Insights That Move the GPCR Field Forward

Before the islet lit up, the collaboration wasn’t even aimed at imaging. Johannes “JB” Broichhagen trained as a synthetic chemist — someone who trusted carbon–carbon bonds far more than live-cell behavior. Yet curiosity and chemistry pulled him into the world of GLP-1R, pancreatic β-cells, and the biological questions David Hodson had been exploring for years. The call from David — the glowing islet — created a pivot the team couldn’t ignore. A fluorescent peptide probe

Some breakthroughs don’t start with a grant or a roadmap — they start with a question no one expects to matter. For JB, that moment was a cold email from a biologist he’d never met, asking if he could synthesize a molecule “when you’re back in Munich.” That simple ask pulled a young chemist out of the fume hood and into the messy, electrifying world of live-cell biology. What followed — a trip to London, confocal imaging marathons, and a partnership built on trust and c

Most GPCR programs don’t fail because of weak molecules—they fail because biology behaves differently than the assay implied. This week’s feature goes straight to the foundation: how system-level GPCR thinking protects discovery teams from the costly misinterpretations that derail programs. If your work touches GPCR pharmacology, these insights aren’t optional—they’re essential.

When David Hodson’s lab teamed up with chemist Johannes Broichhagen aka JB (then a young researcher newly arrived during a home DIY moment), the goal was bold and elegant: Create a photo-switchable ligand to remotely control GPCR signaling with light. This was the moment when photopharmacology felt like the future. The literature was buzzing. Labs were competing. The idea was simple — turn signaling on or off with a flash of light.