More Recent Comments

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

How Viagra Works

 
Mondays Molecule was sildenofil (5-[2-ethoxy-5- (4-methylpiperazin-1- ylsulfonyl) phenyl]-1- methyl-3-propyl-1,6-dihydro-7H-pyrazolo [4,3-d] pyrimidin-7-one) better known as its citrate salt, Viagra®.

Viagra® is most often used in the treatment of erectile disfunction. The way it works is to inhibit a specific enzyme called phosphodiesterase-5 located in the smooth muscle of the arteries that supply blood to the penis. In order to understand the significnace of this inhibition, we need a little background.

Nitric oxide (NO) is a chemical produced by special nerve cells called NANC nerve cells. (NANC stands for nonadrenergic-noncholinergic.) Under certain, rather special, conditions the brain sends a signal down the axon of a NANC nerve cell located in the penis. This causes NO to be released into the blood stream in the arteries of the penis.

One of the main roles of NO is to trigger the relaxation of the smooth muscle that lines the arteries. This leads to vasodilation and the lowering of blood pressure. In the penis this causes engorgement as the arteries expand and fill up with blood. The result is an erection that's stimulated by NO.

Nitric oxide acts locally. It diffuses into adjacent cells and binds to an enzyme called guanylyl cyclase. The binding of NO activates the enzyme, stimulating it to produce cyclic guanosine monophosphate or cGMP. The substrate for this reaction is guanosine triphosphate (GTP), a molecule that's similar to ATP except that the base is guanine instead of adenine.

ATP can be also be cyclized to form cAMP—a compound analogous to cGMP. cAMP is a common signal in many hormone-induced signal transduction pathways (and in creating a sense of smell). Like cAMP, cGMP is a signalling molecule. It activates specific enzymes that add phosphate to various proteins causing them to become more, or perhaps less, active. During an erection, the cGMP signal leads to changes in phosphorylation of muscle proteins causing the muscles to relax and the arteries to expand.

As you might expect, cGMP is not infinitely stable; otherwise a man might have an erection forever. cGMP is removed by the action of cGMP phosphodiesterase, which converts it to GMP. The turnover of cGMP in the penis is quite rapid leading to lack of signal unless NO is continually produced by the NANC nerve cells in order to replenish the supply of cGMP by reactivating guanylyl cyclase. This production of NO requires the attention of the brain, which has to keep focused on the task at hand.

The smooth muscle cells in the penis contain a special cGMP phosphodiesterase called phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5). Sometimes the degradation of cGMP by PDE5 outpaces the production of cGMP by guanylyl cyclase. In such cases, the steady-state levels of cGMP aren't sufficient to signal muscle relaxation and no erection occurs. This is a common cause of erectile disfunction.

Viagra® works by inhibiting PDE5 thus blocking the breakdown of cGMP. This causes levels of cGMP to increase and an erection is prolonged. The structure of the PDE5 enzyme has been solved by Sung et al. (2003) in the presence of bound sildenafil (Viagra®) and two other inhibitors, tadalafil (Cialis®) and vardenafil (Levitra®). The structures are shown as stereo images in the figure below.

The upper image is the PDE5 proetin with overlapping molecules of sildenafil (red) and tadalfil (green) bound to the enzyme. The bottom images shown the structures of the three inhibitors. Viagra® binds to the site where cGMP would normally bind, thus blocking the degradation of cGMP. The structure of Viagra® is similar to cGMP and this exlains why it is such a potent inhibitor.

Sung B-J., Hwang, K.Y., Jeon, Y.H., Lee, J.I., Heo, Y.S., Kim, J.H., Moon, J., Yoon, J.M., Hyun, Y.L., Kim, E., Eum, S.J., Park, S.Y., Lee, J.O., Lee, T.G., Ro, S., and Cho, J.M. (2003) Structure of the catalytic domain of human phosphodiesterase 5 with bound drug molecules. Nature 425:98-102.

9 comments :

Looney said...

