ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2012
Molecular requirements for inhibition of the chemokine receptor CCR8--probe-dependent allosteric interactions.
Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design and application of CCR8 antagonists.Future medicinal chemistry · 2025Article
- Design, molecular characterization and therapeutic investigation of a novel CCR8 peptide antagonist that attenuates acute liver injury by inhibiting infiltration and activation of macrophages.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Article
- Development of tolerance to chemokine receptor antagonists: current paradigms and the need for further investigation.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Selective Allosteric Modulation of N-Terminally Cleaved, but Not Full Length CCL3 in CCR1.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2019Article
- Novel Chemokine-Based Immunotoxins for Potent and Selective Targeting of Cytomegalovirus Infected Cells.Journal of immunology research · 2017Article
- Role of Conserved Disulfide Bridges and Aromatic Residues in Extracellular Loop 2 of Chemokine Receptor CCR8 for Chemokine and Small Molecule Binding.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2016Article
- International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. [corrected]. LXXXIX. Update on the extended family of chemokine receptors and introducing a new nomenclature for atypical chemokine receptors.Pharmacological reviews · 2014Review
- Small molecule antagonism of oxysterol-induced Epstein-Barr virus induced gene 2 (EBI2) activation.FEBS open bio · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeHere we present a novel series of CCR8 antagonists based on a naphthalene-sulfonamide structure. This structure differs from the predominant pharmacophore for most small-molecule CC-chemokine receptor antagonists, which in fact activate CCR8, suggesting that CCR8 inhibition requires alternative structural probes. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The compounds were tested as inverse agonists and as antagonists against CCL1-induced activity in Gα(i) signalling and chemotaxis. Furthermore, they were assessed by heterologous competition binding against two radiolabelled receptor ligands: the endogenous agonist CCL1 and the virus-encoded antagonist MC148. KEY
resultsAll compounds were highly potent inverse agonists with EC(50) values from 1.7 to 23 nM. Their potencies as antagonists were more widely spread (EC(50) values from 5.9 to 1572 nM). Some compounds were balanced antagonists/inverse agonists whereas others were predominantly inverse agonists with >100-fold lower potency as antagonists. A correspondingly broad range of affinities, which followed the antagonist potencies, was disclosed by competition with [(125)I]-CCL1 (K(i) 3.4-842 nM), whereas the affinities measured against [(125)I]-MC148 were less widely spread (K(i) 0.37-27 nM), and matched the inverse agonist potencies. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Despite highly potent and direct effects as inverse agonists, competition-binding experiments against radiolabelled agonist and tests for antagonism revealed a probe-dependent allosteric effect of these compounds. Thus, minor chemical changes affected the ability to modify chemokine binding and action, and divided the compounds into two groups: predominantly inverse agonists and balanced antagonists/inverse agonists. These studies have important implications for the design of new inverse agonists with or without antagonist properties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.