Structures in G proteins important for subtype selective receptor binding and subsequent activation

Bayesian network models identify cooperative GPCR:G protein interactions that contribute to G protein coupling

Cooperative interactions in protein-protein interfaces demonstrate the interdependency or the linked network-like behavior and their effect on the coupling of proteins. Cooperative interactions also could cause ripple or allosteric effects at a distance in protein-protein interfaces. Although they are critically important in protein-protein interfaces, it is challenging to determine which amino acid pair interactions are cooperative. In this work, we have used Bayesian network modeling, an interpretable machine learning method, combined with molecular dynamics trajectories to identify the residue pairs that show high cooperativity and their allosteric effect in the interface of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) complexes with Gα subunits. Our results reveal six GPCR:Gα contacts that are common to the different Gα subtypes and show strong cooperativity in the formation of interface. Both the C terminus helix5 and the core of the G protein are codependent entities and play an important role in GPCR coupling. We show that a promiscuous GPCR coupling to different Gα subtypes, makes all the GPCR:Gα contacts that are specific to each Gα subtype (Gαs, Gαi, and Gαq). This work underscores the potential of data-driven Bayesian network modeling in elucidating the intricate dependencies and selectivity determinants in GPCR:G protein complexes, offering valuable insights into the dynamic nature of these essential cellular signaling components.

Identification of Gα12-vs-Gα13-coupling determinants and development of a Gα12/13-coupled designer GPCR

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) transduce diverse signals into the cell by coupling to one or several Gα subtypes. Of the 16 Gα subtypes in human cells, Gα12 and Gα13 belong to the G12 subfamily and are reported to be functionally different. Notably, certain GPCRs display selective coupling to either Gα12 or Gα13, highlighting their significance in various cellular contexts. However, the structural basis underlying this selectivity remains unclear. Here, using a Gα12-coupled designer receptor exclusively activated by designer drugs (DREADD; G12D) as a model system, we identified residues in the α5 helix and the receptor that collaboratively determine Gα12-vs-Gα13 selectivity. Residue-swapping experiments showed that G12D distinguishes differences between Gα12 and Gα13 in the positions G.H5.09 and G.H5.23 in the α5 helix. Molecular dynamics simulations observed that I378G.H5.23 in Gα12 interacts with N1032.39, S1693.53 and Y17634.53 in G12D, while H364G.H5.09 in Gα12 interact with Q2645.71 in G12D. Screening of mutations at these positions in G12D identified G12D mutants that enhanced coupling with Gα12 and to an even greater extent with Gα13. Combined mutations, most notably the dual Y17634.53H and Q2645.71R mutant, further enhanced Gα12/13 coupling, thereby serving as a potential Gα12/13-DREADD. Such novel Gα12/13-DREADD may be useful in future efforts to develop drugs that target Gα12/13 signaling as well as to identify their therapeutic indications.

EP4 Receptor Conformation Sensor Suited for Ligand Screening and Imaging of Extracellular Prostaglandins

Prostaglandins are important lipid mediators with a wide range of functions in the human body. They act mainly via plasma membrane localized prostaglandin receptors, which belong to the G-protein coupled receptor class. Due to their localized formation and short lifetime, it is important to be able to measure the distribution and abundance of prostaglandins in time and/or space. In this study, we present a Foerster resonance energy transfer (FRET)-based conformation sensor of the human prostaglandin E receptor subtype 4 (EP4 receptor), which was capable of detecting prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)-induced receptor activation in the low nanomolar range with a good signal-to-noise ratio. The sensor retained the typical selectivity for PGE2 among arachidonic acid products. Human embryonic kidney cells stably expressing the sensor did not produce detectable amounts of prostaglandins making them suitable for a coculture approach allowing us, over time, to detect prostaglandin formation in Madin-Darby canine kidney cells and primary mouse macrophages. Furthermore, the EP4 receptor sensor proved to be suited to detect experimentally generated PGE2 gradients by means of FRET-microscopy, indicating the potential to measure gradients of PGE2 within tissues. In addition to FRET-based imaging of prostanoid release, the sensor allowed not only for determination of PGE2 concentrations, but also proved to be capable of measuring ligand binding kinetics. The good signal-to-noise ratio at a commercial plate reader and the ability to directly determine ligand efficacy shows the obvious potential of this sensor interest for screening and characterization of novel ligands of the pharmacologically important human EP4 receptor. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The authors present a biosensor based on the prostaglandin E receptor subtype 4, which is well suited to measure extracellular prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) concentration with high temporal and spatial resolution. It can be used for the imaging of PGE2 levels and gradients by means of Foerster resonance energy transfer microscopy, and for determining PGE2 release of primary cells as well as for screening purposes in a plate reader setting.

