SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Structural Analysis, Molecular Modelling and Preliminary Competition Binding Studies of AM-DAN as a NMDA Receptor PCP-Site Fluorescent Ligand.

Molecules · 2019-11-13

DOI: 10.3390/molecules24224092PMID: 31766120

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Excitotoxicity related to the dysfunction of the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) has been indicated to play an integral role in the pathophysiology of multiple disease states, including neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease. There is a notable gap in the market for novel NMDAR antagonists, however current methods to analyse potential antagonists rely on indirect measurements of calcium flux and hazardous radioligand binding assays. Recently, a fluorescent NMDAR ligand, N-adamantan-1-yl-dimethylamino-1-naphthalenesulfonic acid, known as AM-DAN was developed by our group. Additional studies on this ligand is necessary to evaluate its potential as a biological tool in NMDAR research. Therefore, this study was aimed at conducting structural analyses, fluorescence experiments, high-accuracy NMDAR molecular modelling and NMDAR phencyclidine (PCP) site competition binding studies using AM-DAN. Results revealed that AM-DAN has appropriate structural properties, significant fluorescent ability in various solvents and is able to bind selectively and compete for the PCP-binding site of the NMDAR. Therefore, AM-DAN holds promise as a novel fluorescent ligand to measure the affinity of prospective drugs binding at the NMDAR PCP-site and may circumvent the use of radioligands.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.