G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) pose challenges for drug discovery efforts because of the high degree of structural homology in the orthosteric pocket, particularly for GPCRs within a single subfamily, such as the nine adrenergic receptors. Allosteric ligands may bind to less-conserved regions of these receptors and therefore are more likely to be selective. Unlike orthosteric ligands, which tonically activate or inhibit signalling, allosteric ligands modulate physiologic responses to hormones and neurotransmitters, and may therefore have fewer adverse effects. The majority of GPCR crystal structures published to date were obtained with receptors bound to orthosteric antagonists, and only a few structures bound to allosteric ligands have been reported. Compound 15 (Cmpd-15) is an allosteric modulator of the β2 adrenergic receptor (β2AR) that was recently isolated from a DNA-encoded small-molecule library1. Orthosteric β-adrenergic receptor antagonists, known as beta-blockers, are amongst the most prescribed drugs in the world and Cmpd-15 is the first allosteric beta-blocker. Cmpd-15 exhibits negative cooperativity with agonists and positive cooperativity with inverse agonists. Here we present the structure of the β2AR bound to a polyethylene glycol-carboxylic acid derivative (Cmpd-15PA) of this modulator. Cmpd-15PA binds to a pocket formed primarily by the cytoplasmic ends of transmembrane segments 1, 2, 6 and 7 as well as intracellular loop 1 and helix 8. A comparison of this structure with inactive- and active-state structures of the β2AR reveals the mechanism by which Cmpd-15 modulates agonist binding affinity and signalling.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Protein Data Bank
Ahn, S. et al. Allosteric ‘beta-blocker’ isolated from a DNA-encoded small molecule library. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 114, 1708–1713 (2017)
Kruse, A. C. et al. Activation and allosteric modulation of a muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. Nature 504, 101–106 (2013)
Zheng, Y. et al. Structure of CC chemokine receptor 2 with orthosteric and allosteric antagonists. Nature 540, 458–461 (2016)
Oswald, C. et al. Intracellular allosteric antagonism of the CCR9 receptor. Nature 540, 462–465 (2016)
Jazayeri, A. et al. Extra-helical binding site of a glucagon receptor antagonist. Nature 533, 274–277 (2016)
Rosenbaum, D. M. et al. GPCR engineering yields high-resolution structural insights into β2-adrenergic receptor function. Science 318, 1266–1273 (2007)
Rasmussen, S. G. et al. Crystal structure of the β2 adrenergic receptor–Gs protein complex. Nature 477, 549–555 (2011)
Kang, Y. et al. Crystal structure of rhodopsin bound to arrestin by femtosecond X-ray laser. Nature 523, 561–567 (2015)
Staus, D. P. et al. Allosteric nanobodies reveal the dynamic range and diverse mechanisms of G-protein-coupled receptor activation. Nature 535, 448–452 (2016)
Ring, A. M. et al. Adrenaline-activated structure of β2-adrenoceptor stabilized by an engineered nanobody. Nature 502, 575–579 (2013)
Rasmussen, S. G. et al. Structure of a nanobody-stabilized active state of the β2 adrenoceptor. Nature 469, 175–180 (2011)
Huang, W. et al. Structural insights into μ-opioid receptor activation. Nature 524, 315–321 (2015)
Kobilka, B. K. Amino and carboxyl terminal modifications to facilitate the production and purification of a G protein-coupled receptor. Anal. Biochem. 231, 269–271 (1995)
Caffrey, M. & Cherezov, V. Crystallizing membrane proteins using lipidic mesophases. Nat. Protoc. 4, 706–731 (2009)
Kabsch, W. Xds. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 125–132 (2010)
Strong, M. et al. Toward the structural genomics of complexes: crystal structure of a PE/PPE protein complex from Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 103, 8060–8065 (2006)
Adams, P. D . et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 213–221 (2010)
Emsley, P., Lohkamp, B., Scott, W. G. & Cowtan, K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 486–501 (2010)
Chen, V. B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D 66, 12–21 (2010)
Ten Eyck, L. F. Fast Fourier transform calculation of electron density maps. Methods Enzymol. 115, 324–337 (1985)
Winn, M. D. et al. Overview of the CCP4 suite and current developments. Acta Crystallogr. D 67, 235–242 (2011)
Krissinel, E. Stock-based detection of protein oligomeric states in jsPISA. Nucleic Acids Res. 43 (W1), W314–W319 (2015)
Whorton, M. R. et al. A monomeric G protein-coupled receptor isolated in a high-density lipoprotein particle efficiently activates its G protein. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 104, 7682–7687 (2007)
Strachan, R. T. et al. Divergent transducer-specific molecular efficacies generate biased agonism at a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR). J. Biol. Chem. 289, 14211–14224 (2014)
