Exploring the putative mechanism of allosteric modulations by mixed-action kappa/mu opioid receptor bitopic modulators

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

• 1. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. www.samhsa.gov/data/
  Google Scholar
• 2. White FJ, Kalivas PW. Neuroadaptations involved in amphetamine and cocaine addiction. Drug Alcohol Depend. 51(1–2), 141–153 (1998).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 3. Lott DC, Lott DC, Kim S-J et al. Serotonin transporter genotype and acute subjective response to amphetamine. Am. J. Addict. 15(5), 327–335 (2006).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 4. Broadbear JH, Sumpter TL, Burke TF et al. Methocinnamox is a potent, long-lasting, and selective antagonist of morphine-mediated antinociception in the mouse: comparison with clocinnamox, β-funaltrexamine, and β-chlornaltrexamine. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 294(3), 933–940 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 5. American Addiction Centers. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/stimulant-drugs
  Google Scholar
• 6. D'Souza MS. Brain and cognition for addiction medicine: from prevention to recovery neural substrates for treatment of psychostimulant-induced cognitive deficits. Front. Psychiatry 10, 509 (2019).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 7. Buttner A. Neuropathological alterations in cocaine abuse. Curr. Med. Chem. 19(33), 5597–5600 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 8. Redila VA, Chavkin C. Stress-induced reinstatement of cocaine seeking is mediated by the kappa opioid system. Psychopharmacology 200(1), 59–70 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 9. Karkhanis A, Holleran KM, Jones SR. Dynorphin/kappa opioid receptor signaling in preclinical models of alcohol, drug, and food addiction. Int. Rev. Neurobiol. 136, 53–88 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 10. Bruijnzeel AW. Kappa-opioid receptor signaling and brain reward function. Brain Res. Rev. 62(1), 127–146 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 11. Crawford C, McDougall S, Bolanos C, Hall S, Berger S. The effects of the kappa agonist U-50,488 on cocaine-induced conditioned and unconditioned behaviors and Fos immunoreactivity. Psychopharmacology 120(4), 392–399 (1995).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 12. Shippenberg T, LeFevour A, Heidbreder C. Kappa-opioid receptor agonists prevent sensitization to the conditioned rewarding effects of cocaine. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 276(2), 545–554 (1996).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 13. Heidbreder CA, Babovic-Vuksanovic D, Shoaib M, Shippenberg TS. Development of behavioral sensitization to cocaine: influence of kappa opioid receptor agonists. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 275(1), 150–163 (1995).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 14. Kivell B, Paton K, Kumar N et al. Kappa opioid receptor agonist mesyl Sal B attenuates behavioral sensitization to cocaine with fewer aversive side-effects than salvinorin A in rodents. Molecules 23(10), 2602 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• 15. Kivell BM, Ewald AW, Prisinzano TE. Salvinorin A analogs and other kappa-opioid receptor compounds as treatments for cocaine abuse. Adv. Pharmacol. 69, 481–511 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 16. Shippenberg T, Zapata A, Chefer V. Dynorphin and the pathophysiology of drug addiction. Pharmacol. Ther. 116(2), 306–321 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 17. Todtenkopf MS, Marcus JF, Portoghese PS, Carlezon WA. Effects of κ-opioid receptor ligands on intracranial self-stimulation in rats. Psychopharmacology 172(4), 463–470 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 18. Di Chiara G, Imperato A. Opposite effects of mu and kappa opiate agonists on dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens and in the dorsal caudate of freely moving rats. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 244(3), 1067–1080 (1988). • An in vivo study on the opposite effects of mu and kappa agonists on dopamine release.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 19. Phan NQ, Lotts T, Antal A, Bernhard JD, Ständer S. Systemic kappa opioid receptor agonists in the treatment of chronic pruritus: a literature review. Acta Derm. Venereol. 92(5), 555–560 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 20. Pan ZZ. μ-opposing actions of the κ-opioid receptor. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 19(3), 94–98 (1998).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 21. Greedy BM, Bradbury F, Thomas MP et al. Orvinols with mixed kappa/mu opioid receptor agonist activity. J. Med. Chem. 56(8), 3207–3216 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 22. Zhou Y, Kreek MJ. Clinically utilized kappa-opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine combined with low-dose naltrexone prevents alcohol relapse-like drinking in male and female mice. Brain Res. 1724, 146410 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 23. Nagase H, Imaide S, Hirayama S, Nemoto T, Fujii H. Essential structure of opioid κ receptor agonist nalfurafine for binding to the κ receptor 2: synthesis of decahydro (iminoethano) phenanthrene derivatives and their pharmacologies. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 22(15), 5071–5074 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 24. Toll L, Berzetei-Gurske I, Polgar W et al. Standard binding and functional assays related to medications development division testing for potential cocaine and opiate narcotic treatment medications. NIDA Res. Monogr. 