pe
pep-10305 v1 CC-BY-SA-4.0

Tiny research peptide (CHEMBL1172246)

A four-letter lab-made peptide that hits three different body receptors at once; used only as a research tool, not a medicine.

statusbioassayed targetCCKAR length4 aa refs1
status 5 / 5
prediction metrics boltz-2 1.0
ipTM0.933
pTM0.787
avg pLDDT73.6
ranking score0.776
STRUCTURE · PEP-10305 × CCKAR
ranking0.776
target interface 4.5Å peptide drag rotate · ctrl+scroll zoom · right-click pan
boltz-2 1.0 · mmCIF ↓ download
sequence4 aa
14
YGHR
in the news 2 articles
overview readme

What this is

CCKAR ligand CHEMBL1172246 is a short four-amino-acid peptide (sequence YGHR) reported in a 2010 medicinal-chemistry paper that set out to make a single molecule capable of engaging three different receptors implicated in pain: the delta opioid receptor (DOR/OPRD1), the cholecystokinin A receptor (CCKAR), and the melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R). It is not an approved drug, not a clinical candidate, and not a peptide sold for wellness use — it is a research compound catalogued in ChEMBL under the identifier CHEMBL1172246, with a measured binding affinity of IC50 = 125.89 nM reported by the authors. The motivation behind it is the long-standing idea that combining activity at the opioid system with modulation of co-regulating receptors (CCK and melanocortin signaling) could in principle produce analgesia with a different side-effect profile than a pure opioid.

History

The peptide was described by Lee and colleagues (2010) in Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, in a paper titled "Design and synthesis of trivalent ligands targeting opioid, cholecystokinin, and melanocortin receptors for the treatment of pain." The work belongs to a multivalent-ligand design tradition in pain pharmacology in which short peptide fragments or small-molecule pharmacophores known to engage individual receptors are linked or combined to produce a single chemical entity addressing multiple targets at once. The CCK and melanocortin systems were chosen as co-targets because of pre-existing evidence that activation of CCK and central melanocortin signaling each contribute to opioid tolerance and to the maintenance of certain chronic pain states, so an opioid agonist combined with antagonism or modulation of these pathways might preserve analgesia while limiting the development of tolerance.

What it does

In the assay reported by Lee and colleagues, the compound binds the cholecystokinin A receptor (CCKAR) with an IC50 of 125.89 nM. The paper describes it as a trivalent ligand designed against the delta opioid receptor, CCKAR, and MC4R simultaneously, so binding at the other two targets is part of the intended pharmacology. Beyond receptor binding in vitro, no clinical or in vivo efficacy data are attached to this specific four-mer on the platform.

Evidence

  • Human: No human studies. This is a research compound with no clinical development.
  • Animal: Not characterized in the dossier sources available for this card.
  • In vitro: Binding to CCKAR with IC50 = 125.89 nM, reported by Lee and colleagues (2010) and catalogued in ChEMBL as CHEMBL1172246.

Related peptides

The endogenous ligand for the cholecystokinin A receptor is cholecystokinin itself, the gut-and-brain peptide hormone whose C-terminal octapeptide (CCK-8) is the minimal active sequence at CCK-1R and whose biology — postprandial satiety, gallbladder contraction, pancreatic secretion — provides the physiologic context for any CCKAR-targeted ligand. The endogenous ligand at MC4R, the melanocortin-4 receptor co-target of this compound, is α-MSH; MC4R is the same receptor engaged by the clinical melanocortin agonists setmelanotide and bremelanotide. The opioid co-target OPRD1 (delta opioid receptor) is the target of compounds in the enkephalin and dermorphin/deltorphin families.

Hypotheses4 directions▾ collapse

Research directions for this peptide, selected from the current sources — hypotheses you can explore and model. None of it is proven yet; tap any one to see the full thinking.

openupdated 2026-06-05

Does YGHR actually engage all three targeted receptors equally, or is one receptor doing most of the work?

If the compound's activity is dominated by a single receptor, researchers could focus development efforts more precisely, avoiding wasted effort and designing better versions that either improve true multi-receptor engagement or optimize for the one receptor that actually responds.

