Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23713847›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2013

A structural chemogenomics analysis of aminergic GPCRs: lessons for histamine receptor ligand design.

A J Kooistra, S Kuhne, I J P de Esch, R Leurs, C de Graaf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Development of pH-Sensitive β‑Adrenergic Receptor Antagonists.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Probing the Histamine HJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Role of adrenergic receptors in shock.Frontiers in physiology · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Crystal structure of the αNature communications · 2022
    Article
  12. New Chemical Biology Tools for the Histamine Receptor Family.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Agonist Binding and G Protein Coupling in Histamine HInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Covalent Inhibition of the Histamine HMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Article
  20. Route to Prolonged Residence Time at the Histamine HJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2019
    Article
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

5 authors.

A J KooistraFaculty of Sciences, Amsterdam Institute for Molecules, Medicines and Systems, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
S Kuhne
I J P de Esch
R Leurs
C de Graaf

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeChemogenomics focuses on the discovery of new connections between chemical and biological space leading to the discovery of new protein targets and biologically active molecules. G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a particularly interesting protein family for chemogenomics studies because there is an overwhelming amount of ligand binding affinity data available. The increasing number of aminergic GPCR crystal structures now for the first time allows the integration of chemogenomics studies with high-resolution structural analyses of GPCR-ligand complexes. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: In this study, we have combined ligand affinity data, receptor mutagenesis studies, and amino acid sequence analyses to high-resolution structural analyses of (hist)aminergic GPCR-ligand interactions. This integrated structural chemogenomics analysis is used to more accurately describe the molecular and structural determinants of ligand affinity and selectivity in different key binding regions of the crystallized aminergic GPCRs, and histamine receptors in particular. KEY

resultsOur investigations highlight interesting correlations and differences between ligand similarity and ligand binding site similarity of different aminergic receptors. Apparent discrepancies can be explained by combining detailed analysis of crystallized or predicted protein-ligand binding modes, receptor mutation studies, and ligand structure-selectivity relationships that identify local differences in essential pharmacophore features in the ligand binding sites of different receptors. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We have performed structural chemogenomics studies that identify links between (hist)aminergic receptor ligands and their binding sites and binding modes. This knowledge can be used to identify structure-selectivity relationships that increase our understanding of ligand binding to (hist)aminergic receptors and hence can be used in future GPCR ligand discovery and design.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAmino Acid SequenceBinding SitesCrystallizationHumansLigandsMutagenesis, Site-DirectedProtein BindingProtein ConformationReceptors, G-Protein-CoupledReceptors, HistamineSequence Analysis, ProteinStructure-Activity RelationshipLigandsReceptors, G-Protein-CoupledReceptors, Histamineaminergicchemical similaritychemogenomicscrystal structuresGPCRhistamine receptorsprotein-ligand interactionssite-directed mutagenesisstructure-affinity relationshiptransmembrane proteins

Identifiers

PMID23713847
PMCPMC3764853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.