4.7 Article

Validation of a histamine H3 receptor model through structure-activity relationships for classical H3 antagonists

期刊

BIOORGANIC & MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 13, 期 19, 页码 5647-5657

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2005.05.072

关键词

histamine H-3 receptor; histamine antagonists; GPCR; docking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Histamine H-3 receptor is a G protein-coupled receptor whose activation inhibits the synthesis and release of histamine and other neurotransmitters from nerve endings and is involved in the modulation of different central nervous system functions. H-3 antagonists have been proposed for their potential usefulness in diseases characterized by impaired neurotransmission and they have demonstrated beneficial effects on learning and food intake in animal models. In the present work, a 3D model of the rat histamine H-3 receptor, built by comparative modeling from the crystallographic coordinates of bovine rhodopsin, is presented with the discussion of its ability to predict the potency of known and new H-3 antagonists. A putative binding site for classical, imidazolederived H-3 antagonists was identified by molecular docking. Comparison with a known pharmacophore model and the binding affinity of a new rigid H-3 antagonist (compound 1, pK(i) = 8.02) allowed the characterization of a binding scheme which could also account for the different affinities observed in a recently reported series of potent H-3 antagonists, characterized by a 2-aminobenzimidazole moiety. Molecular dynamics simulations were employed to assess the stability and reliability of the proposed binding mode. Two new conformationally constrained benzimidazole derivatives were prepared and their binding affinity was tested on rat brain membranes; compound 9, designed to reproduce the conformation of a known potent H-3 antagonist, showed higher potency than compound 8, as expected from the binding scheme hypothesized. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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