178, 440–466 (1998).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 25. Takemori A, Portoghese PS. Affinity labels for opioid receptors. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 25(1), 193–223 (1985).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 26. Chen C, Yin J, de Riel JK et al. Determination of the amino acid residue involved in [3H] β-funaltrexamine covalent binding in the cloned rat μ opioid receptor. J. Biol. Chem. 271(35), 21422–21429 (1996).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 27. Manglik A, Kruse AC, Kobilka TS et al. Crystal structure of the μ-opioid receptor bound to a morphinan antagonist. Nature 485(7398), 321–326 (2012). • Describes the crystal structure of the mouse mu opioid receptor in complex with an irreversible morphinan antagonist.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 28. Cami-Kobeci G, Neal AP, Bradbury FA et al. Mixed κ/μ opioid receptor agonists: the 6β-naltrexamines. J. Med. Chem. 52(6), 1546–1552 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 29. Tam S, Liu-Chen L. Reversible and irreversible binding of beta-funaltrexamine to mu, delta and kappa opioid receptors in guinea pig brain membranes. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 239(2), 351–357 (1986).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 30. Nakao K, Mochizuki H. Nalfurafine hydrochloride: a new drug for the treatment of uremic pruritus in hemodialysis patients. Drugs Today (Barc.) 45(5), 323 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 31. Inui S. Nalfurafine hydrochloride to treat pruritus: a review. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dermatol. 8, 249–255 (2015). • Systematic review of nalfurafine (NFF).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 32. Schattauer SS, Kuhar JR, Song A, Chavkin C. Nalfurafine is a G-protein biased agonist having significantly greater bias at the human than rodent form of the kappa opioid receptor. Cell. Signal. 32, 59–65 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 33. Cao D, Huang P, Chiu Y-T et al. Comparison of pharmacological properties between the kappa opioid receptor agonist nalfurafine and 42B, its 3-dehydroxy analogue: disconnect between in vitro agonist bias and in vivo pharmacological effects. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 11(19), 3036–3050 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 34. Wang Y, Tang K, Inan S et al. Comparison of pharmacological activities of three distinct κ ligands (salvinorin A, TRK-820 and 3FLB) on κ opioid receptors in vitro and their antipruritic and antinociceptive activities in vivo. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 312(1), 220–230 (2005).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 35. Hasebe K, Kawai K, Suzuki T et al. Possible pharmacotherapy of the opioid κ receptor agonist for drug dependence. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1025(1), 404–413 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 36. Mori T, Nomura M, Nagase H, Narita M, Suzuki T. Effects of a newly synthesized κ-opioid receptor agonist, TRK-820, on the discriminative stimulus and rewarding effects of cocaine in rats. Psychopharmacology 161(1), 17–22 (2002).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 37. White J. Drug addiction: from basic research to therapy. Drug Alcohol Rev. 28(4), 455–455 (2009).
  Google Scholar
• 38. Dunn A, Windisch K, Ben-Ezra A et al. Modulation of cocaine-related behaviors by low doses of the potent KOR agonist nalfurafine in male C57BL6 mice. Psychopharmacology 237(8), 2405–2418 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 39. Kawai K, Hayakawa J, Miyamoto T et al. Design, synthesis, and structure–activity relationship of novel opioid κ-agonists. Biorg. Med. Chem. 16(20), 9188–9201 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 40. Waldhoer M, Bartlett SE, Whistler JL. Opioid receptors. Annu. Rev. Biochem 73(1), 953–990 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 41. Livingston KE, Stanczyk MA, Burford NT, Alt A, Canals M, Traynor JR. Pharmacologic evidence for a putative conserved allosteric site on opioid receptors. Mol. Pharmacol. 93(2), 157–167 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 42. Remesic M, Hruby VJ, Porreca F, Lee YS. Recent advances in the realm of allosteric modulators for opioid receptors for future therapeutics. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 8(6), 1147–1158 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 43. Marino KA, Shang Y, Filizola M. Insights into the function of opioid receptors from molecular dynamics simulations of available crystal structures. Br. J. Pharmacol. 175(14), 2834–2845 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 44. Frances B, Gout R, Monsarrat B, Cros J, Zajac J-M. Further evidence that morphine-6 beta-glucuronide is a more potent opioid agonist than morphine. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 262(1), 25–31 (1992).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 45. Kato H. Pharmacological effects of a mu-opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone on alcohol dependence. Nihon Arukoru Yakubutsu Igakkai Zasshi 43(5), 697–704 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 46. Roth BL, Baner K, Westkaemper R et al. Salvinorin A: a potent naturally occurring nonnitrogenous kappa opioid selective agonist. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 99(18), 11934–11939 (2002).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 47. Livingston KE, Traynor JR. Allostery at opioid receptors: modulation with small molecule ligands. Br. J. Pharmacol. 175(14), 2846–2856 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 48. Gregory KJ, Dong EN, Meiler J, Conn PJ. Allosteric modulation of metabotropic glutamate receptors: structural insights and therapeutic potential. Neuropharmacology 60(1), 66–81 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 49. Allegretti M, Cesta MC, Locati M. Allosteric modulation of chemoattractant receptors. Front. Immunol. 7, 170 (2016). •• Comprehensive review of the modulation of allosteric modulators to the orthosteric ligands in G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 50. Stolzenberg S, Michino M, LeVine MV, Weinstein H, Shi L. Computational approaches to detect allosteric pathways in transmembrane molecular machines. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1858(7), 1652–1662 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 51. Hertig S, Latorraca NR, Dror RO. Revealing atomic-level mechanisms of protein allostery with molecular dynamics simulations. PLoS Comp. Biol. 12(6), e1004746 (2016).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 52. Collier G, Ortiz V. Emerging computational approaches for the study of protein allostery. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 538(1), 6–15 (2013). •• Systematically summarizes the computational approaches to studying communication in allosteric proteins.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 53. Feher VA, Durrant JD, Van Wart AT, Amaro RE. Computational approaches to mapping allosteric pathways. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 25, 98–103 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 54. Stolzenberg S, Quick M, Zhao C et al. Mechanism of the association between Na⁺ binding and conformations at the intracellular gate in neurotransmitter: sodium symporters. J. Biol. Chem. 290(22), 13992–14003 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 55. McClendon CL, Friedland G, Mobley DL, Amirkhani H, Jacobson MP. Quantifying correlations between allosteric sites in thermodynamic ensembles. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 5(9), 2486–2502 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 56. Obeng S, Wang H, Jali A et al. Structure–activity relationship studies of 6α-and 6β-indolylacetamidonaltrexamine derivatives as bitopic mu opioid receptor modulators and elaboration of the “message-address concept” to comprehend their functional conversion. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 10(3), 1075–1090 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 57. Wang H, Reinecke BA, Zhang Y. Computational insights into the molecular mechanisms of differentiated allosteric modulation at the mu opioid receptor by structurally similar bitopic modulators. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 34(8), 879–895 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 58. Fronik P, Gaiser BI, Sejer Pedersen D. Bitopic ligands and metastable binding sites: opportunities for G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) medicinal chemistry. J. Med. Chem. 60(10), 4126–4134 (2017). •• Provides an overview of bitopic ligands targeting different GPCR subfamilies.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 59. Nemoto T, Yamamoto N, Wada N et al. The effect of 17-N substituents on the activity of the opioid κ receptor in nalfurafine derivatives. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 23(1), 268–272 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 60. Che T, Majumdar S, Zaidi SA et al. Structure of the nanobody-stabilized active state of the kappa opioid receptor. Cell 172(1–2), 55–67 (2018). • Discusses the crystal structure of human kappa opioid receptor in complex with the potent epoxymorphinan opioid agonist MP1104.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 61. Huang W, Manglik A, Venkatakrishnan A et al. Structural insights into μ-opioid receptor activation. Nature 524(7565), 315–321 (2015). • Discusses the x-ray crystal structure of the murine mu opioid receptor bound to the morphinan agonist BU72.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 62. Wu H, Wacker D, Mileni M et al. Structure of the human kappa-opioid receptor in complex with JDTic. Nature 485(7398), 327–332 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 63. Wu EL, Cheng X, Jo S et al. CHARMM-GUI membrane builder toward realistic biological membrane simulations. J. Comput. Chem. 35(27), 1997–2004 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 64. Jo S, Lim JB, Klauda JB, Im W. CHARMM-GUI membrane builder for mixed bilayers and its application to yeast membranes. Biophys. J. 97(1), 50–58 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 65. Lomize MA, Lomize AL, Pogozheva ID, Mosberg HI. OPM: orientations of proteins in membranes database. Bioinformatics 22(5), 623–625 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 66. Ng HW, Laughton CA, Doughty SW. Molecular dynamics simulations of the adenosine A2a receptor in POPC and POPE lipid bilayers: effects of membrane on protein behavior. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 54(2), 573–581 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 67. Filizola M, Wang SX, Weinstein H. Dynamic models of G-protein coupled receptor dimers: indications of asymmetry in the rhodopsin dimer from molecular dynamics simulations in a POPC bilayer. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 20(7–8), 405–416 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 68. Im W, Seefeld S, Roux B. A grand canonical Monte Carlo-Brownian dynamics algorithm for simulating ion channels. Biophys. J. 79(2), 788–801 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 69. Case D, Berryman J, Betz R et al. AMBER 2015. University of California, CA, USA (2015).
