Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25157173›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2014

Ligand- and mutation-induced conformational selection in the CCR5 chemokine G protein-coupled receptor.

Ravinder Abrol, Bartosz Trzaskowski, William A Goddard, Alexandre Nesterov, Ivan Olave, Christopher Irons

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Activation mechanism of the G protein-coupled sweet receptor heterodimer with sweeteners and allosteric agonists.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ravinder AbrolMaterials and Process Simulation Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125; and wag@wag.caltech.edu abrolr@csmc.edu.
Bartosz TrzaskowskiMaterials and Process Simulation Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125; and.
William A GoddardMaterials and Process Simulation Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125; and wag@wag.caltech.edu abrolr@csmc.edu.
Alexandre NesterovPharmSelex Inc., Seattle, WA 98102.
Ivan OlavePharmSelex Inc., Seattle, WA 98102.
Christopher IronsPharmSelex Inc., Seattle, WA 98102.
California Institute of Technology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We predicted the structural basis for pleiotropic signaling of the C-C chemokine type 5 (CCR5) G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) by predicting the binding of several ligands to the lower-energy conformations of the CCR5 receptor and 11 mutants. For each case, we predicted the ∼ 20 most stable conformations for the receptor along with the binding sites for four anti-HIV ligands. We found that none of the ligands bind to the lowest-energy apo-receptor conformation. The three ligands with a similar pharmacophore (Maraviroc, PF-232798, and Aplaviroc) bind to a specific higher-energy receptor conformation whereas TAK-779 (with a different pharmacophore) binds to a different high-energy conformation. This result is in agreement with the very different binding-site profiles for these ligands obtained by us and others. The predicted Maraviroc binding site agrees with the recent structure of CCR5 receptor cocrystallized with Maraviroc. We performed 11 site-directed mutagenesis experiments to validate the predicted binding sites. Here, we independently predicted the lowest 10 mutant protein conformations for each of the 11 mutants and then docked the ligands to these lowest conformations. We found the predicted binding energies to be in excellent agreement with our mutagenesis experiments. These results show that, for GPCRs, each ligand can stabilize a different protein conformation, complicating the use of cocrystallized structures for ligand screening. Moreover, these results show that a single-point mutation in a GPCR can dramatically alter the available low-energy conformations, which in turn alters the binding site, potentially altering downstream signaling events. These studies validate the conformational selection paradigm for the pleiotropic function and structural plasticity of GPCRs.

Indexed as

Binding SitesCrystallography, X-RayCyclohexanesHumansLigandsMaravirocModels, MolecularMutant ProteinsMutationProtein Structure, SecondaryReceptors, CCR5Structural Homology, ProteinThermodynamicsTriazolesCyclohexanesLigandsMaravirocMutant ProteinsReceptors, CCR5Triazolesconformational ensemblefunctional selectivityGEnSeMBLEligand–protein binding predictionprotein structure prediction

Identifiers

PMID25157173
PMCPMC4246978
OpenAlexW2138246206

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.