Agonists at the δ‐opioid receptor modify the binding of µ‐receptor agonists to the µ–δ receptor hetero‐oligomer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: µ- and δ-opioid receptors form heteromeric complexes with unique ligand binding and G protein-coupling profiles linked to G protein α z-subunit (Gα(z) ) activation. However, the mechanism of action of agonists and their regulation of the µ-δ receptor heteromer are not well understood. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Competition radioligand binding, cell surface receptor internalization in intact cells, confocal microscopy and receptor immunofluorescence techniques were employed to study the regulation of the µ-δ receptor heteromer in heterologous cells with and without agonist exposure. KEY RESULTS: Gα(z) enhanced affinity of some agonists at µ-δ receptor heteromers, independent of agonist chemical structure. δ-Opioid agonists displaced µ-agonist binding with high affinity from µ-δ heteromers, but not µ receptor homomers, suggestive of δ-agonists occupying a novel µ-receptor ligand binding pocket within the heteromers. Also, δ-agonists induced internalization of µ-opioid receptors in cells co-expressing µ- and δ-receptors, but not those expressing µ-receptors alone, indicative of µ-δ heteromer internalization. This dose-dependent, Pertussis toxin-resistant and clathrin- and dynamin-dependent effect required agonist occupancy of both µ- and δ-opioid receptors. In contrast to µ-receptor homomers, agonist-induced internalization of µ-δ heteromers persisted following chronic morphine exposure. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The µ-δ receptor heteromer may contain a novel δ-agonist-detected, high-affinity, µ-receptor ligand binding pocket and is regulated differently from the µ-receptor homomer following chronic morphine exposure. Occupancy of both µ- and δ-receptor binding pockets is required for δ-agonist-induced endocytosis of µ-δ receptor heteromers. δ-Opioid agonists target µ-δ receptor heteromers, and thus have a broader pharmacological specificity than previously identified.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".