Key result
The racemic compound showed better GPVI antagonism (IC50 = 6.7 μM) than its S (25.3 μM) or R (126.3 μM) enantiomers, explained by complementary interactions at primary and secondary binding sites.
Molecular modelling reveals that the higher GPVI antagonistic activity of the racemic compound compared to its enantiomers is due to synergistic binding at both primary and secondary receptor sites.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports racemic GPVI antagonist development in models; animal data leave open clinical translation.
The GPVI receptor on the platelets plays a major role in inhibiting arterial thrombosis with limited risk of bleeding and is considered a potential anti-thrombotic target for arterial thrombosis. In the reported anti-thrombotics, tetrahydropyridoindoles, the title compound was the best inhibitor of the collagen mediated platelet aggregation by antagonizing the platelet receptor GPVI. Interestingly, the racemic title compound showed better antagonism (IC50 racemate = 6.7 μM) than either of its enantiomers (IC50 S enantiomer = 25.3 μM; IC50 R enantiomer = 126.3 μM). In order to explain this, the molecular modelling approaches viz. site map analysis, protein–protein docking and molecular dynamics simulation were carried out, which led to the identification of a second binding site located near the primary antagonist binding site known to bind losartan. The induced fit docking studies for both the enantiomers at the primary and secondary binding sites showed that the S-enantiomer has better interactions at the primary binding site than the R-enantiomer, while the R-enantiomer has better interactions at the secondary site than the S-enantiomer. Hence, the overall interactions of the racemic compound containing equimolar mixture may be higher than any one of the enantiomers and may explain the higher activity than its enantiomers of the racemic compound.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhunia et al. (2017) studied Arterial thrombosis. Racemic 2-(4-methoxyphenylsulfonyl)-2,3,4,9-tetrahydro-1H-pyrido[3,4-b]indole-3-carboxamide vs. S and R enantiomers was evaluated on GPVI antagonism (IC50). The racemic compound showed better GPVI antagonism (IC50 = 6.7 μM) than its S (25.3 μM) or R (126.3 μM) enantiomers, explained by complementary interactions at primary and secondary binding sites.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: