The molecular acrobatics of arrestin activation

The role of arrestin-1 N-edge in rhodopsin binding

Arrestin-1, in contrast to other subtypes, demonstrates exquisite selectivity for the active phosphorylated form of its cognate receptor, rhodopsin. The loop between β-strands IX and X, termed N-edge because it is located on the distal tip of the N-domain in the folded arrestin molecule, was implicated in the binding of arrestin-1 and -2 to their cognate receptors. We performed alanine scanning and charge reversal mutagenesis of all twelve residues in this element of bovine arrestin-1. The mutants were tested for the binding to phosphorylated and unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin in the context of wild type and "enhanced" in terms of receptor binding C-terminally truncated arrestin-1-(1-378). The data identified two phosphate-binding lysines and seven other residues enhancing arrestin-1 preference for phosphorylated rhodopsin over unphosphorylated. We deleted three of these that are absent in the other mammalian arrestins and found that this insert is generally important for rhodopsin binding, not for enhanced selectivity. Eleven out of nineteen mutations differentially affected the binding of wild type arrestin-1 and its enhanced mutant, suggesting that the prevalent form of the complex of these two arrstin-1 variants with rhodopsin is different.

Arrestin recognizes GPCRs independently of the receptor state

Only two nonvisual arrestins recognize many hundreds of different, intracellularly phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Due to the highly dynamic nature of GPCR•arrestin complexes, the critical determinants of GPCR-arrestin recognition have remained largely unclear. We show here that arrestin2 recruitment to the β1-adrenergic receptor (β1AR) can be induced by an arrestin-activating phosphopeptide that is not covalently linked to the receptor and that the recruitment is independent of the presence and type of the orthosteric receptor ligand. Apparently, the arrestin-receptor interaction is driven by the conformational switch within arrestin induced by the phosphopeptide, whereas the electrostatic attraction toward the receptor phosphosites may only play an auxiliary role. Extensive NMR observations show that in contrast to previous static GPCR•arrestin complex structures, the β1AR complex with the beta-blocker carvedilol and arrestin2 is in a G protein-inactive conformation. The insensitivity to the specific receptor conformation provides a rationale for arrestin's promiscuous recognition of GPCRs and explains the arrestin-biased agonism of carvedilol, which largely blocks G protein binding, while still enabling arrestin engagement.

Unraveling the Structural Basis of Biased Agonism in the β2-Adrenergic Receptor Through Molecular Dynamics Simulations

Biased agonism in G protein-coupled receptors is a phenomenon resulting in the selective activation of distinct intracellular signaling pathways by different agonists, which may exhibit bias toward either Gs, Gi, or arrestin-mediated pathways. This study investigates the structural basis of ligand-induced biased agonism within the context of the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2-AR). Atomistic molecular dynamics simulations were conducted for β2-AR complexes with two stereoisomers of methoxynaphtyl fenoterol (MNFen), that is, compounds eliciting qualitatively different cellular responses. The simulations reveal distinct interaction patterns within the binding cavity, dependent on the stereoisomer. These changes propagate to the intracellular parts of the receptor, triggering various structural responses: the dynamic structure of the intracellular regions of the (R,R)-MNFen complex more closely resembles the "Gs-compatible" and "β-arrestin-compatible" conformation of β2-AR, while both stereoisomers maintain structural responses equidistant from the inactive conformation. These findings are confirmed by independent coarse-grained simulations. In the context of deciphered molecular mechanisms, Trp313 plays a pivotal role, altering its orientation upon interactions with (R,R)-MNFen, along with the Lys305-Asp192 ionic bridge. This effect, accompanied by ligand interactions with residues on TM2, increases the strength of interactions within the extracellular region and the binding cavity, resulting in a slightly more open conformation and a minor (by ca. 0.2 nm) increase in the distance between the TM5-TM7, TM1-TM6, TM6-TM7, and TM1-TM5 pairs. On the other hand, an even slighter decrease in the distance between the TM1-TM4 and TM2-TM4 pairs is observed.

Ligand-Induced Biased Activation of GPCRs: Recent Advances and New Directions from In Silico Approaches

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of membrane proteins engaged in transducing signals from the extracellular environment into the cell. GPCR-biased signaling occurs when two different ligands, sharing the same binding site, induce distinct signaling pathways. This selective signaling offers significant potential for the design of safer and more effective drugs. Although its molecular mechanism remains elusive, big efforts are made to try to explain this mechanism using a wide range of methods. Recent advances in computational techniques and AI technology have introduced a variety of simulations and machine learning tools that facilitate the modeling of GPCR signal transmission and the analysis of ligand-induced biased signaling. In this review, we present the current state of in silico approaches to elucidate the structural mechanism of GPCR-biased signaling. This includes molecular dynamics simulations that capture the main interactions causing the bias. We also highlight the major contributions and impacts of transmembrane domains, loops, and mutations in mediating biased signaling. Moreover, we discuss the impact of machine learning models on bias prediction and diffusion-based generative AI to design biased ligands. Ultimately, this review addresses the future directions for studying the biased signaling problem through AI approaches.

The Role of Individual Residues in the N-Terminus of Arrestin-1 in Rhodopsin Binding

Sequences and three-dimensional structures of the four vertebrate arrestins are very similar, yet in sharp contrast to other subtypes, arrestin-1 demonstrates exquisite selectivity for the active phosphorylated form of its cognate receptor, rhodopsin. The N-terminus participates in receptor binding and serves as the anchor of the C-terminus, the release of which facilitates arrestin transition into a receptor-binding state. We tested the effects of substitutions of fourteen residues in the N-terminus of arrestin-1 on the binding to phosphorylated and unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin of wild-type protein and its enhanced mutant with C-terminal deletion that demonstrates higher binding to both functional forms of rhodopsin. Profound effects of mutations identified lysine-15 as the main phosphate sensor and phenylalanine-13 as the key anchor of the C-terminus. These residues are conserved in all arrestin subtypes. Substitutions of five other residues reduced arrestin-1 selectivity for phosphorylated rhodopsin, indicating that wild-type residues participate in fine-tuning of arrestin-1 binding. Differential effects of numerous substitutions in wild-type and an enhanced mutant arrestin-1 suggest that these two proteins bind rhodopsin differently.

Structural plasticity of arrestin-G protein coupled receptor complexes as a molecular determinant of signaling

G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are critically regulated by arrestins. In this study, high-resolution data was combined with molecular dynamics simulations to infer the determinants of β-arrestin 1 (βarr1)-GPCR coupling, using the V2 vasopressin receptor (V2R) as a model system. The study highlighted the extremely high plasticity of βarr1-GPCR complexes, dependent on receptor type, state, and membrane environment. The multiple functions of receptor-bound βarr1 are likely determined by the interplay of intrinsic flexibility and collective motions both as a bi-domain protein and as a whole. The two major collective motions of the whole βarr1, consisting in rotation parallel to the membrane plane and inclination with respect to the receptor main axis, are distinctly linked to the two intermolecular interfaces involved in tail and core interactions. The intermolecular dynamic coupling between βarr1 and V2R depends on the allosteric effect of the agonist arginine-vasopressin (AVP). In the absence of AVP the dynamic coupling concerns only tail interactions, while in the presence of AVP it involves both tail and core interactions. This suggests that constitutive and agonist-induced arrestin-receptor dynamic coupling is linked to distinct arrestin functions.