Ghanouni, P. et al. The effect of pH on β2 adrenoceptor function. Evidence for protonation-dependent activation. J. Biol. Chem. 275, 3121–3127 (2000)
Ranganathan, A., Dror, R. O. & Carlsson, J. Insights into the role of Asp792.50 in β2 adrenergic receptor activation from molecular dynamics simulations. Biochemistry 53, 7283–7296 (2014)
Lomize, M. A., Lomize, A. L., Pogozheva, I. D. & Mosberg, H. I. OPM: orientations of proteins in membranes database. Bioinformatics 22, 623–625 (2006)
Huang, J. & MacKerell, A. D., Jr. CHARMM36 all-atom additive protein force field: validation based on comparison to NMR data. J. Comput. Chem. 34, 2135–2145 (2013)
Klauda, J. B. et al. Update of the CHARMM all-atom additive force field for lipids: validation on six lipid types. J. Phys. Chem. B 114, 7830–7843 (2010)
MacKerell, A. D. et al. All-atom empirical potential for molecular modeling and dynamics studies of proteins. J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 3586–3616 (1998)
Best, R. B. et al. Optimization of the additive CHARMM all-atom protein force field targeting improved sampling of the backbone φ, ψ and side-chain χ1 and χ2 dihedral angles. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 8, 3257–3273 (2012)
Best, R. B., Mittal, J., Feig, M. & MacKerell, A. D., Jr. Inclusion of many-body effects in the additive CHARMM protein CMAP potential results in enhanced cooperativity of α-helix and β-hairpin formation. Biophys. J. 103, 1045–1051 (2012)
Vanommeslaeghe, K. et al. CHARMM general force field: a force field for drug-like molecules compatible with the CHARMM all-atom additive biological force fields. J. Comput. Chem. 31, 671–690 (2010)
Vanommeslaeghe, K., Raman, E. P. & MacKerell, A. D., Jr. Automation of the CHARMM General Force Field (CGenFF) II: assignment of bonded parameters and partial atomic charges. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 52, 3155–3168 (2012)
Vanommeslaeghe, K. & MacKerell, A. D., Jr. Automation of the CHARMM General Force Field (CGenFF) I: bond perception and atom typing. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 52, 3144–3154 (2012)
Salomon-Ferrer, R., Götz, A. W., Poole, D., Le Grand, S. & Walker, R. C. Routine microsecond molecular dynamics simulations with AMBER on GPUs. 2. Explicit solvent particle mesh ewald. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9, 3878–3888 (2013)
Case, D. A. et al. AMBER 2016. (2016)
Hopkins, C. W., Le Grand, S., Walker, R. C. & Roitberg, A. E. Long-time-step molecular dynamics through hydrogen mass repartitioning. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 1864–1874 (2015)
Humphrey, W., Dalke, A. & Schulten, K. VMD: visual molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Graph. 14, 33–38 (1996)
Wallace, A. C., Laskowski, R. A. & Thornton, J. M. LIGPLOT: a program to generate schematic diagrams of protein–ligand interactions. Protein Eng. 8, 127–134 (1995)
We thank K. Hirata at Beamline BL32XU of Spring-8 for assistance in data collection. A. Wall and T. Xu provided technical assistance. NuEvolution for constructive discussions in the course of the work. We acknowledge support from the National Institute of Health grants NS028471 and GM106990 (B.K.K.), HL16037 (R.J.L.) and T32HL007101 (A.W.K. and A.M.), Amgen-China Postdoc fellowship (X.L.) and the Mathers Foundation (B.K.K. and W.I.W.). R.J.L. is an investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Reviewer Information Nature thanks T. Sakmar, P. Scheerer and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
a, The level of 3H-Fenoterol (Fen) high-affinity binding to the β2AR was measured after pretreatment with the vehicle control (0.5% DMSO), Cmpd-15 or Cmpd-15PA at various concentrations as indicated in the presence of transducers, either trimeric Gαβγ protein or β-arrestin 1 (β-arr1) together with Fab30. Values were expressed as percentages of the maximal 3H-Fen binding level promoted by each transducer in the vehicle control (0.5% DMSO) and represent mean ± s.e.m. obtained from four independent experiments done in duplicate. b, Isoproterenol (ISO)-125I-CYP competition binding curves were obtained using wild-type (WT) β2AR or β2AR–T4L (T4L) in the absence (vehicle alone) or the presence of Cmpd-15PA at 32 μM. Values are expressed as percentages of the maximal 125I-CYP binding level obtained from a one-site competition binding-log IC50 curve fit and represent mean ± s.e.m. obtained from four independent experiments done in duplicate.
a–c, Clear differences were observed around the bromine atom of Cmpd-15PA between simulated annealing omit maps of the first half of diffraction data (a, green density, 2.3σ) and maps of the second half of diffraction data (b, green density, 2.3σ), resulting in a strong difference electron density centred around the bromine atom (c, purple density, 4σ).