The hypothesis
YGHR has substantially different binding affinities at OPRD1 versus CCKAR versus MC4R, with the reported IC50 of ~126 nM reflecting only the highest-affinity interaction (most likely CCKAR given ChEMBL annotation), and the other two receptor interactions occurring at micromolar concentrations that may lack in vivo relevance at non-toxic doses.
Why it’s plausible
A 4-residue peptide cannot present independent optimized contact networks for three different GPCRs. ChEMBL annotates the IC50 against CCKAR specifically. If the OPRD1 and MC4R affinities are 10- to 100-fold weaker (i.e., in the low micromolar range), then the 'trivalent' framing overstates the compound's pharmacological reach in vivo, and the true pharmacology of YGHR would be dominated by CCKAR activity. This would reframe YGHR as a CCK-A antagonist/partial agonist with weak opioid and melanocortin activity rather than a true trivalent ligand.
Why it matters
Clarifying the actual affinity hierarchy across all three annotated targets is essential before any therapeutic development, since a CCKAR-dominant profile has very different indications (satiety, pancreatitis pain, gallbladder) from a balanced trivalent analgesic profile.
Plausibility.80
Novelty.40
Impact.70
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
paper
IC50 = 125.89 nM is reported in the ChEMBL record against CCKAR; affinities at OPRD1 and MC4R are not separately annotated in the available snippet, raising the question of whether those values were measured at all or measured at comparable potency
doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.05.078
[2]
sequenceYGHR has no classic opioid Tyr-Gly-Gly-Phe tetrapeptide core (the Gly-Phe extension is absent), and no canonical MSH His-Phe-Arg-Trp MC4R pharmacophore, suggesting lower intrinsic affinity at those receptors
[3]
structureipTM 0.933 could reflect a single high-confidence pose at one receptor rather than three equally confident poses, if the structure prediction was run against one target
openupdated 2026-06-05

Does replacing the flexible glycine in YGHR destroy its ability to bind some receptors while preserving others?

If true, this discovery would provide a simple chemical rule for tuning which pain receptors a drug hits, allowing medicinal chemists to dial in desired receptor combinations with a single amino acid substitution, making drug design faster and more predictable.

The hypothesis
The Gly2 in YGHR functions as a conformational switch that allows the peptide to adopt distinct backbone geometries when engaging different receptors, and its replacement with any alpha-methyl amino acid (such as Aib) will preserve or improve one receptor's affinity while abolishing another, revealing receptor-specific conformational requirements.
Why it’s plausible
Glycine is the only achiral amino acid and uniquely permits phi/psi angles in all backbone quadrants including those inaccessible to L-amino acids. In a 4-residue peptide where each residue likely contacts a different receptor environment, Gly2 provides the flexibility needed to simultaneously satisfy incompatible geometric requirements for three GPCRs. Constraining this flexibility via Aib (alpha-aminoisobutyric acid, a helix-inducing alpha-methyl residue) or D-Ala would lock the peptide into one preferred conformation and thereby selectively enhance binding at the receptor whose binding pocket prefers that geometry while disrupting others. This is a testable structure-function prediction that follows directly from the sequence composition.
Why it matters
Identifying the conformational requirement for each receptor interaction would enable rational design of selective analogs, monoselective peptidomimetics, or biased agonists derived from the YGHR scaffold.
Plausibility.55
Novelty.60
Impact.55
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
sequenceYGHR contains Gly at position 2, the only residue capable of sampling all Ramachandran regions; this is the only conformational degree of freedom in the tetrapeptide that could allow simultaneous pharmacophore presentation to three different receptor binding geometries
[2]
structurepLDDT 73.6 is consistent with backbone flexibility centered on Gly2, as structured flanking residues (Tyr, His, Arg) would score higher individually
[3]
paper
Lee et al. 2010 designed YGHR as a single entity meant to engage three receptors, implying conformational promiscuity is a design feature, not a flaw
doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.05.078
openupdated 2026-06-05

Would a circular version of YGHR survive in the bloodstream long enough to be a useful drug, and would it become more selective in the process?

If true, this would convert a promising but fragile research molecule into a more drug-like compound, bringing an entirely new class of multi-target pain peptides one step closer to real-world clinical use.