Arrestins: A Small Family of Multi-Functional Proteins

The first member of the arrestin family, visual arrestin-1, was discovered in the late 1970s. Later, the other three mammalian subtypes were identified and cloned. The first described function was regulation of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling: arrestins bind active phosphorylated GPCRs, blocking their coupling to G proteins. It was later discovered that receptor-bound and free arrestins interact with numerous proteins, regulating GPCR trafficking and various signaling pathways, including those that determine cell fate. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity; they function by organizing multi-protein complexes and localizing their interaction partners to particular cellular compartments. Today we understand the molecular mechanism of arrestin interactions with GPCRs better than the mechanisms underlying other functions. However, even limited knowledge enabled the construction of signaling-biased arrestin mutants and extraction of biologically active monofunctional peptides from these multifunctional proteins. Manipulation of cellular signaling with arrestin-based tools has research and likely therapeutic potential: re-engineered proteins and their parts can produce effects that conventional small-molecule drugs cannot.

Snapshot of the cannabinoid receptor 1-arrestin complex unravels the biased signaling mechanism

Cannabis activates the cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), which elicits analgesic and emotion regulation benefits, along with adverse effects, via Gi and β-arrestin signaling pathways. However, the lack of understanding of the mechanism of β-arrestin-1 (βarr1) coupling and signaling bias has hindered drug development targeting CB1. Here, we present the high-resolution cryo-electron microscopy structure of CB1-βarr1 complex bound to the synthetic cannabinoid MDMB-Fubinaca (FUB), revealing notable differences in the transducer pocket and ligand-binding site compared with the Gi protein complex. βarr1 occupies a wider transducer pocket promoting substantial outward movement of the TM6 and distinctive twin toggle switch rearrangements, whereas FUB adopts a different pose, inserting more deeply than the Gi-coupled state, suggesting the allosteric correlation between the orthosteric binding pocket and the partner protein site. Taken together, our findings unravel the molecular mechanism of signaling bias toward CB1, facilitating the development of CB1 agonists.

β-arrestin1 is an E3 ubiquitin ligase adaptor for substrate linear polyubiquitination

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling and trafficking are regulated by multiple mechanisms, including posttranslational modifications such as ubiquitination by E3 ubiquitin ligases. E3 ligases have been linked to agonist-stimulated ubiquitination of GPCRs via simultaneous binding to βarrestins. In addition, βarrestins have been suggested to assist E3 ligases for ubiquitination of key effector molecules, yet mechanistic insight is lacking. Here, we developed an in vitro reconstituted system and show that βarrestin1 (βarr1) serves as an adaptor between the effector protein signal-transducing adaptor molecule 1 (STAM1) and the E3 ligase atrophin-interacting protein 4. Via mass spectrometry, we identified seven lysine residues within STAM1 that are ubiquitinated and several types of ubiquitin linkages. We provide evidence that βarr1 facilitates the formation of linear polyubiquitin chains at lysine residue 136 on STAM1. This lysine residue is important for stabilizing the βarr1:STAM1 interaction in cells following GPCR activation. Our study identifies atrophin-interacting protein 4 as only the second E3 ligase known to conjugate linear polyubiquitin chains and a possible role for linear ubiquitin chains in GPCR signaling and trafficking.

Gαq signalling from endosomes: A new conundrum

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family of membrane receptors, and are involved in the transmission of a variety of extracellular stimuli such as hormones, neurotransmitters, light and odorants into intracellular responses. They regulate every aspect of physiology and, for this reason, about one third of all marketed drugs target these receptors. Classically, upon binding to their agonist, GPCRs are thought to activate G-proteins from the plasma membrane and to stop signalling by subsequent desensitisation and endocytosis. However, accumulating evidence indicates that, upon internalisation, some GPCRs can continue to activate G-proteins in endosomes. Importantly, this signalling from endomembranes mediates alternative cellular responses other than signalling at the plasma membrane. Endosomal G-protein signalling and its physiological relevance have been abundantly documented for Gαs - and Gαi -coupled receptors. Recently, some Gαq -coupled receptors have been reported to activate Gαq on endosomes and mediate important cellular processes. However, several questions relative to the series of cellular events required to translate endosomal Gαq activation into cellular responses remain unanswered and constitute a new conundrum. How are these responses in endosomes mediated in the quasi absence of the substrate for the canonical Gαq -activated effector? Is there another effector? Is there another substrate? If so, how does this alternative endosomal effector or substrate produce a downstream signal? This review aims to unravel and discuss these important questions, and proposes possible routes of investigation.

Structural snapshots uncover a key phosphorylation motif in GPCRs driving β-arrestin activation

Agonist-induced GPCR phosphorylation is a key determinant for the binding and activation of β-arrestins (βarrs). However, it is not entirely clear how different GPCRs harboring divergent phosphorylation patterns impart converging active conformation on βarrs leading to broadly conserved functional responses such as desensitization, endocytosis, and signaling. Here, we present multiple cryo-EM structures of activated βarrs in complex with distinct phosphorylation patterns derived from the carboxyl terminus of different GPCRs. These structures help identify a P-X-P-P type phosphorylation motif in GPCRs that interacts with a spatially organized K-K-R-R-K-K sequence in the N-domain of βarrs. Sequence analysis of the human GPCRome reveals the presence of this phosphorylation pattern in a large number of receptors, and its contribution in βarr activation is demonstrated by targeted mutagenesis experiments combined with an intrabody-based conformational sensor. Taken together, our findings provide important structural insights into the ability of distinct GPCRs to activate βarrs through a significantly conserved mechanism.

