The mu opioid receptor (MOR) has been shown to desensitize after 1 h of exposure to the opioid peptide, [D-Ala(2), N-MePhe(4), Gly-ol(5)]enkephalin (DAMGO), largely by the loss of receptors from the cell surface and receptor down-regulation. We have previously shown that the Thr(394) in the carboxyl tail is essential for agonist-induced early desensitization, presumably by serving as a primary phosphorylation site for G protein-coupled receptor kinase. Using a T394A mutant receptor, we determined that Thr(394) was also responsible for mu opioid receptor down-regulation. The T394A mutant receptor displayed 50% reduction of receptor down-regulation (14.8%) compared with wild type receptor (34%) upon 1 h of exposure to DAMGO. Agonist-induced T394A receptor down-regulation was unaffected by pertussis toxin treatment, indicating involvement of a mechanism independent of G protein function. Interestingly, pertussis toxin-insensitive T394A receptor down-regulation was completely inhibited by a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, genistein. Tyrosine kinase inhibition blocked wild type MOR down-regulation by 50%, and the genistein-resistant wild type MOR down-regulation was completely pertussis toxin-sensitive. Following DAMGO stimulation, MOR was shown to be phosphorylated at tyrosine residue(s), indicating that the receptor was a direct substrate for tyrosine kinase action. Mutagenesis of the four intracellular tyrosine residues resulted in complete inhibition of the G protein-insensitive MOR internalization. Therefore, agonist-induced MOR down-regulation appears to be mediated by two distinct cellular signal transduction pathways. One is G protein-dependent and GRK-dependent, which can be abolished by pertussis toxin treatment of wild type MOR or by mutagenesis of Thr(394). The other novel pathway is G protein-independent but tyrosine kinase-dependent, blocked by genistein treatment, and one in which Thr(394) has no regulatory role but phosphorylation of tyrosine residues appears essential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pak et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: