![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Department of Biological Reagents and Assay Development, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
This article describes functional selectivity of agonists and antagonists and distinguishes conventional cell-based functional selectivity, where the strength of signal produces selective signaling in various organs, from true receptor active-state based selectivity, also alternatively referred to in the literature as "stimulus trafficking," "biased agonism," and "collateral efficacy." This latter mechanism of selectivity depends on the ligand-related conformation of the receptor and is not compatible with the parsimonious view that agonists produce a single receptor active state. In addition, protean agonism is described, whereby a ligand produces positive agonism in quiescent systems and inverse agonism in constitutively active systems. This is a special case of active state-based selectivity in which the ligand produces an active state that is of lower efficacy than the natural constitutively active state. It is postulated that receptor active-state based selectivity, unlike cell-based functional selectivity, is controllable through the chemical structure of the ligand and is therefore more likely to be a viable avenue for therapeutic selectivity in the clinic. Reasons are given for differentiating receptor active-state based selectivity from conventional functional organ selectivity.
Address correspondence to: Terry Kenakin, Department of Biological Reagents and Assay Development, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, 5 Moore Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. E-mail: terry.p.kenakin{at}gsk.com
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. F. Peters and C. W. Scott Evaluating Cellular Impedance Assays for Detection of GPCR Pleiotropic Signaling and Functional Selectivity J Biomol Screen, March 1, 2009; 14(3): 246 - 255. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Seifert and S. Dove Functional Selectivity of GPCR Ligand Stereoisomers: New Pharmacological Opportunities Mol. Pharmacol., January 1, 2009; 75(1): 13 - 18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. A. Simmons Let's Go Rafting: Ligand Functional Selectivity May Depend on Membrane Structure Mol. Interv., December 1, 2008; 8(6): 281 - 283. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Weitl and R. Seifert Distinct Interactions of Human {beta}1- and {beta}2-Adrenoceptors with Isoproterenol, Epinephrine, Norepinephrine, and Dopamine J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., December 1, 2008; 327(3): 760 - 769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. A. Stoddart, N. J. Smith, L. Jenkins, A. J. Brown, and G. Milligan Conserved Polar Residues in Transmembrane Domains V, VI, and VII of Free Fatty Acid Receptor 2 and Free Fatty Acid Receptor 3 Are Required for the Binding and Function of Short Chain Fatty Acids J. Biol. Chem., November 21, 2008; 283(47): 32913 - 32924. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Hoffmann, N. Ziegler, S. Reiner, C. Krasel, and M. J. Lohse Agonist-selective, Receptor-specific Interaction of Human P2Y Receptors with {beta}-Arrestin-1 and -2 J. Biol. Chem., November 7, 2008; 283(45): 30933 - 30941. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Okazaki, S. Ferrandon, J.-P. Vilardaga, M. L. Bouxsein, J. T. Potts Jr, and T. J. Gardella Prolonged signaling at the parathyroid hormone receptor by peptide ligands targeted to a specific receptor conformation PNAS, October 28, 2008; 105(43): 16525 - 16530. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