Mechanisms of Arrestin-Mediated Signaling

Arrestins were first discovered as proteins that selectively bind active phosphorylated GPCRs and suppress (arrest) their G protein-mediated signaling. Nonvisual arrestins are also recognized as signaling proteins regulating a variety of cellular pathways. Arrestins are highly flexible; they can assume many different conformations. In their receptor-bound conformation, arrestins have higher affinity for a subset of binding partners. This explains how receptor activation regulates certain branches of arrestin-dependent signaling via arrestin recruitment to GPCRs. However, free arrestins are also active molecular entities that regulate other signaling pathways and localize signaling proteins to particular subcellular compartments. Recent findings suggest that the two visuals, arrestin-1 and arrestin-4, which are expressed in photoreceptor cells, not only regulate signaling via binding to photopigments but also interact with several nonreceptor partners, critically affecting the health and survival of photoreceptor cells. Detailed in this overview are GPCR-dependent and independent modes of arrestin-mediated regulation of cellular signaling. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

New insights into GPCR coupling and dimerisation from cryo-EM structures

Over the past three years (2020-2022) more structures of GPCRs have been determined than in the previous twenty years (2000-2019), primarily of GPCR complexes that are large enough for structure determination by single-particle cryo-EM. This review will present some structural highlights that have advanced our molecular understanding of promiscuous G protein coupling, how a G protein receptor kinase and β-arrestins couple to GPCRs, and GPCR dimerisation. We will also discuss advances in the use of gene fusions, nanobodies, and Fab fragments to facilitate the structure determination of GPCRs in the inactive state that, on their own, are too small for structure determination by single-particle cryo-EM.

Functional Role of Arrestin-1 Residues Interacting with Unphosphorylated Rhodopsin Elements

Arrestin-1, or visual arrestin, exhibits an exquisite selectivity for light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) over its other functional forms. That selectivity is believed to be mediated by two well-established structural elements in the arrestin-1 molecule, the activation sensor detecting the active conformation of rhodopsin and the phosphorylation sensor responsive to the rhodopsin phosphorylation, which only active phosphorylated rhodopsin can engage simultaneously. However, in the crystal structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex there are arrestin-1 residues located close to rhodopsin, which do not belong to either sensor. Here we tested by site-directed mutagenesis the functional role of these residues in wild type arrestin-1 using a direct binding assay to P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). We found that many mutations either enhanced the binding only to Rh* or increased the binding to Rh* much more than to P-Rh*. The data suggest that the native residues in these positions act as binding suppressors, specifically inhibiting the arrestin-1 binding to Rh* and thereby increasing arrestin-1 selectivity for P-Rh*. This calls for the modification of a widely accepted model of the arrestin-receptor interactions.

Phosphorylation barcodes direct biased chemokine signaling at CXCR3

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-biased agonism, selective activation of certain signaling pathways relative to others, is thought to be directed by differential GPCR phosphorylation "barcodes." At chemokine receptors, endogenous chemokines can act as "biased agonists", which may contribute to the limited success when pharmacologically targeting these receptors. Here, mass spectrometry-based global phosphoproteomics revealed that CXCR3 chemokines generate different phosphorylation barcodes associated with differential transducer activation. Chemokine stimulation resulted in distinct changes throughout the kinome in global phosphoproteomics studies. Mutation of CXCR3 phosphosites altered β-arrestin 2 conformation in cellular assays and was consistent with conformational changes observed in molecular dynamics simulations. T cells expressing phosphorylation-deficient CXCR3 mutants resulted in agonist- and receptor-specific chemotactic profiles. Our results demonstrate that CXCR3 chemokines are non-redundant and act as biased agonists through differential encoding of phosphorylation barcodes, leading to distinct physiological processes.

A boost in learning by removing nuclear phosphodiesterases and enhancing nuclear cAMP signaling

cAMP signaling in the nucleus leads to the expression of immediate early genes in neurons and learning and memory. In this issue of Science Signaling, Martinez et al. found that activation of the β2-adrenergic receptor enhances nuclear cAMP signaling that supports learning and memory in mice by removing the phosphodiesterase PDE4D5 from the nucleus through arrestin3 bound to the internalized receptor.

Phosphorylation barcodes direct biased chemokine signaling at CXCR3

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) biased agonism, the activation of some signaling pathways over others, is thought to largely be due to differential receptor phosphorylation, or "phosphorylation barcodes." At chemokine receptors, ligands act as "biased agonists" with complex signaling profiles, which contributes to the limited success in pharmacologically targeting these receptors. Here, mass spectrometry-based global phosphoproteomics revealed that CXCR3 chemokines generate different phosphorylation barcodes associated with differential transducer activation. Chemokine stimulation resulted in distinct changes throughout the kinome in global phosphoproteomic studies. Mutation of CXCR3 phosphosites altered β-arrestin conformation in cellular assays and was confirmed by molecular dynamics simulations. T cells expressing phosphorylation-deficient CXCR3 mutants resulted in agonist- and receptor-specific chemotactic profiles. Our results demonstrate that CXCR3 chemokines are non-redundant and act as biased agonists through differential encoding of phosphorylation barcodes and lead to distinct physiological processes.

psnGPCRdb: The Structure-network Database of G Protein Coupled Receptors

G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are critical eukaryotic signal transduction gatekeepers and represent the largest protein superfamily in the human proteome, with more than 800 members. They share seven transmembrane helices organized in an up-down bundle architecture. GPCR-mediated signaling pathways have been linked to numerous human diseases, and GPCRs are the targets of approximately 35% of all drugs currently on the market. Structure network analysis, a graph theory-based approach, represents a cutting-edge tool to deeply understand GPCR function, which strongly relies on communication between the extracellular and intracellular poles of their structure. psnGPCRdb stores the structure networks (i.e., linked nodes, hubs, communities and communication pathways) computed on all updated GPCR structures in the Protein Data Bank, in their isolated states or in complex with extracellular and/or intracellular molecules. The structure communication signatures of a sub-family or family of GPCRs as well as of their small-molecule activators or inhibitors are stored as consensus networks. The database stores also all meaningful structure network-based comparisons (i.e., difference networks) of functionally different states (i.e., inactive or active) of a given receptor sub-type, or of consensus networks representative of a receptor sub-type, type, sub-family or family. Single or consensus GPCR networks hold also information on amino acid conservation. The database allows to graphically analyze 3D structure networks together with interactive data-tables. Ligand-centric networks can be analyzed as well. psnGPCRdb is unique and represents a powerful resource to unravel GPCR function with important implications in cell signaling and drug design. psnGPCRdb is freely available at: http://webpsn.hpc.unimo.it/psngpcr.php.

A streamlined protocol for expression and purification of wild-type β-arrestins

The two isoforms of β-arrestins namely β-arrestin 1 and 2 interact with, and regulate a broad repertoire of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). While several protocols have been described in the literature for purification of β-arrestins for biochemical and biophysical studies, some of these protocols involve multiple complicated steps that prolong the process and yield relatively smaller amounts of purified proteins. Here, we describe a simplified and streamlined protocol for expression and purification of β-arrestins using E. coli as an expression host. This protocol is based on N-terminal fusion of GST tag and involves a two-step protocol involving GST-based affinity chromatography and size exclusion chromatography. The protocol described here yields sufficient amounts of high-quality purified β-arrestins suitable for biochemical and structural studies.

