4.5 Article

Structural basis for bifunctional peptide recognition at human δ-opioid receptor

期刊

NATURE STRUCTURAL & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 22, 期 3, 页码 265-268

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nsmb.2965

关键词

-

资金

  1. US National Institutes of Health (NIH)
  2. National Institute of General Medical Sciences grant [U54 GM094618, R01 GM108635, U54 GM094599, R01 GM095583, P41 GM103393]
  3. US National Institute of Drug Abuse grant [P01 DA035764, R01 DA017204]
  4. US National Institute of Mental Health Psychoactive Drug Screening Program
  5. Michael Hooker Chair for Protein Therapeutics and Translational Proteomics
  6. US National Science Foundation Science and Technology Center award [1231306]
  7. Helmholtz Association
  8. German Research Foundation (DFG) Cluster of Excellence 'Center for Ultrafast Imaging'
  9. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) project [FKZ 05K12CH1, 05K2012]
  10. PIER Helmholtz Graduate School
  11. Marie Curie Initial Training Network NanoMem [317079]
  12. Ministere du Developpement Economique, de l'Innovation et de l'Exportation du Quebec [PSR-SIIRI-417]
  13. Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO Vlaanderen) [FWOAL570]
  14. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [MOP-89716]
  15. NIH [DA-004443]
  16. US National Cancer Institute grant [Y1-CO-1020]
  17. US National Institute of General Medical Sciences grant [Y1-GM-1104]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bifunctional mu- and delta-opioid receptor (OR) ligands are potential therapeutic alternatives, with diminished side effects, to alkaloid opiate analgesics. We solved the structure of human delta-OR bound to the bifunctional delta-OR antagonist and mu-OR agonist tetrapeptide H-Dmt-Tic-Phe-Phe-NH2 (DIPP-NH2) by serial femtosecond crystallography, revealing a cis-peptide bond between H-Dmt and Tic. The observed receptor-peptide interactions are critical for understanding of the pharmacological profiles of opioid peptides and for development of improved analgesics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据