4.7 Article

Molecular cloning and radioligand binding characterization of the chemokine receptor CCR5 from rhesus macaque and human

Journal

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 71, Issue 1-2, Pages 163-172

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2005.10.024

Keywords

chemokine; CCR5; receptor; maraviroc; MIP-1 beta; rhesus macaque; radioligand binding

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to determine if macaque represents a suitable species for the preclinical evaluation of novel CCR5 antagonists, such as maraviroc (UK-427,857). To do this we cloned and expressed CCR5 from rhesus macaque and compared the binding properties of [I-125] -MIP-1 beta and [H-3]-maraviroc with human recombinant CCR5. [I-125]-MIP-1 beta bound with similar high affinity to CCR5 from macaque (K-d = 0.24 +/- 0.05 nM) and human (K-d = 0.23 +/- 0.05 nM) and with similar kinetic properties. In competition binding studies the affinity of a range of human chemokines for macaque CCR5 was also similar to human CCR5. Maraviroc inhibited binding of [I-125]-MIP-1 beta to CCR5 from macaque and human with similar potency (IC50 = 17.50 +/- 1.24 nM and 7.18 +/- 0.93 nM, respectively) and antagonised MIP-1 beta induced intracellular calcium release mediated through CCR5 from macaque and human with similar potency (IC50 = 17.50 +/- 3.30 nM and 12.07 +/- 1.89, respectively). [3 H]maraviroc bound with high affinity to CCR5 from macaque (Kd = 1.36 +/- 0.07 nM) and human (Kd = 0.86 +/- 0.08 nM), but was found to dissociate similar to 10-fold more quickly from macaque CCR5. However, as with the human receptor, maraviroc was shown to be a high affinity, potent functional antagonist of macaque CCR5 thereby indicating that the macaque should be a suitable species in which to evaluate the pharmacology, safety and potential mechanism-related toxicology of novel CCR5 antagonists. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available