The Role of Arrestin-1 Middle Loop in Rhodopsin Binding

Arrestins preferentially bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The middle loop, highly conserved in all arrestin subtypes, is localized in the central crest on the GPCR-binding side. Upon receptor binding, it directly interacts with bound GPCR and demonstrates the largest movement of any arrestin element in the structures of the complexes. Comprehensive mutagenesis of the middle loop of rhodopsin-specific arrestin-1 suggests that it primarily serves as a suppressor of binding to non-preferred forms of the receptor. Several mutations in the middle loop increase the binding to unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin severalfold, which makes them candidates for improving enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins. The data also suggest that enhanced forms of arrestin do not bind GPCRs exactly like the wild-type protein. Thus, the structures of the arrestin-receptor complexes, in all of which different enhanced arrestin mutants and reengineered receptors were used, must be interpreted with caution.

Allosteric modulation of GPCR-induced β-arrestin trafficking and signaling by a synthetic intrabody

Agonist-induced phosphorylation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a primary determinant of β-arrestin (βarr) recruitment and trafficking. For several GPCRs such as the vasopressin receptor subtype 2 (V2R), agonist-stimulation first drives the translocation of βarrs to the plasma membrane, followed by endosomal trafficking, which is generally considered to be orchestrated by multiple phosphorylation sites. We have previously shown that mutation of a single phosphorylation site in the V2R (i.e., V2RT360A) results in near-complete loss of βarr translocation to endosomes despite robust recruitment to the plasma membrane, and compromised ERK1/2 activation. Here, we discover that a synthetic intrabody (Ib30), which selectively recognizes activated βarr1, efficiently rescues the endosomal trafficking of βarr1 and ERK1/2 activation for V2RT360A. Molecular dynamics simulations reveal that Ib30 enriches active-like βarr1 conformation with respect to the inter-domain rotation, and cellular assays demonstrate that it also enhances βarr1-β2-adaptin interaction. Our data provide an experimental framework to positively modulate the receptor-transducer-effector axis for GPCRs using intrabodies, which can be potentially integrated in the paradigm of GPCR-targeted drug discovery.

Structural basis of GPCR coupling to distinct signal transducers: implications for biased signaling

Three classes of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) partners - G proteins, GPCR kinases, and arrestins - preferentially bind active GPCRs. Our analysis suggests that the structures of GPCRs bound to these interaction partners available today do not reveal a clear conformational basis for signaling bias, which would have enabled the rational design of biased GRCR ligands. In view of this, three possibilities are conceivable: (i) there are no generalizable GPCR conformations conducive to binding a particular type of partner; (ii) subtle differences in the orientation of individual residues and/or their interactions not easily detectable in the receptor-transducer structures determine partner preference; or (iii) the dynamics of GPCR binding to different types of partners rather than the structures of the final complexes might underlie transducer bias.

Emerging structural insights into GPCR-β-arrestin interaction and functional outcomes

Agonist-induced recruitment of β-arrestins (βarrs) to G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) plays a central role in regulating the spatio-temporal aspects of GPCR signaling. Several recent studies have provided novel structural and functional insights into our understanding of GPCR-βarr interaction, subsequent βarr activation and resulting functional outcomes. In this review, we discuss these recent advances with a particular emphasis on recognition of receptor-bound phosphates by βarrs, the emerging concept of spatial positioning of key phosphorylation sites, the conformational transition in βarrs during partial to full-engagement, and structural differences driving functional outcomes of βarr isoforms. We also highlight the key directions that require further investigation going forward to fully understand the structural mechanisms driving βarr activation and functional responses.

An intrabody sensor to monitor conformational activation of β-arrestins

Agonist-induced interaction of β-arrestins with GPCRs is critically involved in downstream signaling and regulation. This interaction is associated with activation and major conformational changes in β-arrestins. Although there are some assays available to monitor the conformational changes in β-arrestins in cellular context, additional sensors to report β-arrestin activation, preferably with high-throughput capability, are likely to be useful considering the structural and functional diversity in GPCR-β-arrestin complexes. We have recently developed an intrabody-based sensor as an integrated approach to monitor GPCR-β-arrestin interaction and conformational change, and generated a luminescence-based reporter using NanoBiT complementation technology. This sensor is derived from a synthetic antibody fragment referred to as Fab30 that selectively recognizes activated and receptor-bound conformation of β-arrestin1. Here, we present a step-by-step protocol to employ this intrabody sensor to measure the interaction and conformational activation of β-arrestin1 upon agonist-stimulation of a prototypical GPCR, the complement C5a receptor (C5aR1). This protocol is potentially applicable to other GPCRs and may also be leveraged to deduce qualitative differences in β-arrestin1 conformations induced by different ligands and receptor mutants.

A narrative synthesis of research with 5-MeO-DMT

BACKGROUND

5-Methoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine (5-MeO-DMT) is a naturally occurring, short-acting psychedelic tryptamine, produced by a variety of plant and animal species. Plants containing 5-MeO-DMT have been used throughout history for ritual and spiritual purposes. The aim of this article is to review the available literature about 5-MeO-DMT and inform subsequent clinical development.

METHODS

We searched PubMed database for articles about 5-MeO-DMT. Search results were cross-checked against earlier reviews and reference lists were hand searched. Findings were synthesised using a narrative synthesis approach. This review covers the pharmacology, chemistry and metabolism of 5-MeO-DMT, as well epidemiological studies, and reported adverse and beneficial effects.

RESULTS

5-MeO-DMT is serotonergic agonist, with highest affinity for 5-HT1A receptors. It was studied in a variety of animal models, but clinical studies with humans are lacking. Epidemiological studies indicate that, like other psychedelics, 5-MeO-DMT induces profound alterations in consciousness (including mystical experiences), with potential beneficial long-term effects on mental health and well-being.

CONCLUSION

5-MeO-DMT is a potentially useful addition to the psychedelic pharmacopoeia because of its short duration of action, relative lack of visual effects and putatively higher rates of ego-dissolution and mystical experiences. We conclude that further clinical exploration is warranted, using similar precautions as with other classic psychedelics.

Structural Basis of Arrestin Selectivity for Active Phosphorylated G Protein-Coupled Receptors

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that bind G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binds to active phosphorylated GPCRs with higher affinity than to all other functional forms of the receptor, including inactive phosphorylated and active unphosphorylated. The selectivity of arrestins suggests that they must have two sensors, which detect receptor-attached phosphates and the active receptor conformation independently. Simultaneous engagement of both sensors enables arrestin transition into a high-affinity receptor-binding state. This transition involves a global conformational rearrangement that brings additional elements of the arrestin molecule, including the middle loop, in contact with a GPCR, thereby stabilizing the complex. Here, we review structural and mutagenesis data that identify these two sensors and additional receptor-binding elements within the arrestin molecule. While most data were obtained with the arrestin-1-rhodopsin pair, the evidence suggests that all arrestins use similar mechanisms to achieve preferential binding to active phosphorylated GPCRs.

