4.5 Article

Analysis of Functional Responses at G Protein-Coupled Receptors: Estimation of Relative Affinity Constants for the Inactive Receptor State

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/jpet.111.179291

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences [GM69829]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe a modification of receptor theory that enables the estimation of relative affinity constants for the inactive state of a G protein-coupled receptor. Our approach includes the traditional parameters of observed affinity (K-obs) and efficacy (fraction of ligand-receptor complex in the active state, epsilon) and introduces the concept of the fraction of the ligand-receptor complex in the inactive state (intrinsic inactivity, epsilon(i)). The relationship between receptor activation and the ligand concentration is known as the stimulus, and the operational model expresses the response as a logistic function of the stimulus. The latter function includes K-obs and the parameter tau, which is proportional to epsilon. We introduce the parameter tau(i), which is proportional to epsilon(i). We have previously shown that the product, K-obs tau, of one agonist, expressed relative to that of another (intrinsic relative activity, RA(i)), is a relative measure of the affinity constant for the active state of the receptor. In this report, we show that the product, K-obs tau(i), of one agonist, expressed relative to that of another (intrinsic relative inactivity, RIi), is a relative measure of the affinity constant for the inactive state of the receptor. We use computer simulation techniques to verify our analysis and apply our method to the analysis of published data on agonist activity at the M-3 muscarinic receptor. Our method should have widespread application in the analysis of agonist bias in drug discovery programs and in the estimation of a more fundamental relative measure of efficacy (RA(i)/RIi).

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