Mode of Binding of the Cyclic Agonist Peptide TC14012 to CXCR7: Identification of Receptor and Compound Determinants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemokine receptor CXCR7 is an atypical CXCL12 receptor that, as opposed to the classical CXCL12 receptor CXCR4, signals preferentially via the β-arrestin pathway and does not mediate chemotaxis. We previously reported that the cyclic peptide TC14012, a potent CXCR4 antagonist, also engaged CXCR7, albeit with lower potency. Surprisingly, the compound activated the CXCR7-arrestin pathway. The reason underlying the opposite effects of TC14012 on CXCR4 and CXCR7, and the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7, remained unclear. The mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR4 is known from cocrystallization of its analogue CVX15 with CXCR4. We here report the the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7 by combining the use of compound analogues, receptor mutants, and molecular modeling. We find that the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7 is indeed similar to that of CVX15 to CXCR4, with compound positions Arg2 and Arg14 engaging CXCR7 key residues D179(4.60) (on the tip of transmembrane domain 4) and D275(6.58) (on the tip of transmembrane domain 6), respectively. Interestingly, the TC14012 parent compound T140 is not a CXCR7 agonist, because of conformational constraints in its pharmacophore, which in TC14012 are relieved through C-terminal amidation. However, an engineered salt bridge between the CXCR7 ECL2 substitution R197D and compound residue Arg1 permitted T140 agonism by repositioning the compound in the binding pocket. In conclusion, our results show that the opposite effect of TC14012 on CXCR4 and CXCR7 is not explained by different binding modes. Rather, engagement of the interface between transmembrane domains and extracellular loops readily triggers CXCR7, but not CXCR4, activation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".