Carbon atoms are coloured in black, oxygen atoms in red, nitrogen atoms in blue, bromine atom in green. Hydrogen bonds are represented as green dashed lines with distances labelled. The figure is generated using LIGPLOT40.
a, b, The R isomer fits better into the simulated annealing omit map (green density map, 2.3σ) than S isomer (b). c, When refined with R isomer, the Cmpd-15PA model fits well into the 2Fo − Fc density (grey map, 1.5σ) with only very weak negative Fo − Fc density (red map, 3.0σ). d, When refined with S isomer, the Cmpd-15PA model does not fit as well to the 2Fo − Fc density (grey map, 1.5σ). The negative density Fo − Fc map (red map, 3.0σ) and positive density Fo − Fc map (green map, 3.0σ) suggest that the S isomer is not supported by crystallographic data.
a, b, The binding pocket is occluded before Cmpd-15PA binding (a), which would be an obstacle for in silico docking because the shape of the pocket is markedly different after Cmpd-15 binding (b).
Extended Data Figure 6 Comparison of the structures of the β2AR (cyan, PDB, 2RH1), β2AR–Nb60 (green, PDB, 5JQH) and β2AR–Cmpd-15PA (orange).
a, Cmpd-15PA binding pocket overlaps with Nb60 binding pocket. b–d, Different views of superimposed structures of the β2AR, the β2AR–Nb60 and the β2AR–Cmpd-15PA revealing very little structural difference associated with binding of Nb60 or Cmpd-15PA.
For each analogue, only the modified region relative to the parent Cmpd-15 is indicated. Values for ‘inhibition Emax (%)’ are expressed as percentages of analogue-induced inhibition relative the Cmpd-15-induced level. Values for ‘EC50 shift (fold)’ are expressed as rightward fold-shifts compared to the EC50 value obtained in the vehicle (DMSO)-treated control curve. All values represent mean ± s.e.m. obtained from at least four independent experiments done in duplicate. Statistical analyses were performed using ‘one-way ANOVA’ with ‘Dunnetts’ post-tests for comparison to the control. ***P < 0.001. cAMP, G protein-mediated cAMP accumulation; βarr, β-arrestin recruitment to the β2AR.
Extended Data Figure 8 Alignment of residues that form the Cmpd-15PA binding pocket in β2AR with those from β1AR, V2R and AT1R.
There are 21 residues from β2AR that form the Cmpd-15 binding pocket (highlighted green). The identical residues from β1AR, V2R and AT1R are also highlighted in green. 10 out of the 21 residues are located at TM1, ICL1 and TM2 (a), while 11 of the 21 residues are located at TM6, TM7 and helix 8 (b). The top numbering refers to protein sequences in β2AR. The bottom numbering refers to Ballesteros–Weinstein numbering. c, Cmpd-15 has no effect on orthosteric agonist binding to the β1AR. Dose–response curves of isoproterenol (ISO)-competition binding to the β1AR with 125I-CYP were obtained in the presence of various concentrations of Cmpd-15 as indicated. Values were expressed as percentages of the maximal 125I-CYP binding level obtained from a one-site competition binding-log IC50 curve fit and represent mean ± s.e.m. obtained from five independent experiments done in duplicate.
Extended Data Figure 9 Comparison of Cmpd-15PA pocket with intracellular allosteric antagonist pockets of CCR2 and CCR9.
a, Cmpd-15PA pocket is formed by residues from TM1, TM2, TM6, TM7, ICL1 and helix 8 in β2AR. b, c, The binding pocket of CCR2-RA-(R) in CCR2 (b) and the pocket of vercirnon in CCR9 (c) are similar to Cmpd-15PA (blue lines) pocket but involve more interactions with TM3. (Protein Data Bank accession numbers, 5T1A for CCR2/CCE2-RA-(R) and 5LWE for CCR9/vercirnon.)
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, X., Ahn, S., Kahsai, A. et al. Mechanism of intracellular allosteric β2AR antagonist revealed by X-ray crystal structure. Nature 548, 480–484 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23652
ACS Chemical Neuroscience (2020)
Structural basis for GPCR signaling by small polar versus large lipid metabolites—discovery of non-metabolite ligands
Current Opinion in Cell Biology (2020)
Identification and characterization of fragment binding sites for allosteric ligand design using the site identification by ligand competitive saturation hotspots approach (SILCS-Hotspots)
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - General Subjects (2020)
Distinctive communication networks in inactive states of β 2 ‐adrenergic receptor: Mutual information and entropy transfer analysis
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics (2020)
ACS Pharmacology & Translational Science (2020)