Agonist dependency of the second phase access of β-arrestin 2 to the heteromeric µ-V1b receptor

During the development of analgesic tolerance to morphine, the V1b vasopressin receptor has been proposed to bind to β-arrestin 2 and the µ-opioid receptor to enable their interaction. However, direct evidence of such a high-order complex is lacking. Using bioluminescent resonance energy transfer between a split Nanoluciferase and the Venus fluorescent protein, the NanoBit-NanoBRET system, we found that β-arrestin 2 closely located near the heteromer µ-V1b receptor in the absence of an agonist and moved closer to the receptor carboxyl-termini upon agonist stimulation. An additive effect of the two agonists for opioid and vasopressin receptors was detected on the NanoBRET between the µ-V1b heteromer and β-arrestin 2. To increase the agonist response of NanoBRET, the ratio of the donor luminophore to the acceptor fluorophore was decreased to the detection limit of luminescence. In the first phase of access, β-arrestin 2 was likely to bind to the unstimulated V1b receptor in both its phosphorylated and unphosphorylated forms. In contrast, the second-phase access of β-arrestin 2 was agonist dependent, indicating a possible pharmacological intervention strategy. Therefore, our efficient method should be useful for evaluating chemicals that directly target the vasopressin binding site in the µ-V1b heteromer to reduce the second-phase access of β-arrestin 2 and thereby to alleviate tolerance to morphine analgesia.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin

The finger loop in the central crest of the receptor-binding site of arrestins engages the cavity between the transmembrane helices of activated G-protein-coupled receptors. Therefore, it was hypothesized to serve as the sensor that detects the activation state of the receptor. We performed comprehensive mutagenesis of the finger loop in bovine visual arrestin-1, generated mutant radiolabeled proteins by cell-free translation, and determined the effects of mutations on the in vitro binding of arrestin-1 to purified phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. This interaction is driven by two factors, rhodopsin activation and rhodopsin-attached phosphates. Therefore, the binding of arrestin-1 to light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin is low. To evaluate the role of the finger loop specifically in the recognition of the active receptor conformation, we tested the effects of these mutations in the context of truncated arrestin-1 that demonstrates much higher binding to unphosphorylated activated and phosphorylated inactive rhodopsin. The majority of finger loop residues proved important for arrestin-1 binding to light-activated rhodopsin, with six mutations affecting the binding exclusively to this form. Thus, the finger loop is the key element of arrestin-1 activation sensor. The data also suggest that arrestin-1 and its enhanced mutant bind various functional forms of rhodopsin differently.

β-Arrestin 2 (ARRB2) Polymorphism is Associated With Adverse Consequences of Chronic Heroin Use

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

β-arrestin 2 is an intracellular protein recruited during the activation of G-protein-coupled receptors. In preclinical studies, β-arrestin 2 has been implicated in µ-opioid receptor desensitization and internalization and the development of opioid tolerance and dependence. The present study investigated relationships between variants in the gene encoding β-arrestin 2 (ARRB2) and clinically relevant phenotypes among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). We hypothesized that ARRB2 variants would be associated with the negative effects of long-term heroin use.

METHODS

Chronic heroin users (N = 201; n = 103 African American; n = 98 Caucasian) were genotyped for ARRB2 r1045280 (synonymous, also affecting binding motif of transcription factor GTF2IRD1), rs2036657 (3'UTR) and rs3786047 (intron) and assessed for the past-month frequency of use, injection use, and lifetime duration of heroin use, number of heroin quit-attempts, and heroin use-related consequences.

RESULTS

Lifetime heroin-use consequences (especially occupational and health-related) were significantly lower for African American ARRB2 r1045280 C-allele carriers compared with the TT genotype. There was no significant genotype difference in the Caucasian group. ARRB2 rs2036657 was in strong linkage disequilibrium with rs1045280.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

These results, consistent with extant data, illustrate a role for ancestry-dependent allelic variation in ARRB2 r1045280 on heroin-use consequences. The ARRB2 r1045280 C-allele played a protective role in African-descent participants.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

These first-in-human findings, which should be replicated, provide support for mechanistic investigations of ARRB2 and related intracellular signaling molecules in OUD etiology, treatment, and relapse prevention. (Am J Addict 2021;00:00-00).

An Eight Amino Acid Segment Controls Oligomerization and Preferred Conformation of the two Non-visual Arrestins

G protein coupled receptors signal through G proteins or arrestins. A long-standing mystery in the field is why vertebrates have two non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3. These isoforms are ~75% identical and 85% similar; each binds numerous receptors, and appear to have many redundant functions, as demonstrated by studies of knockout mice. We previously showed that arrestin-3 can be activated by inositol-hexakisphosphate (IP6). IP6 interacts with the receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3, induces arrestin-3 oligomerization, and this oligomer stabilizes the active conformation of arrestin-3. Here, we compared the impact of IP6 on oligomerization and conformational equilibrium of the highly homologous arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 and found that these two isoforms are regulated differently. In the presence of IP6, arrestin-2 forms "infinite" chains, where each promoter remains in the basal conformation. In contrast, full length and truncated arrestin-3 form trimers and higher-order oligomers in the presence of IP6; we showed previously that trimeric state induces arrestin-3 activation (Chen et al., 2017). Thus, in response to IP6, the two non-visual arrestins oligomerize in different ways in distinct conformations. We identified an insertion of eight residues that is conserved across arrestin-2 homologs, but absent in arrestin-3 that likely accounts for the differences in the IP6 effect. Because IP6 is ubiquitously present in cells, this suggests physiological consequences, including differences in arrestin-2/3 trafficking and JNK3 activation. The functional differences between two non-visual arrestins are in part determined by distinct modes of their oligomerization. The mode of oligomerization might regulate the function of other signaling proteins.

Receptor-Arrestin Interactions: The GPCR Perspective

Arrestins are a small family of four proteins in most vertebrates that bind hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binding to a GPCR has at least three functions: precluding further receptor coupling to G proteins, facilitating receptor internalization, and initiating distinct arrestin-mediated signaling. The molecular mechanism of arrestin-GPCR interactions has been extensively studied and discussed from the "arrestin perspective", focusing on the roles of arrestin elements in receptor binding. Here, we discuss this phenomenon from the "receptor perspective", focusing on the receptor elements involved in arrestin binding and emphasizing existing gaps in our knowledge that need to be filled. It is vitally important to understand the role of receptor elements in arrestin activation and how the interaction of each of these elements with arrestin contributes to the latter's transition to the high-affinity binding state. A more precise knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of arrestin activation is needed to enable the construction of arrestin mutants with desired functional characteristics.

Lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins does not serve as phosphate sensor

Arrestins demonstrate strong preference for phosphorylated over unphosphorylated receptors, but how arrestins "sense" receptor phosphorylation is unclear. A conserved lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins directly binds the phosphate in crystal structures of activated arrestin-1, -2, and -3. The lariat loop supplies two negative charges to the central polar core, which must be disrupted for arrestin activation and high-affinity receptor binding. Therefore, we hypothesized that receptor-attached phosphates pull the lariat loop via this lysine, thus removing the negative charges and destabilizing the polar core. We tested the role of this lysine by introducing charge elimination (Lys->Ala) and reversal (Lys->Glu) mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3. These mutations in arrestin-1 only moderately reduced phospho-rhodopsin binding and had no detectable effect on arrestin-2 and -3 binding to cognate non-visual receptors in cells. The mutations of Lys300 in bovine and homologous Lys301 in mouse arrestin-1 on the background of pre-activated mutants had variable effects on the binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin, while affecting the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin to a greater extent. Thus, conserved lysine in the lariat loop participates in receptor binding, but does not play a critical role in phosphate-induced arrestin activation.

Impact of T161, Y318 and S363 alanine mutations on regulation of the human delta-opioid receptor (hDOPr) induced by peptidic and alkaloid agonists

Previously, we showed a differential regulation of the human delta-opioid receptor (hDOPr) by etorphine and [D-Pen², D-Pen⁵] enkephalin (DPDPE). To understand the molecular basis of such differences, we introduced 3 alanine mutations at the residues T161. Y318 and S363. Both wild type (WT) and hDOPr mutants were expressed in HEK cells containing endogenous arrestins or CFP-tagged arrestin 3, then desensitization, internalization, recycling and phosphorylation were studied. In a context of endogenous arrestin expression, a major difference in DOPr desensitization was observed between agonists that was modified with the T161A mutation upon etorphine and with the S363A substitution upon DPDPE exposure. While both agonists induced a major receptor internalization, T161A and S363A impaired DOPr sequestration only for etorphine. However, similar level of S363 phosphorylation was measured between agonists. When CFP-tagged arrestin 3 was over-expressed, a similar profile of desensitization was measured for both agonists. In this context, all the 3 alanine mutations decreased etorphine-induced receptor desensitization. Using FRET, we showed similar interactions between WT hDOPr and arrestin 3 under DPDPE and etorphine stimulation which were delayed by both the Y318A and the S363A substitutions for etorphine. Finally, hDOPr recycling was qualitatively evaluated by microscopy and showed neither arrestin 3/hDOPr colocalization nor major impact of alanine mutations except for the S363A which impaired internalization and recycling for etorphine. The T161, Y318 and S363 residues of hDOPr could underlie the differential regulation promoted by DPDPE and etorphine.

Biased allosteric modulation of formyl peptide receptor 2 leads to distinct receptor conformational states for pro- and anti-inflammatory signaling

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Formyl peptide receptor 2 (FPR2) is a Class A G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that interacts with multiple ligands and transduces both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory signals. These ligands include weak agonists and modulators that are produced during inflammation. The present study investigates how prolonged exposure to FPR2 modulators influence receptor signaling.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Fluorescent biosensors of FPR2 were constructed based on single-molecule fluorescent resonance energy transfer (FRET) and used for measurement of ligand-induced receptor conformational changes. These changes were combined with FPR2-mediated signaling events and used as parameters for the conformational states of FPR2. Ternary complex models were developed to interpret ligand concentration-dependent changes in FPR2 conformational states.

KEY RESULTS

Incubation with Ac2-26, an anti-inflammatory ligand of FPR2, decreased FRET intensity at picomolar concentrations. In comparison, WKYMVm (W-pep) and Aβ42, both proinflammatory agonists of FPR2, increased FRET intensity. Preincubation with Ac2-26 at 10 pM diminished W-pep-induced Ca2+ flux but potentiated W-pep-stimulated β-arrestin2 membrane translocation and p38 MAPK phosphorylation. The opposite effects were observed with 10 pM of Aβ42. Neither Ac2-26 nor Aβ42 competed for W-pep binding at the picomolar concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The results support the presence of two allosteric binding sites on FPR2, each for Ac2-26 and Aβ42, with high and low affinities. Sequential binding of the two allosteric ligands at increasing concentrations induce different conformational changes in FPR2, providing a novel mechanism by which biased allosteric modulators alter receptor conformations and generate pro- and anti-inflammatory signals.

A non-GPCR-binding partner interacts with a novel surface on β-arrestin1 to mediate GPCR signaling

The multifaceted adaptor protein β-arr1 (β-arrestin1) promotes activation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) by the chemokine receptor CXCR4, facilitating chemotaxis. This function of β-arr1 requires the assistance of the adaptor protein STAM1 (signal-transducing adaptor molecule 1) because disruption of the interaction between STAM1 and β-arr1 reduces CXCR4-mediated activation of FAK and chemotaxis. To begin to understand the mechanism by which β-arr1 together with STAM1 activates FAK, we used site-directed spin-labeling EPR spectroscopy-based studies coupled with bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based cellular studies to show that STAM1 is recruited to activated β-arr1 by binding to a novel surface on β-arr1 at the base of the finger loop, at a site that is distinct from the receptor-binding site. Expression of a STAM1-deficient binding β-arr1 mutant that is still able to bind to CXCR4 significantly reduced CXCL12-induced activation of FAK but had no impact on ERK-1/2 activation. We provide evidence of a novel surface at the base of the finger loop that dictates non-GPCR interactions specifying β-arrestin-dependent signaling by a GPCR. This surface might represent a previously unidentified switch region that engages with effector molecules to drive β-arrestin signaling.

webPSN v2.0: a webserver to infer fingerprints of structural communication in biomacromolecules

A mixed Protein Structure Network (PSN) and Elastic Network Model-Normal Mode Analysis (ENM-NMA)-based strategy (i.e. PSN-ENM) was developed to investigate structural communication in bio-macromolecules. Protein Structure Graphs (PSGs) are computed on a single structure, whereas information on system dynamics is supplied by ENM-NMA. The approach was implemented in a webserver (webPSN), which was significantly updated herein. The webserver now handles both proteins and nucleic acids and relies on an internal upgradable database of network parameters for ions and small molecules in all PDB structures. Apart from the radical restyle of the server and some changes in the calculation setup, other major novelties concern the possibility to: a) compute the differences in nodes, links, and communication pathways between two structures (i.e. network difference) and b) infer links, hubs, communities, and metapaths from consensus networks computed on a number of structures. These new features are useful to identify commonalties and differences between two different functional states of the same system or structural-communication signatures in homologous or analogous systems. The output analysis relies on 3D-representations, interactive tables and graphs, also available for download. Speed and accuracy make this server suitable to comparatively investigate structural communication in large sets of bio-macromolecular systems. URL: http://webpsn.hpc.unimore.it.

