4.5 Review

An update on adenosine A2A-dopamine D2 receptor interactions:: Implications for the function of G protein-coupled receptors

期刊

CURRENT PHARMACEUTICAL DESIGN
卷 14, 期 15, 页码 1468-1474

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/138161208784480108

关键词

adenosine A(2A) receptor; dopamine D(2) receptor; G protein-coupled receptors; receptor heteromers; striatum; basal ganglia disorders; drug addiction

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z01 DA000493-02] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adenosine A(2A)-dopamine D(2) receptor interactions play a very important role in striatal function. A(2A)-D(2) receptor interactions provide an example of the capabilities of information processing by just two different G protein-coupled receptors. Thus, there is evidence for the coexistence of two reciprocal antagonistic interactions between A(2A) and D(2) receptors in the same neurons, the GABAergic enkephalinergic neurons. An antagonistic A(2A)-D(2) intramembrane receptor interaction, which depends on A(2A)-D(2) receptor heteromerization and G(q/11)-PLC signaling, modulates neuronal excitability and neurotransmitter release. On the other hand, an antagonistic A(2A)-D(2) receptor interaction at the adenylyl-cyclase level, which depends on G(s/olf)- and G(i/o)-type V adenylyl-cyclase signaling, modulates protein phosphorylation and gene expression. Finally, under conditions of upregulation of an activator of G protein signaling (AGS3), such as during chronic treatment with addictive drugs, a synergistic A(2A)-D(2) receptor interaction can also be demonstrated. AGS3 facilitates a synergistic interaction between G(s/olf) - and G(i/o)-coupled receptors on the activation of types II/IV adenylyl cyclase, leading to a paradoxical increase in protein phosphorylation and gene expression upon co-activation of A(2A) and D(2) receptors. The analysis of A(2)-D(2) receptor interactions will have implications for the pathophysiology and treatment of basal ganglia disorders and drug addiction.

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