Journal of Molecular Modeling · 2016 · 36 citations · 33 references
MedicineNeurosciencePharmacologyMolecular PharmacologyNeuropharmacologyPsychopharmacologyDrug-receptor InteractionsLigand BindingMolecular DockingReceptor ModelingReceptor PharmacologyReceptor-ligand InteractionsD2-like Dopamine ReceptorsDopamine D2-like ReceptorsDopamine Receptor SubtypesHomologyHomology Modeling Of Protein ComplexesHomology Modeling Of ReceptorsReceptor Dimerization
In order to apply structure-based drug design techniques to G protein-coupled receptor complexes, it is essential to model their 3D structure and to identify regions that are suitable for selective drug binding. For this purpose, we have developed and tested a multi-component protocol to model the inactive conformation of the dopamine D2 receptor dimer, suitable for interaction with homobivalent antagonists. Our approach was based on protein-protein docking, applying the Rosetta software to obtain populations of dimers as present in membranes with all the main possible interfaces. Consensus scoring based on the values and frequencies of best interfaces regarding four scoring parameters, Rosetta interface score, interface area, free energy of binding and energy of hydrogen bond interactions indicated that the best scored dimer model possesses a TM4-TM5-TM7-TM1 interface, which is in agreement with experimental data. This model was used to study interactions of the previously published dopamine D2 receptor homobivalent antagonists based on clozapine,1,4-disubstituted aromatic piperidines/piperazines and arylamidoalkyl substituted phenylpiperazine pharmacophores. It was found that the homobivalent antagonists stabilize the receptor-inactive conformation by maintaining the ionic lock interaction, and change the dimer interface by disrupting a set of hydrogen bonds and maintaining water- and ligand-mediated hydrogen bonds in the extracellular and intracellular part of the interface. Graphical Abstract Structure of the final model of the dopamine D2 receptor homodimer, indicating the distancebetween Tyr37 and Tyr 5.42 in the apo form (left) and in the complex with the ligand (right).
33
VMD: Visual molecular dynamics
William Humphrey, Andrew Dalke, Klaus Schulten · Journal of Molecular Graphics · 1996 · 66.6K citations
Inference of Macromolecular Assemblies from Crystalline State
Evgeny Krissinel, Kim Henrick · Journal of Molecular Biology · 2007 · 10.4K citations · Full text
Comparative Protein Structure Modeling Using Modeller
Narayanan Eswar, Ben Webb, Marc A. Martı́-Renom et al. · Current Protocols in Bioinformatics · 2006 · 4.6K citations · Full text
Statistical potential for assessment and prediction of protein structures
Min‐Yi Shen, Andrej Šali · Protein Science · 2006 · 2.4K citations · Full text