Enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins and gene therapy

The LPA3 Receptor: Regulation and Activation of Signaling Pathways

The lysophosphatidic acid 3 receptor (LPA₃) participates in different physiological actions and in the pathogenesis of many diseases through the activation of different signal pathways. Knowledge of the regulation of the function of the LPA₃ receptor is a crucial element for defining its roles in health and disease. This review describes what is known about the signaling pathways activated in terms of its various actions. Next, we review knowledge on the structure of the LPA₃ receptor, the domains found, and the roles that the latter might play in ligand recognition, signaling, and cellular localization. Currently, there is some information on the action of LPA₃ in different cells and whole organisms, but very little is known about the regulation of its function. Areas in which there is a gap in our knowledge are indicated in order to further stimulate experimental work on this receptor and on other members of the LPA receptor family. We are convinced that knowledge on how this receptor is activated, the signaling pathways employed and how the receptor internalization and desensitization are controlled will help design new therapeutic interventions for treating diseases in which the LPA₃ receptor is implicated.

Arrestin-1 engineering facilitates complex stabilization with native rhodopsin

Arrestin-1 desensitizes the activated and phosphorylated photoreceptor rhodopsin by forming transient rhodopsin−arrestin-1 complexes that eventually decay to opsin, retinal and arrestin-1. Via a multi-dimensional screening setup, we identified and combined arrestin-1 mutants that form lasting complexes with light-activated and phosphorylated rhodopsin in harsh conditions, such as high ionic salt concentration. Two quadruple mutants, D303A + T304A + E341A + F375A and R171A + T304A + E341A + F375A share similar heterologous expression and thermo-stability levels with wild type (WT) arrestin-1, but are able to stabilize complexes with rhodopsin with more than seven times higher half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) values for NaCl compared to the WT arrestin-1 protein. These quadruple mutants are also characterized by higher binding affinities to phosphorylated rhodopsin, light-activated rhodopsin and phosphorylated opsin, as compared with WT arrestin-1. Furthermore, the assessed arrestin-1 mutants are still specifically associating with phosphorylated or light-activated receptor states only, while binding to the inactive ground state of the receptor is not significantly altered. Additionally, we propose a novel functionality for R171 in stabilizing the inactive arrestin-1 conformation as well as the rhodopsin–arrestin-1 complex. The achieved stabilization of the active rhodopsin–arrestin-1 complex might be of great interest for future structure determination, antibody development studies as well as drug-screening efforts targeting G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs).

The Diverse Roles of Arrestin Scaffolds in G Protein-Coupled Receptor Signaling

The visual/β-arrestins, a small family of proteins originally described for their role in the desensitization and intracellular trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), have emerged as key regulators of multiple signaling pathways. Evolutionarily related to a larger group of regulatory scaffolds that share a common arrestin fold, the visual/β-arrestins acquired the capacity to detect and bind activated GPCRs on the plasma membrane, which enables them to control GPCR desensitization, internalization, and intracellular trafficking. By acting as scaffolds that bind key pathway intermediates, visual/β-arrestins both influence the tonic level of pathway activity in cells and, in some cases, serve as ligand-regulated scaffolds for GPCR-mediated signaling. Growing evidence supports the physiologic and pathophysiologic roles of arrestins and underscores their potential as therapeutic targets. Circumventing arrestin-dependent GPCR desensitization may alleviate the problem of tachyphylaxis to drugs that target GPCRs, and find application in the management of chronic pain, asthma, and psychiatric illness. As signaling scaffolds, arrestins are also central regulators of pathways controlling cell growth, migration, and survival, suggesting that manipulating their scaffolding functions may be beneficial in inflammatory diseases, fibrosis, and cancer. In this review we examine the structure-function relationships that enable arrestins to perform their diverse roles, addressing arrestin structure at the molecular level, the relationship between arrestin conformation and function, and sites of interaction between arrestins, GPCRs, and nonreceptor-binding partners. We conclude with a discussion of arrestins as therapeutic targets and the settings in which manipulating arrestin function might be of clinical benefit.

Uncovering missing pieces: duplication and deletion history of arrestins in deuterostomes

BACKGROUND

The cytosolic arrestin proteins mediate desensitization of activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via competition with G proteins for the active phosphorylated receptors. Arrestins in active, including receptor-bound, conformation are also transducers of signaling. Therefore, this protein family is an attractive therapeutic target. The signaling outcome is believed to be a result of structural and sequence-dependent interactions of arrestins with GPCRs and other protein partners. Here we elucidated the detailed evolution of arrestins in deuterostomes.

RESULTS

Identity and number of arrestin paralogs were determined searching deuterostome genomes and gene expression data. In contrast to standard gene prediction methods, our strategy first detects exons situated on different scaffolds and then solves the problem of assigning them to the correct gene. This increases both the completeness and the accuracy of the annotation in comparison to conventional database search strategies applied by the community. The employed strategy enabled us to map in detail the duplication- and deletion history of arrestin paralogs including tandem duplications, pseudogenizations and the formation of retrogenes. The two rounds of whole genome duplications in the vertebrate stem lineage gave rise to four arrestin paralogs. Surprisingly, visual arrestin ARR3 was lost in the mammalian clades Afrotheria and Xenarthra. Duplications in specific clades, on the other hand, must have given rise to new paralogs that show signatures of diversification in functional elements important for receptor binding and phosphate sensing.

CONCLUSION

The current study traces the functional evolution of deuterostome arrestins in unprecedented detail. Based on a precise re-annotation of the exon-intron structure at nucleotide resolution, we infer the gain and loss of paralogs and patterns of conservation, co-variation and selection.

Different conformational dynamics of β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 analyzed by hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry

Arrestins have important roles in G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling including desensitization of GPCRs and G protein-independent signaling. There have been four arrestins identified: arrestin1, arrestin2 (e.g. β-arrestin1), arrestin3 (e.g. β-arrestin2), and arrestin4. β-Arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 are ubiquitously expressed and regulate a broad range of GPCRs, while arrestin1 and arrestin4 are expressed in the visual system. Although the functions of β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 widely overlap, β-arrestin2 has broader receptor selectivity, and a few studies have suggested that β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 have distinct cellular functions. Here, we compared the conformational dynamics of β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 by hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS). We also used the R169E mutant as a pre-activation model system. HDX-MS data revealed that β-strands II through IV were more dynamic in β-arrestin2 in the basal state, while the middle loop was more dynamic in β-arrestin1. With pre-activation, both β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 became more flexible, but broader regions of β-arrestin1 became flexible compared to β-arrestin2. The conformational differences between β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 in both the basal and pre-activated states might determine their different receptor selectivities and different cellular functions.