the constitutive activity of each mutant receptor correlated with an increase in the potency of carbachol in both binding and functional assays, with the most constitutively activated receptors showing a 40-fold decrease in the EC50 of carbachol. The negative antagonist atropine bound to and reversed the constitutive activity of all mutant receptors with equal potency. These data were fitted to a two-state model of receptor function. The data are consistent with the primary effect of substitutions to serine 465 being to selectively destabilize the inactive state of the receptor, thus favoring formation of the active state in the absence of agonists. Our data strongly support this two-state model of receptor function and identify a critical role of this domain in the activation of muscarinic receptors.