4.5 Review

Bringing GPCR Structural Biology to Medical Applications: Insights from Both V2 Vasopressin and Mu-Opioid Receptors

期刊

MEMBRANES
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/membranes13060606

关键词

G protein-coupled receptor; mu-opioid receptor; arginine-vasopressin receptor; Nuclear Magnetic Resonance; cryo-electron microscopy; X-ray crystallography; molecular dynamics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are versatile signaling proteins that regulate key physiological processes in response to a wide variety of extracellular stimuli. Recent advancements in structural biology, cryo-electron microscopy, NMR development, and molecular dynamic simulations have provided better insight into the regulation of GPCRs by ligands of different efficacy and bias. These developments have fostered a renewed interest in GPCR drug discovery and the identification of biased ligands that can selectively promote specific regulations.
G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are versatile signaling proteins that regulate key physiological processes in response to a wide variety of extracellular stimuli. The last decade has seen a revolution in the structural biology of clinically important GPCRs. Indeed, the improvement in molecular and biochemical methods to study GPCRs and their transducer complexes, together with advances in cryo-electron microscopy, NMR development, and progress in molecular dynamic simulations, have led to a better understanding of their regulation by ligands of different efficacy and bias. This has also renewed a great interest in GPCR drug discovery, such as finding biased ligands that can either promote or not promote specific regulations. In this review, we focus on two therapeutically relevant GPCR targets, the V2 vasopressin receptor (V2R) and the mu-opioid receptor (mu OR), to shed light on the recent structural biology studies and show the impact of this integrative approach on the determination of new potential clinical effective compounds.

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