Small Molecules with Similar Structures Exhibit Agonist, Neutral Antagonist or Inverse Agonist Activity toward Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor

Small differences in the chemical structures of ligands can be responsible for agonism, neutral antagonism or inverse agonism toward a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR). Although each ligand may stabilize the receptor conformation in a different way, little is known about the precise conformational differences. We synthesized the angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) olmesartan, R239470 and R794847, which induced inverse agonism, antagonism and agonism, respectively, and then investigated the ligand-specific changes in the receptor conformation with respect to stabilization around transmembrane (TM)3. The results of substituted cysteine accessibility mapping studies support the novel concept that ligand-induced changes in the conformation of TM3 play a role in stabilizing GPCR. Although the agonist-, neutral antagonist and inverse agonist-binding sites in the AT1 receptor are similar, each ligand induced specific conformational changes in TM3. In addition, all of the experimental data were obtained with functional receptors in a native membrane environment (in situ)

Glutamate Uptake Triggers Transporter-Mediated GABA Release from Astrocytes

Background: Glutamate (Glu) and c-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transporters play important roles in regulating neuronal activity. Glu is removed from the extracellular space dominantly by glial transporters. In contrast, GABA is mainly taken up by neurons. However, the glial GABA transporter subtypes share their localization with the Glu transporters and their expression is confined to the same subpopulation of astrocytes, raising the possibility of cooperation between Glu and GABA transport processes. Methodology/Principal Findings: Here we used diverse biological models both in vitro and in vivo to explore the interplay between these processes. We found that removal of Glu by astrocytic transporters triggers an elevation in the extracellular level of GABA. This coupling between excitatory and inhibitory signaling was found to be independent of Glu receptor-mediated depolarization, external presence of Ca2+ and glutamate decarboxylase activity. It was abolished in the presence of non-transportable blockers of glial Glu or GABA transporters, suggesting that the concerted action of these transporters underlies the process. Conclusions/Significance: Our results suggest that activation of Glu transporters results in GABA release through reversal of glial GABA transporters. This transporter-mediated interplay represents a direct link between inhibitory and excitatory neurotransmission and may function as a negative feedback combating intense excitation in pathological conditions such as epilepsy or ischemia