 |
PDBsum entry 2amb
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hormone/growth factor receptor
|
PDB id
|
|
|
|
2amb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
Protein Sci
15:987-999
(2006)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Comparison of crystal structures of human androgen receptor ligand-binding domain complexed with various agonists reveals molecular determinants responsible for binding affinity.
|
|
K.Pereira de Jésus-Tran,
P.L.Côté,
L.Cantin,
J.Blanchet,
F.Labrie,
R.Breton.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
Androgens exert their effects by binding to the highly specific androgen
receptor (AR). In addition to natural potent androgens, AR binds a variety of
synthetic agonist or antagonist molecules with different affinities. To identify
molecular determinants responsible for this selectivity, we have determined the
crystal structure of the human androgen receptor ligand-binding domain (hARLBD)
in complex with two natural androgens, testosterone (Testo) and
dihydrotestosterone (DHT), and with an androgenic steroid used in sport doping,
tetrahydrogestrinone (THG), at 1.64, 1.90, and 1.75 A resolution, respectively.
Comparison of these structures first highlights the flexibility of several
residues buried in the ligand-binding pocket that can accommodate a variety of
ligand structures. As expected, the ligand structure itself (dimension,
presence, and position of unsaturated bonds that influence the geometry of the
steroidal nucleus or the electronic properties of the neighboring atoms, etc.)
determines the number of interactions it can make with the hARLBD. Indeed,
THG--which possesses the highest affinity--establishes more van der Waals
contacts with the receptor than the other steroids, whereas the geometry of the
atoms forming electrostatic interactions at both extremities of the steroid
nucleus seems mainly responsible for the higher affinity measured experimentally
for DHT over Testo. Moreover, estimation of the ligand-receptor interaction
energy through modeling confirms that even minor modifications in ligand
structure have a great impact on the strength of these interactions. Our
crystallographic data combined with those obtained by modeling will be helpful
in the design of novel molecules with stronger affinity for the AR.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 1.
Molecular structures of the ligands used. DHT,
dihydrotestosterone; Testo, testosterone; THG,
tetrahydrogestrinone; R1881, methyltrienolone. Carbon and oxygen
atoms of the steroids are numbered according to the standard
steroid nomenclature and the cycles designated by letters. For
THG, extra carbon atoms are numbered 20 and 21 for the
17[alpha]-ethyl group and 22 for the C18-methyl group.
|
 |
Figure 5.
Double or unique Gln711 conformation in (A) Testo --, (B) DHT
--, and (C) THG --hARLBD complexes. Electron density maps are
contoured at 1[sigma].
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
from an Open Access publication published by the Protein Society:
Protein Sci
(2006,
15,
987-999)
copyright 2006.
|
|
| |
Figures were
selected
by an automated process.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
N.M.DeVore,
and
E.E.Scott
(2012).
Structures of cytochrome P450 17A1 with prostate cancer drugs abiraterone and TOK-001.
|
| |
Nature,
482,
116-119.
|
 |
|
PDB codes:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
A.M.Reitzel,
and
A.M.Tarrant
(2010).
Correlated evolution of androgen receptor and aromatase revisited.
|
| |
Mol Biol Evol,
27,
2211-2215.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
H.Wang,
J.Li,
Y.Gao,
Y.Xu,
Y.Pan,
I.Tsuji,
Z.J.Sun,
and
X.M.Li
(2010).
Xeno-oestrogens and phyto-oestrogens are alternative ligands for the androgen receptor.
|
| |
Asian J Androl,
12,
535-547.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.T.Rosenberg,
M.Froehner,
D.Albala,
and
M.M.Miner
(2010).
Biology and natural history of prostate cancer and the role of chemoprevention.
|
| |
Int J Clin Pract,
64,
1746-1753.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
W.Gao
(2010).
Androgen receptor as a therapeutic target.
|
| |
Adv Drug Deliv Rev,
62,
1277-1284.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.Schubert,
F.Brunet,
M.Paris,
S.Bertrand,
G.Benoit,
and
V.Laudet
(2008).
Nuclear hormone receptor signaling in amphioxus.
|
| |
Dev Genes Evol,
218,
651-665.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.Thauvin,
C.Robin-Jagerschmidt,
F.Nique,
P.Mollat,
D.Fleury,
and
T.Prangé
(2008).
Crystallization and preliminary X-ray analysis of the human androgen receptor ligand-binding domain with a coactivator-like peptide and selective androgen receptor modulators.
|
| |
Acta Crystallogr Sect F Struct Biol Cryst Commun,
64,
1159-1162.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
S.M.Carroll,
J.T.Bridgham,
and
J.W.Thornton
(2008).
Evolution of hormone signaling in elasmobranchs by exploitation of promiscuous receptors.
|
| |
Mol Biol Evol,
25,
2643-2652.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
The most recent references are shown first.
Citation data come partly from CiteXplore and partly
from an automated harvesting procedure. Note that this is likely to be
only a partial list as not all journals are covered by
either method. However, we are continually building up the citation data
so more and more references will be included with time.
Where a reference describes a PDB structure, the PDB
codes are
shown on the right.
|
');
}
}
 |