The hypothesis
Cyclizing YGHR head-to-tail (cyclo-YGHR) will increase its serum half-life by at least 10-fold compared to linear YGHR by eliminating aminopeptidase-mediated Tyr1 cleavage, while simultaneously restricting the conformational ensemble to a single preferred geometry that shifts receptor selectivity toward either CCKAR or OPRD1 depending on which ring conformation is stabilized.
Why it’s plausible
Linear tetrapeptides are extremely rapidly degraded in plasma and tissue, primarily by aminopeptidases acting on the N-terminus and carboxypeptidases on the C-terminus. The half-life of a 4-mer in serum is typically on the order of minutes. Head-to-tail cyclization removes both termini simultaneously. For a 4-residue ring, the conformational space is small and the preferred ring geometry is determined by side-chain packing. Tyr-Gly-His-Arg in a cyclic scaffold will sample a limited set of beta-turn-like conformations, each of which would present the side chains in a geometry that favors one receptor over others. This means cyclization simultaneously solves the stability problem and generates a more selective pharmacological tool from a promiscuous parent.
Why it matters
A stable cyclic analog of YGHR could serve as a lead compound for pain indications requiring longer duration of action, and the conformational restriction could rescue selectivity profiles that are otherwise uncharacterizable in the rapidly degraded linear form.
Plausibility.60
Novelty.45
Impact.55
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
sequenceYGHR is a linear 4-mer with free N-terminal Tyr (a prime aminopeptidase substrate) and free C-terminal Arg; no protective modifications reported; expected plasma half-life of unmodified linear tetrapeptides is minutes
[2]
paper
Lee et al. 2010 do not report stability data or cyclized analogs, leaving the pharmacokinetic liability of the linear YGHR scaffold unaddressed
doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.05.078
[3]
structureipTM 0.933 for the linear form suggests a defined binding pose exists; cyclization that locks in this pose could improve affinity at the preferred receptor while the conformational cost of binding a different receptor increases
openupdated 2026-06-05

Could this molecule, designed as a painkiller, also act on the gut receptor that stops hunger?

If true, people with both chronic pain and obesity could potentially benefit from a single treatment, addressing two conditions that often worsen each other, without requiring the CNS-active drugs that carry addiction or mood risks.

The hypothesis
YGHR or its CCKAR-active component could suppress food intake via the gut-brain CCK-A signaling axis, acting as a satiety-enhancing peptide distinct from its intended analgesic indication, because CCKAR activation by sulfated CCK in the duodenum is a primary physiological trigger for meal termination and YGHR's affinity (~126 nM) is within the range of endogenous CCK fragments.
Why it’s plausible
CCK-A receptor agonism in the peripheral vagal-gut axis is a well-validated mechanism for reducing meal size in rodents and humans. The reported IC50 of ~126 nM for YGHR at CCKAR is in the range where endogenous CCK peptide fragments exert physiological effects. If YGHR acts as a CCKAR agonist (rather than antagonist) at this site, peripheral administration could trigger satiety signaling without significant CNS penetration, which for a 4-mer linear peptide is likely low. This would position YGHR as a potential satiety peptide for obesity, an entirely different indication from its analgesic design purpose.
Why it matters
A peptide with both analgesic and satiety properties could address the overlap between chronic pain and obesity as comorbidities, and could provide a starting scaffold for gut-restricted CCK-A agonists that avoid CNS side effects.
Plausibility.50
Novelty.50
Impact.60
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
paper
CCKAR is listed as the primary annotated target with IC50 = 125.89 nM; CCK-A receptors in the gut-brain axis mediate satiety, a major physiological role distinct from the analgesia focus of the original paper
doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.05.078
[2]
sequenceYGHR is a 4-residue linear peptide with likely low oral bioavailability and CNS penetration, which would restrict action to peripheral CCKAR sites including gut vagal afferents, consistent with a satiety rather than central analgesic mechanism
[3]
sourceReadme notes CCK and melanocortin systems contribute to regulating opioid analgesia and side effects, but CCKAR's satiety role is a parallel physiological function not explored in the original design rationale
details expand to inspect
full evidence table1 metrics
metricvaluetool
IC50 125.89 nM GPCRDB/ChEMBL
structural qualityopenfold3
metricvaluenote
gpde1.318global PDE — lower = better
disorderNaNfraction disordered
3-letter notation
Tyr-Gly-His-Arg
recipeboltz-2 1.0
parametervalue
modelboltz-2 1.0
weights
hardwarenvidia_nim_api
mlx version
python
random seed
msa strategynone
diffusion samples1
runtime
predicted bymlx@peptide
predicted at2026-04-24
citationbibtex
peptidemodel (2026). Tiny research peptide (CHEMBL1172246) (pep-10305, v1). PeptideModel. https://peptidemodel.com/card/pep-10305
@peptide{pep10305,
  sequence = {YGHR},
  target   = {cckar},
  author   = {peptidemodel},
  year     = {2026},
  status   = {bioassayed}
}
related peptides 3 by signal overlap
clinical trials 0 trials · checked 2026-05-22
0
no registered clinical trials as of 2026-05-22; we'll re-check periodically
references 1 papers
discussion no comments
sign in to comment
peptidemodel.com CC-BY-SA-4.0 research only · not for human use