Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17629959›Full record

ReviewTrends in pharmacological sciences2007

Multiple GPCR conformations and signalling pathways: implications for antagonist affinity estimates.

Jillian G Baker, Stephen J Hill

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in pharmacological sciences, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. How Carvedilol activates βNature communications · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Regulation of mitochondrial metabolism in murine skeletal muscle by the medium-chain fatty acid receptor Gpr84.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jillian G BakerInstitute of Cell Signalling, Medical School, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
Stephen J Hill

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antagonist affinity measurements have traditionally been considered important in characterizing the cell-surface receptors present in a particular cell or tissue. A central assumption has been that antagonist affinity is constant for a given receptor-antagonist interaction, regardless of the agonist used to stimulate that receptor or the downstream response that is measured. As a consequence, changes in antagonist affinity values have been taken as initial evidence for the presence of novel receptor subtypes. Emerging evidence suggests, however, that receptors can possess multiple binding sites and the same receptor can show different antagonist affinity measurements under distinct experimental conditions. Here, we discuss several mechanisms by which antagonists have different affinities for the same receptor as a consequence of allosterism, coupling to different G proteins, multiple (but non-interacting) receptor sites, and signal-pathway-dependent pharmacology (where the pharmacology observed varies depending on the signalling pathway measured).

Indexed as

Signal TransductionBinding, CompetitiveBinding SitesHumansModels, BiologicalPharmaceutical PreparationsProtein BindingProtein ConformationReceptors, G-Protein-CoupledPharmaceutical PreparationsReceptors, G-Protein-Coupled

Identifiers

PMID17629959
PMCPMC2169386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.