Pardoprunox Hydrochloride

D3/D2 sub‐specificity is a complex problem to solve. Indeed, in the absence of easy structural biology of the G‐protein coupled receptors, and despite key progresses in this area, the systematic knowledge of the ligand/receptor relationship is difficult to obtain. Due to these structural biology limitations concerning membrane proteins, we favored the use of directed mutagenesis to document a rational towards the discovery of markedly specific D3 ligands over D2 ligands together with basic binding experiments. Using our methodology of stable expression of receptors in HEK cells, we constructed the gene encoding for 24 mutants and 4 chimeras of either D2 or D3 receptors and expressed them stably. Those cell lines, expressing a single copy of one receptor mutant each, were stably constructed, selected, amplified and the membranes from them were prepared. Binding data at those receptors were obtained using standard binding conditions for D2 and D3 dopamine receptors. We generated 26 new molecules derived from D2 or D3 ligands. Using 8 reference compounds and those 26 molecules, we characterized their binding at those mutants and chimeras, exemplifying an approach to better understand the difference at the molecular level of the D2 and D3 receptors. Although all the individual results are presented and could be used for minute analyses, the present report does not discuss the differences between D2 and D3 data. It simply shows the feasibility of the approach and its potential.

Drug development is an arduous procedure, necessitating testing the interaction of a large number of potential candidates with potential interacting (macro)molecules. Therefore, any method which could provide an initial screening of potential candidate drugs might be of interest for the acceleration of the procedure, by highlighting interesting compounds, prior to in vitro and in vivo validation. In this line, we present a method which may identify potential hits, with agonistic and/or antagonistic properties on GPCR receptors, integrating the knowledge on signaling events triggered by receptor activation (GPCRs binding to Gα,β,γ proteins, and activating Gα, exchanging GDP for GTP, leading to a decreased affinity of the Gα for the GPCR). We show that, by integrating GPCR‐ligand and Gα‐GDP or ‐GTP binding in docking simulation, which correctly predicts crystallographic data, we can discriminate agonists, partial agonists, and antagonists, through a linear function, based on the ΔG (Gibbs‐free energy) of liganded‐GPCR/Gα‐GDP. We built our model using two Gαs (β2‐adrenergic and prostaglandin‐D2), four Gαi (μ‐opioid, dopamine‐D3, adenosine‐A1, rhodopsin), and one Gαo (serotonin) receptors and validated it with a series of ligands on a recently deorphanized Gαi receptor (OXER1). This approach could be a valuable tool for initial in silico validation and design of GPRC‐interacting ligands.