"Biochemists know that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution and they simply assume that intelligent students will understand the references to evolution scattered throughout the textbooks. The textbooks do not ignore evolution, they take it as a given fact."

Of course, there was not a single direct or indirect reference to evolution in your description of how Viagra works. If the relationship of evolution to biology were the same as Newton's laws are to mechanics, then this would be impossible. In mechanics, we begin with Newton's laws and start deriving. In biochemistry textbooks, you start with physics, derive some stuff, and somewhere along the line you might exclaim "Holy cow, it's evolution!". Behe is exactly right.

Anonymous said...

Except for the bit about "Behe is exactly right," looney has demonstrated the principle of a stopped clock being right twice a day.

Anonymous said...

I find the analogous phosphodiesterase degradation mechanisms between Viagra mediating cGMP and caffeine mediating cAMP absolutely fascinating.

It a cool example of parallel evolution. :-)

Looney said...

Well, Renaissance, you have re-demonstrated the exClamatory powers of evolution. Unfortunately, Behe's point, and my observation, is that biochemistry and molecular biology texts don't begin with evolution as a principle and derive things. If evolution did have any exPlanatory powers, this situation would be inconceivable.

Ryan said...

"The turnover of cGMP in the penis is quite rapid leading to lack of signal unless NO is continually produced by the NANC nerve cells in order to replenish the supply of cGMP by reactivating guanylyl cyclase. This production of NO requires the attention of the brain, which has to keep focused on the task at hand."

larry, you're cracking me up! haha!

on a serious note, excellent post. absolutely fascinating!

renaissance: I'd like to hear more about caffeine.

looney: I don't think the results of evolution are derivable like Physics equations (in the sense that you would be able to predict an evolutionary development). but, evolution certainly has explanatory power when talking about hindsight. I'd imagine that the reason the texts don't mention evolution, is (1) because it isn't always necessary to be able to understand the topic at hand, and (2) the evolutionary history of biochemical systems would be many more volumes than simply a textbook about biochemistry.

Torbjörn Larsson said...

Makes sense that it is a signal molecule balance, and if so that it is sensitive to both production and removal.

Looney:
"there was not a single direct or indirect reference to evolution"

But nobody said it is the same situation as for Newtons' laws. Your quote simply says that the details of the system and its mechanisms doesn't make sense without comparing to similar systems resulting from evolution.

Btw, nobody uses Newton's laws for serious work in mechanics. The Lagrangian formulation makes it practical. The related Hamiltonian formulation is used for deeper results and makes the connection with quantum mechanics. These formulations shows that action principles relates mechanical systems. And this is an analogous situation to evolution relating biological systems.

Anonymous said...

looney: "Behe's point, and my observation, is that biochemistry and molecular biology texts don't begin with evolution as a principle and derive things. If evolution did have any exPlanatory powers, this situation would be inconceivable."

Not really. The theory of evolution is very good as an overarching theory that ties together the results of particular biological disciplines and explains how they hang together.

Looney said...

"Btw, nobody uses Newton's laws for serious work in mechanics."

You must be kidding!

I really believe evolution is true: Evolution = change and change is a fact that only a moron would argue with. The concept of change (evolution), however, is totally vacuous and it is nearly impossible for it to be used for anything other than exclamations, hand waving and 20/20 hindsight.

And yes, it is a good overarching theory in that evolution is guaranteed to touch everything in a consistent manner and tie everything together. The insights obtainable from this fact, however, constitute the null set.

Thus, when a biochemist wants to explain something real in any detail, he must dump evolution and go back to scientific concepts which actually have some content.

Torbjörn Larsson said...

Looney:

""Btw, nobody uses Newton's laws for serious work in mechanics."

You must be kidding!"

Of course not. If you want to treat a mechanical system with more than one degree of freedom analytically or in softwar, you better pull out your Lagrangian formulation.

"Evolution = change"

In biology it is more complex, see btw Larry's post defining evolution.

"The insights obtainable from this fact, however, constitute the null set."

I see you know as little about biology as about physics. Go study, and use the references to dig up hard data confirming or falsifying predictions. Since those exists, it is science.