Distinct phosphorylation sites in a prototypical GPCR differently orchestrate β-arrestin interaction, trafficking, and signaling

Agonist-induced phosphorylation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a key determinant for their interaction with β-arrestins (βarrs) and subsequent functional responses. Therefore, it is important to decipher the contribution and interplay of different receptor phosphorylation sites in governing βarr interaction and functional outcomes. Here, we find that several phosphorylation sites in the human vasopressin receptor (V₂R), positioned either individually or in clusters, differentially contribute to βarr recruitment, trafficking, and ERK1/2 activation. Even a single phosphorylation site in V₂R, suitably positioned to cross-talk with a key residue in βarrs, has a decisive contribution in βarr recruitment, and its mutation results in strong G-protein bias. Molecular dynamics simulation provides mechanistic insights into the pivotal role of this key phosphorylation site in governing the stability of βarr interaction and regulating the interdomain rotation in βarrs. Our findings uncover important structural aspects to better understand the framework of GPCR-βarr interaction and biased signaling.

Key phosphorylation sites in GPCRs orchestrate the contribution of β-Arrestin 1 in ERK1/2 activation

β-arrestins (βarrs) are key regulators of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling and trafficking, and their knockdown typically leads to a decrease in agonist-induced ERK1/2 MAP kinase activation. Interestingly, for some GPCRs, knockdown of βarr1 augments agonist-induced ERK1/2 phosphorylation although a mechanistic basis for this intriguing phenomenon is unclear. Here, we use selected GPCRs to explore a possible correlation between the spatial positioning of receptor phosphorylation sites and the contribution of βarr1 in ERK1/2 activation. We discover that engineering a spatially positioned double-phosphorylation-site cluster in the bradykinin receptor (B₂ R), analogous to that present in the vasopressin receptor (V₂ R), reverses the contribution of βarr1 in ERK1/2 activation from inhibitory to promotive. An intrabody sensor suggests a conformational mechanism for this role reversal of βarr1, and molecular dynamics simulation reveals a bifurcated salt bridge between this double-phosphorylation site cluster and Lys²⁹⁴ in the lariat loop of βarr1, which directs the orientation of the lariat loop. Our findings provide novel insights into the opposite roles of βarr1 in ERK1/2 activation for different GPCRs with a direct relevance to biased agonism and novel therapeutics.

Biased GPCR signaling: Possible mechanisms and inherent limitations

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are targeted by about a third of clinically used drugs. Many GPCRs couple to more than one type of heterotrimeric G proteins, become phosphorylated by any of several different GRKs, and then bind one or more types of arrestin. Thus, classical therapeutically active drugs simultaneously initiate several branches of signaling, some of which are beneficial, whereas others result in unwanted on-target side effects. The development of novel compounds to selectively channel the signaling into the desired direction has the potential to become a breakthrough in health care. However, there are natural and technological hurdles that must be overcome. The fact that most GPCRs are subject to homologous desensitization, where the active receptor couples to G proteins, is phosphorylated by GRKs, and then binds arrestins, suggest that in most cases the GPCR conformations that facilitate their interactions with these three classes of binding partners significantly overlap. Thus, while partner-specific conformations might exist, they are likely low-probability states. GPCRs are inherently flexible, which suggests that complete bias is highly unlikely to be feasible: in the conformational ensemble induced by any ligand, there would be some conformations facilitating receptor coupling to unwanted partners. Things are further complicated by the fact that virtually every cell expresses numerous G proteins, several GRK subtypes, and two non-visual arrestins with distinct signaling capabilities. Finally, novel screening methods for measuring ligand bias must be devised, as the existing methods are not specific for one particular branch of signaling.

Conformational Sensors and Domain Swapping Reveal Structural and Functional Differences between β-Arrestin Isoforms

Desensitization, signaling, and trafficking of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are critically regulated by multifunctional adaptor proteins, β-arrestins (βarrs). The two isoforms of βarrs (βarr1 and 2) share a high degree of sequence and structural similarity; still, however, they often mediate distinct functional outcomes in the context of GPCR signaling and regulation. A mechanistic basis for such a functional divergence of βarr isoforms is still lacking. By using a set of complementary approaches, including antibody-fragment-based conformational sensors, we discover structural differences between βarr1 and 2 upon their interaction with activated and phosphorylated receptors. Interestingly, domain-swapped chimeras of βarrs display robust complementation in functional assays, thereby linking the structural differences between receptor-bound βarr1 and 2 with their divergent functional outcomes. Our findings reveal important insights into the ability of βarr isoforms to drive distinct functional outcomes and underscore the importance of integrating this aspect in the current framework of biased agonism.

Crystal Structure of β-Arrestin 2 in Complex with CXCR7 Phosphopeptide

β-Arrestins (βarrs) critically regulate G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling and trafficking. βarrs have two isoforms, βarr1 and βarr2. Receptor phosphorylation is a key determinant for the binding of βarrs, and understanding the intricate details of receptor-βarr interaction is the next frontier in GPCR structural biology. The high-resolution structure of active βarr1 in complex with a phosphopeptide derived from GPCR has been revealed, but that of βarr2 remains elusive. Here, we present a 2.3-Å crystal structure of βarr2 in complex with a phosphopeptide (C7pp) derived from the carboxyl terminus of CXCR7. The structural analysis of C7pp-bound βarr2 reveals key differences from the previously determined active conformation of βarr1. One of the key differences is that C7pp-bound βarr2 shows a relatively small inter-domain rotation. Antibody-fragment-based conformational sensor and hydrogen/deuterium exchange experiments further corroborated the structural features of βarr2 and suggested that βarr2 adopts a range of inter-domain rotations.

Molecular basis of β-arrestin coupling to formoterol-bound β1-adrenoceptor

The β₁-adrenoceptor (β₁AR) is a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that couples¹ to the heterotrimeric G protein G_s. G-protein-mediated signalling is terminated by phosphorylation of the C terminus of the receptor by GPCR kinases (GRKs) and by coupling of β-arrestin 1 (βarr1, also known as arrestin 2), which displaces G_s and induces signalling through the MAP kinase pathway². The ability of synthetic agonists to induce signalling preferentially through either G proteins or arrestins-known as biased agonism³-is important in drug development, because the therapeutic effect may arise from only one signalling cascade, whereas the other pathway may mediate undesirable side effects⁴. To understand the molecular basis for arrestin coupling, here we determined the cryo-electron microscopy structure of the β₁AR-βarr1 complex in lipid nanodiscs bound to the biased agonist formoterol⁵, and the crystal structure of formoterol-bound β₁AR coupled to the G-protein-mimetic nanobody⁶ Nb80. βarr1 couples to β₁AR in a manner distinct to that⁷ of G_s coupling to β₂AR-the finger loop of βarr1 occupies a narrower cleft on the intracellular surface, and is closer to transmembrane helix H7 of the receptor when compared with the C-terminal α5 helix of G_s. The conformation of the finger loop in βarr1 is different from that adopted by the finger loop of visual arrestin when it couples to rhodopsin⁸. β₁AR coupled to βarr1 shows considerable differences in structure compared with β₁AR coupled to Nb80, including an inward movement of extracellular loop 3 and the cytoplasmic ends of H5 and H6. We observe weakened interactions between formoterol and two serine residues in H5 at the orthosteric binding site of β₁AR, and find that formoterol has a lower affinity for the β₁AR-βarr1 complex than for the β₁AR-G_s complex. The structural differences between these complexes of β₁AR provide a foundation for the design of small molecules that could bias signalling in the β-adrenoceptors.