  Google Scholar
• 70. Frisch M, Trucks G, Schlegel H et al. Gaussian 03; Gaussian, Inc. Wallingford, CT 6492 (2004).
  Google Scholar
• 71. Wang J, Wolf RM, Caldwell JW, Kollman PA, Case DA. Development and testing of a general Amber force field. J. Comput. Chem. 25(9), 1157–1174 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 72. Maier JA, Martinez C, Kasavajhala K, Wickstrom L, Hauser KE, Simmerling C. ff14SB: improving the accuracy of protein side chain and backbone parameters from ff99SB. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11(8), 3696–3713 (2015).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 73. Dickson CJ, Madej BD, Skjevik AA et al. Lipid14: the Amber lipid force field. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 10(2), 865–879 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 74. Salomon-Ferrer R, Götz AW, Poole D, Le Grand S, Walker RC. Routine microsecond molecular dynamics simulations with AMBER on GPUs. 2. Explicit solvent particle mesh Ewald. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9(9), 3878–3888 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 75. Darden T, York D, Pedersen L. Particle mesh Ewald: an N⋅ log (N) method for Ewald sums in large systems. J. Chem. Phys. 98(12), 10089–10092 (1993).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 76. Javanainen M, Martinez-Seara H. Efficient preparation and analysis of membrane and membrane protein systems. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1858(10), 2468–2482 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 77. Moradi S, Nowroozi A, Shahlaei M. Shedding light on the structural properties of lipid bilayers using molecular dynamics simulation: a review study. RSC Adv. 9(8), 4644–4658 (2019).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 78. Guixà-González R, Rodriguez-Espigares I, Ramírez-Anguita JM et al. MEMBPLUGIN: studying membrane complexity in VMD. Bioinformatics 30(10), 1478–1480 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 79. Kollman PA, Massova I, Reyes C et al. Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc. Chem. Res. 33(12), 889–897 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 80. Weiser J, Shenkin PS, Still WC. Approximate atomic surfaces from linear combinations of pairwise overlaps (LCPO). J. Comput. Chem. 20(2), 217–230 (1999).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 81. Gohlke H, Case DA. Converging free energy estimates: MM-PB (GB) SA studies on the protein–protein complex Ras–Raf. J. Comput. Chem. 25(2), 238–250 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 82. Case DA, Cheatham TE III, Darden T et al. The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J. Comput. Chem. 26(16), 1668–1688 (2005).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 83. Zou Y, Ewalt J, Ng H-L. Insights from molecular dynamics simulations for GPCR drug discovery. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20, 4237 (2020).
  Google Scholar
• 84. Stefaniu A. Introductory chapter: molecular docking and molecular dynamics techniques to achieve rational drug design. In: Molecular Docking and Molecular Dynamics. Stefaniu A (Ed.). IntechOpen, London, UK, 1–3 (2019).
  Google Scholar
• 85. Junmei W, Tingjun Hou, Xiaojie Xu. Recent advances in free energy calculations with a combination of molecular mechanics and continuum models. Curr. Comput. Aided Drug Des. 2(3), 287–306 (2006).
  Google Scholar
• 86. Hou T, McLaughlin W, Lu B, Chen K, Wang W. Prediction of binding affinities between the human amphiphysin-1 SH3 domain and its peptide ligands using homology modeling, molecular dynamics and molecular field analysis. J. Proteome Res. 5(1), 32–43 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 87. Roe DR, Cheatham TE III PTRAJ and CPPTRAJ: software for processing and analysis of molecular dynamics trajectory data. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9(7), 3084–3095 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 88. Cheng J-x, Cheng T, Li W-h, Liu G-x, Zhu W-l, Tang Y. Computational insights into the G-protein-biased activation and inactivation mechanisms of the μ opioid receptor. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 39(1), 154–164 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 89. Hothersall JD, Torella R, Humphreys S et al. Residues W320 and Y328 within the binding site of the μ-opioid receptor influence opiate ligand bias. Neuropharmacology 118, 46–58 (2017).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 90. Mafi A, Kim S-K, Goddard WA. The atomistic level structure for the activated human κ-opioid receptor bound to the full Gi protein and the MP1104 agonist. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117(11), 5836–5843 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 91. Kolinski M, Filipek S. Molecular dynamics of μ opioid receptor complexes with agonists and antagonists. The Open Structural Biology Journal 2(1), 8–20 (2008).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 92. Scott A. Hollingsworth ROD. Molecular dynamics simulation for all. Neuron 99, 1129–1143 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 93. Koehl A, Hu H, Maeda S et al. Structure of the μ-opioid receptor–G i protein complex. Nature 558(7711), 547–552 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar