2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2018.05.053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ligand-selective small molecule modulators of the constitutively active vGPCR US28

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We investigated the receptor target(s) of the three non-ELR vCXCL1 GT5 chemokine variants by screening for both agonistic and antagonistic activity on G protein signaling on a panel of all 18 classical human chemokine receptors in an IP accumulation assay ( Fig 4 ). The HCMV-encoded chemokine receptor US28 Δ300 (a C-terminally truncated US28 with increased signaling properties [ 32 ]) was also included. vCXCL1 GT5 was found to activate CXCR2 at ~60% of the maximal activity of CXCL8 and did not activate CXCR1 or any other chemokine receptor ( Fig 4B ), whereas the two N-terminally truncated variants (vCXCL1 GT5 (4–97) and vCXCL1 GT5 (6–97) ) were half as efficacious as the wild-type chemokine on CXCR2 at ~30% (31% and 29%, respectively) the efficacy of the CXCL8 on CXCR2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We investigated the receptor target(s) of the three non-ELR vCXCL1 GT5 chemokine variants by screening for both agonistic and antagonistic activity on G protein signaling on a panel of all 18 classical human chemokine receptors in an IP accumulation assay ( Fig 4 ). The HCMV-encoded chemokine receptor US28 Δ300 (a C-terminally truncated US28 with increased signaling properties [ 32 ]) was also included. vCXCL1 GT5 was found to activate CXCR2 at ~60% of the maximal activity of CXCL8 and did not activate CXCR1 or any other chemokine receptor ( Fig 4B ), whereas the two N-terminally truncated variants (vCXCL1 GT5 (4–97) and vCXCL1 GT5 (6–97) ) were half as efficacious as the wild-type chemokine on CXCR2 at ~30% (31% and 29%, respectively) the efficacy of the CXCL8 on CXCR2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The compound was observed to induce reactivation of latent HCMV infection potentially exposing it to the immune system ( 25 ), however, VUF2274 was originally discovered as a CCR1 antagonist ( 46 ) implying a selectivity issue if used as a drug. In search of potential drug candidates with limited cross-reactivity to endogenous receptors, two subsequent studies surveyed small molecule libraries based on VUF2274 ( 47 , 48 ). Out of the latest study, several compounds emerged with agonistic or inverse agonistic profiles in Gαq-mediated signaling and capable of displacing CCL2 and CCL4, such as compound 56, 64 and 67 ( 48 ).…”
Section: Progress On Drug Targeting Of Us28mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In search of potential drug candidates with limited cross-reactivity to endogenous receptors, two subsequent studies surveyed small molecule libraries based on VUF2274 ( 47 , 48 ). Out of the latest study, several compounds emerged with agonistic or inverse agonistic profiles in Gαq-mediated signaling and capable of displacing CCL2 and CCL4, such as compound 56, 64 and 67 ( 48 ). These molecules were suggested as scaffolds for further development, but no advances on small molecules targeting US28 have been made since.…”
Section: Progress On Drug Targeting Of Us28mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Continuing these efforts, investigators have shown that C-terminal truncation of pUS28 (pUS28Δ300) is an effective tool for screening potential inhibitors, as it has reduced membrane recycling, which otherwise camouflages the agonism of some ligands towards pUS28. This mutant was used to discover new scaffolds that could lead to the development of novel pUS28 inhibitors [ 172 , 173 ]. Such studies show promise in the expansion of our arsenal of pUS28 inhibitors that are more effective than VUF2274.…”
Section: Us28 As a Therapeutic Targetmentioning
confidence: 99%