Amal El Daibani , Manish K. Madasu , Ream Al-Hasani, Tao Che
{"title":"Limitations and potential of κOR biased agonists for pain and itch management","authors":"Amal El Daibani , Manish K. Madasu , Ream Al-Hasani, Tao Che","doi":"10.1016/j.neuropharm.2024.110061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The concept of ligand bias is based on the premise that different agonists can elicit distinct responses by selectively activating the same receptor. These responses often determine whether an agonist has therapeutic or undesirable effects. Therefore, it would be highly advantageous to have agonists that specifically trigger the therapeutic response. The last two decades have seen a growing trend towards the consideration of ligand bias in the development of ligands to target the κ-opioid receptor (κOR). Most of these ligands selectively favor G-protein signaling over β-arrestin signaling to potentially provide effective pain and itch relief without adverse side effects associated with κOR activation. Importantly, the specific role of β-arrestin 2 in mediating κOR agonist-induced side effects remains unknown, and similarly the therapeutic and side-effect profiles of G-protein-biased κOR agonists have not been established. Furthermore, some drugs previously labeled as G-protein-biased may not exhibit true bias but may instead be either low-intrinsic-efficacy or partial agonists. In this review, we discuss the established methods to test ligand bias, their limitations in measuring bias factors for κOR agonists, as well as recommend the consideration of other systematic factors to correlate the degree of bias signaling and pharmacological effects.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19139,"journal":{"name":"Neuropharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390824002302/pdfft?md5=31516f10f1c130f963324543a6cd94c9&pid=1-s2.0-S0028390824002302-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390824002302","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The concept of ligand bias is based on the premise that different agonists can elicit distinct responses by selectively activating the same receptor. These responses often determine whether an agonist has therapeutic or undesirable effects. Therefore, it would be highly advantageous to have agonists that specifically trigger the therapeutic response. The last two decades have seen a growing trend towards the consideration of ligand bias in the development of ligands to target the κ-opioid receptor (κOR). Most of these ligands selectively favor G-protein signaling over β-arrestin signaling to potentially provide effective pain and itch relief without adverse side effects associated with κOR activation. Importantly, the specific role of β-arrestin 2 in mediating κOR agonist-induced side effects remains unknown, and similarly the therapeutic and side-effect profiles of G-protein-biased κOR agonists have not been established. Furthermore, some drugs previously labeled as G-protein-biased may not exhibit true bias but may instead be either low-intrinsic-efficacy or partial agonists. In this review, we discuss the established methods to test ligand bias, their limitations in measuring bias factors for κOR agonists, as well as recommend the consideration of other systematic factors to correlate the degree of bias signaling and pharmacological effects.
期刊介绍:
Neuropharmacology publishes high quality, original research and review articles within the discipline of neuroscience, especially articles with a neuropharmacological component. However, papers within any area of neuroscience will be considered. The journal does not usually accept clinical research, although preclinical neuropharmacological studies in humans may be considered. The journal only considers submissions in which the chemical structures and compositions of experimental agents are readily available in the literature or disclosed by the authors in the submitted manuscript. Only in exceptional circumstances will natural products be considered, and then only if the preparation is well defined by scientific means. Neuropharmacology publishes articles of any length (original research and reviews).