Structural Insights into M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor Signaling Bias between Gαq and β-Arrestin through BRET Assays and Molecular Docking

The selectivity of drugs for G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling pathways is crucial for their therapeutic efficacy. Different agonists can cause receptors to recruit effector proteins at varying levels, thus inducing different signaling responses, called signaling bias. Although several GPCR-biased drugs are currently being developed, only a limited number of biased ligands have been identified regarding their signaling bias for the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M1mAChR), and the mechanism is not yet well understood. In this study, we utilized bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays to compare the efficacy of six agonists in inducing Gαq and β-arrestin2 binding to M1mAChR. Our findings reveal notable variations in agonist efficacy in the recruitment of Gαq and β-arrestin2. Pilocarpine preferentially promoted the recruitment of β-arrestin2 (∆∆RAi = -0.5), while McN-A-343 (∆∆RAi = 1.5), Xanomeline (∆∆RAi = 0.6), and Iperoxo (∆∆RAi = 0.3) exhibited a preference for the recruitment of Gαq. We also used commercial methods to verify the agonists and obtained consistent results. Molecular docking revealed that certain residues (e.g., Y404, located in TM7 of M1mAChR) could play crucial roles in Gαq signaling bias by interacting with McN-A-343, Xanomeline, and Iperoxo, whereas other residues (e.g., W378 and Y381, located in TM6) contributed to β-arrestin recruitment by interacting with Pilocarpine. The preference of activated M1mAChR for different effectors may be due to significant conformational changes induced by biased agonists. By characterizing bias towards Gαq and β-arrestin2 recruitment, our study provides insights into M1mAChR signaling bias.

Neurotensin Receptor Allosterism Revealed in Complex with a Biased Allosteric Modulator

The NTSR1 neurotensin receptor (NTSR1) is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) found in the brain and peripheral tissues with neurotensin (NTS) being its endogenous peptide ligand. In the brain, NTS modulates dopamine neuronal activity, induces opioid-independent analgesia, and regulates food intake. Recent studies indicate that biasing NTSR1 toward β-arrestin signaling can attenuate the actions of psychostimulants and other drugs of abuse. Here, we provide the cryoEM structures of NTSR1 ternary complexes with heterotrimeric Gq and GoA with and without the brain-penetrant small-molecule SBI-553. In functional studies, we discovered that SBI-553 displays complex allosteric actions exemplified by negative allosteric modulation for G proteins that are Gα subunit selective and positive allosteric modulation and agonism for β-arrestin translocation at NTSR1. Detailed structural analysis of the allosteric binding site illuminated the structural determinants for biased allosteric modulation of SBI-553 on NTSR1.