Genetically encoded intrabody sensors report the interaction and trafficking of β-arrestin 1 upon activation of G-protein-coupled receptors

Agonist stimulation of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) typically leads to phosphorylation of GPCRs and binding to multifunctional proteins called β-arrestins (βarrs). The GPCR-βarr interaction critically contributes to GPCR desensitization, endocytosis, and downstream signaling, and GPCR-βarr complex formation can be used as a generic readout of GPCR and βarr activation. Although several methods are currently available to monitor GPCR-βarr interactions, additional sensors to visualize them may expand the toolbox and complement existing methods. We have previously described antibody fragments (FABs) that recognize activated βarr1 upon its interaction with the vasopressin V2 receptor C-terminal phosphopeptide (V2Rpp). Here, we demonstrate that these FABs efficiently report the formation of a GPCR-βarr1 complex for a broad set of chimeric GPCRs harboring the V2R C terminus. We adapted these FABs to an intrabody format by converting them to single-chain variable fragments and used them to monitor the localization and trafficking of βarr1 in live cells. We observed that upon agonist simulation of cells expressing chimeric GPCRs, these intrabodies first translocate to the cell surface, followed by trafficking into intracellular vesicles. The translocation pattern of intrabodies mirrored that of βarr1, and the intrabodies co-localized with βarr1 at the cell surface and in intracellular vesicles. Interestingly, we discovered that intrabody sensors can also report βarr1 recruitment and trafficking for several unmodified GPCRs. Our characterization of intrabody sensors for βarr1 recruitment and trafficking expands currently available approaches to visualize GPCR-βarr1 binding, which may help decipher additional aspects of GPCR signaling and regulation.

Dynamics and structural communication in the ternary complex of fully phosphorylated V2 vasopressin receptor, vasopressin, and β-arrestin 1

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are critically regulated by arrestins, which not only desensitize G-protein signaling but also initiate a G protein-independent wave of signaling. The information from structure determination was herein exploited to build a structural model of the ternary complex, comprising fully phosphorylated V2 vasopressin receptor (V2R), the agonist arginine vasopressin (AVP), and β-arrestin 1 (β-arr1). Molecular simulations served to explore dynamics and structural communication in the ternary complex. Flexibility and mechanical profiles reflect fold of V2R and β-arr1. Highly conserved amino acids tend to behave as hubs in the structure network and contribute the most to the mechanical rigidity of V2R seven-helix bundle and of β-arr1. Two structurally and dynamically distinct receptor-arrestin interfaces assist the twist of the N- and C-terminal domains (ND and CD, respectively) of β-arr1 with respect to each other, which is linked to arrestin activation. While motion of the ND is essentially assisted by the fully phosphorylated C-tail of V2R (V2RCt), that of CD is assisted by the second and third intracellular loops and the cytosolic extensions of helices 5 and 6. In the presence of the receptor, the β-arr1 inter-domain twist angle correlates with the modes describing the essential subspace of the ternary complex. β-arr1 motions are also influenced by the anchoring to the membrane of the C-edge-loops in the β-arr1-CD. Overall fluctuations reveal a coupling between motions of the agonist binding site and of β-arr1-ND, which are in allosteric communication between each other. Mechanical rigidity points, often acting as hubs in the structure network and distributed along the main axis of the receptor helix bundle, contribute to establish a preferential communication pathway between agonist ligand and the ND of arrestin. Such communication, mediated by highly conserved amino acids, involves also the first amino acid in the arrestin C-tail, which is highly dynamic and is involved in clathrin-mediated GPCR internalization.

Site-directed labeling of β-arrestin with monobromobimane for measuring their interaction with G protein-coupled receptors

β-arrestins (βarrs) are multifunctional proteins that interact with activated and phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) to regulate their signaling and trafficking. Understanding the intricate details of GPCR-βarr interaction continues to be a key research area in the field of GPCR biology. Bimane fluorescence spectroscopy has been one of the key approaches among a broad range of methods employed to study GPCR-βarr interaction using purified and reconstituted system. Here, we present a step-by-step protocol for labeling βarrs with monobromobimane (mBBr) in a site-directed fashion for measuring their interaction with GPCRs and the resulting conformational changes. This simple protocol can be directly applied to other protein-protein interaction modules as well for measuring interactions and conformational changes in reconstituted systems in vitro.

β-arrestin2 alleviates L-dopa-induced dyskinesia via lower D1R activity in Parkinson's rats

The cause of the L-dopa–induced dyskinesia (LID) has been ascribed to G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) supersensitivity and uncontrolled downstream signaling. It is now supposed that β-arrestin2 affects GPCR signaling through its ability to scaffold various intracellular molecules. We used the rAAV (recombinant adeno-associated virus) vectors to overexpress and ablation of β-arrestin2. L-dopa-induced changes in expression of signaling molecules and other proteins in the striatum were examined by western blot and immunohistochemically. Our data demonstrated that via AAV-mediated overexpression of β-arrestin2 attenuated LID performance in 6-OHDA-lesioned rodent models. β-arrestin2 suppressed LID behavior without compromising the antiparkinsonian effects of L-dopa. Moreover, we also found that the anti-dyskinetic effect of β-arrestin2 was reversed by SKF38393, a D1R agonist. On the contrary, the rat knockdown study demonstrated that reduced availability of β-arrestin2 deteriorated LID performance, which was counteracted by SCH23390, a D1R antagonist. These data not only demonstrate a central role for β-arrestin2/GPCR signaling in LID, but also show the D1R signal pathway changes occurring in response to dopaminergic denervation and pulsatile administration of L-dopa.

Targeting arrestin interactions with its partners for therapeutic purposes

Most vertebrates express four arrestin subtypes: two visual ones in photoreceptor cells and two non-visuals expressed ubiquitously. The latter two interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors, certain receptors of other types, and numerous non-receptor partners. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity and work by interacting with other proteins, often assembling multi-protein signaling complexes. Arrestin binding to every partner affects cell signaling, including pathways regulating cell survival, proliferation, and death. Thus, targeting individual arrestin interactions has therapeutic potential. This requires precise identification of protein-protein interaction sites of both participants and the choice of the side of each interaction which would be most advantageous to target. The interfaces involved in each interaction can be disrupted by small molecule therapeutics, as well as by carefully selected peptides of the other partner that do not participate in the interactions that should not be targeted.