ArticleScientific reports2026
Mapping partial agonism of mitragynine at the µ-opioid receptor through molecular dynamics and Markov state modelling analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mitragynine, a major indole alkaloid from Mitragyna speciosa (kratom), acts as a partial agonist at the µ-opioid receptor (µOR), yet the structural basis for its submaximal efficacy remains unclear. Here, we integrate microsecond-scale all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations with Markov State Modelling (MSM) to probe how mitragynine modulates µOR conformational landscapes and kinetics versus a morphine-bound control. MD in explicit POPC bilayers quantified backbone stability, residue-level flexibility, global compactness, and hydrogen bonding. MMPBSA calculations indicated favourable binding for both ligands, with a more negative ΔG_bind for mitragynine (-16.3 ± 5.1 kcal mol⁻¹) than morphine (-10.8 ± 4.2 kcal mol⁻¹). MSMs built on TM3-TM6 separations, DRY/NPxxY χ₁ torsions, and ICL distances revealed distinct energy landscapes: morphine stabilised a deep active-like basin, whereas mitragynine broadened sampling of intermediate basins and reduced occupancy of fully active conformations. Kinetic analysis showed shorter intermediate→open transition times for morphine (hundreds of nanoseconds) but markedly longer, microsecond-scale transitions for mitragynine, yielding macrostate populations enriched in intermediates for mitragynine and in closed/open states for morphine. Together, these data provide a mechanistic explanation for mitragynine's partial, G-protein-biased agonism at µOR and a quantitative framework to guide the design of biased µOR ligands.
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.