Gq Signaling in Autophagy Control: Between Chemical and Mechanical Cues

All processes in human physiology relies on homeostatic mechanisms which require the activation of specific control circuits to adapt the changes imposed by external stimuli. One of the critical modulators of homeostatic balance is autophagy, a catabolic process that is responsible of the destruction of long-lived proteins and organelles through a lysosome degradative pathway. Identification of the mechanism underlying autophagic flux is considered of great importance as both protective and detrimental functions are linked with deregulated autophagy. At the mechanistic and regulatory levels, autophagy is activated in response to diverse stress conditions (food deprivation, hyperthermia and hypoxia), even a novel perspective highlight the potential role of physical forces in autophagy modulation. To understand the crosstalk between all these controlling mechanisms could give us new clues about the specific contribution of autophagy in a wide range of diseases including vascular disorders, inflammation and cancer. Of note, any homeostatic control critically depends in at least two additional and poorly studied interdependent components: a receptor and its downstream effectors. Addressing the selective receptors involved in autophagy regulation is an open question and represents a new area of research in this field. G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent one of the largest and druggable targets membrane receptor protein superfamily. By exerting their action through G proteins, GPCRs play fundamental roles in the control of cellular homeostasis. Novel studies have shown Gαq, a subunit of heterotrimeric G proteins, as a core modulator of mTORC1 and autophagy, suggesting a fundamental contribution of Gαq-coupled GPCRs mechanisms in the control of this homeostatic feedback loop. To address how GPCR-G proteins machinery integrates the response to different stresses including oxidative conditions and mechanical stimuli, could provide deeper insight into new signaling pathways and open potential and novel therapeutic strategies in the modulation of different pathological conditions.

The pocketome of G-protein-coupled receptors reveals previously untargeted allosteric sites

G-protein-coupled receptors do not only feature the orthosteric pockets, where most endogenous agonists bind, but also a multitude of other allosteric pockets that have come into the focus as potential binding sites for synthetic modulators. Here, to better characterise such pockets, we investigate 557 GPCR structures by exhaustively docking small molecular probes in silico and converting the ensemble of binding locations to pocket-defining volumes. Our analysis confirms all previously identified pockets and reveals nine previously untargeted sites. In order to test for the feasibility of functional modulation of receptors through binding of a ligand to such sites, we mutate residues in two sites, in two model receptors, the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M₃ and β₂-adrenergic receptor. Moreover, we analyse the correlation of inter-residue contacts with the activation states of receptors and show that contact patterns closely correlating with activation indeed coincide with these sites.

Disentangling bias between Gq, GRK2, and arrestin3 recruitment to the M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) transmit extracellular signals to the inside by activation of intracellular effector proteins. Different agonists can promote differential receptor-induced signaling responses – termed bias – potentially by eliciting different levels of recruitment of effector proteins. As activation and recruitment of effector proteins might influence each other, thorough analysis of bias is difficult. Here, we compared the efficacy of seven agonists to induce G protein, G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GRK2), as well as arrestin3 binding to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M₃ by utilizing FRET-based assays. In order to avoid interference between these interactions, we studied GRK2 binding in the presence of inhibitors of G_i and G_q proteins and analyzed arrestin3 binding to prestimulated M₃ receptors to avoid differences in receptor phosphorylation influencing arrestin recruitment. We measured substantial differences in the agonist efficacies to induce M₃R-arrestin3 versus M₃R-GRK2 interaction. However, the rank order of the agonists for G protein- and GRK2-M₃R interaction was the same, suggesting that G protein and GRK2 binding to M₃R requires similar receptor conformations, whereas requirements for arrestin3 binding to M₃R are distinct.

Structural basis and mechanism of activation of two different families of G proteins by the same GPCR

The β₁-adrenergic receptor (β₁-AR) can activate two families of G proteins. When coupled to Gs, β₁-AR increases cardiac output, and coupling to Gi leads to decreased responsiveness in myocardial infarction. By comparative structural analysis of turkey β₁-AR complexed with either Gi or Gs, we investigate how a single G-protein-coupled receptor simultaneously signals through two G proteins. We find that, although the critical receptor-interacting C-terminal α5-helices on Gα_i and Gα_s interact similarly with β₁-AR, the overall interacting modes between β₁-AR and G proteins vary substantially. Functional studies reveal the importance of the differing interactions and provide evidence that the activation efficacy of G proteins by β₁-AR is determined by the entire three-dimensional interaction surface, including intracellular loops 2 and 4 (ICL2 and ICL4).