HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Onuffer, J. Articles by Horuk, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Onuffer, J. Articles by Horuk, R. Pubmed/NCBI databases Gene GEO Profiles HomoloGene UniGene Substance via MeSH

Structure Function Differences in Nonpeptide CCR1 Antagonists for Human and Mouse CCR1

James Onuffer^*, Margaret A. McCarrick^1,, Laura Dunning, Meina Liang^2,, Mary Rosser, Guo-Ping Wei, Howard Ng^3, and Richard Horuk^4,*

Departments of ^* Immunology, Discovery Research, and Biological Research, Berlex Biosciences, Richmond, CA 94806

A useful strategy for identifying ligand binding domains of G protein-coupled receptors has been the exploitation of species differences in antagonist potencies. We have used this approach for the CCR1 chemokine receptor with a novel series of antagonists, the 4-hydroxypiperidines, which were discovered by high throughput screening of human CCR1 and subsequently optimized. The structure-activity relationships for a number of different 4-hydroxypiperidine antagonists for human and mouse CCR1 were examined by receptor binding and functional assays. These compounds exhibit major differences in their rank order of potency for the human and mouse chemokine receptor CCR1. For example, the initial lead template, BX 510, which was a highly potent functional antagonist for human CCR1 (K_i = 21 nM) was >400-fold less active on mouse CCR1 (K_i = 9150 nM). However, increasing the length of the linker between the piperidine and dibenzothiepine groups by one methylene group generated a compound, BX 511, which was equipotent for both human and mouse CCR1. These and other analogs of the lead template BX 510, which have major differences in potency for human and mouse CCR1, are described, and a model for their interaction with human CCR1 is presented.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Vaidehi, S. Schlyer, R. J. Trabanino, W. B. Floriano, R. Abrol, S. Sharma, M. Kochanny, S. Koovakat, L. Dunning, M. Liang, et al. Predictions of CCR1 Chemokine Receptor Structure and BX 471 Antagonist Binding Followed by Experimental Validation J. Biol. Chem., September 15, 2006; 281(37): 27613 - 27620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Morokata, K. Suzuki, Y. Masunaga, K. Taguchi, K. Morihira, I. Sato, M. Fujii, S. Takizawa, Y. Torii, N. Yamamoto, et al. A Novel, Selective, and Orally Available Antagonist for CC Chemokine Receptor 3 J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., April 1, 2006; 317(1): 244 - 250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. L. de Mendonca, P. C. A. da Fonseca, R. M. Phillips, J. W. Saldanha, T. J. Williams, and J. E. Pease Site-directed Mutagenesis of CC Chemokine Receptor 1 Reveals the Mechanism of Action of UCB 35625, a Small Molecule Chemokine Receptor Antagonist J. Biol. Chem., February 11, 2005; 280(6): 4808 - 4816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-J. Anders, V. Vielhauer, and D. Schlondorff Current paradigms about chemokines as therapeutic targets Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., December 1, 2004; 19(12): 2948 - 2951. [Full Text] [PDF]