BRET-based effector membrane translocation assay monitors GPCR-promoted and endocytosis-mediated Gq activation at early endosomes

Exploring the constitutive activation mechanism of the class A orphan GPR20

GPR20, an orphan G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), shows significant expression in intestinal tissue and represents a potential therapeutic target to treat gastrointestinal stromal tumors. GPR20 performs high constitutive activity when coupling with Gi. Despite the pharmacological importance of GPCR constitutive activation, determining the mechanism has long remained unclear. In this study, we explored the constitutive activation mechanism of GPR20 through large-scale unbiased molecular dynamics simulations. Our results unveil the allosteric nature of constitutively activated GPCR signal transduction involving extracellular and intracellular domains. Moreover, the constitutively active state of the GPR20 requires both the N-terminal cap and Gi protein. The N-terminal cap of GPR20 functions like an agonist and mediates long-range activated conformational shift. Together with the previous study, this study enhances our knowledge of the self-activation mechanism of the orphan receptor, facilitates the drug discovery efforts that target GPR20.

G protein selectivity profile of GPR56/ADGRG1 and its effect on downstream effectors

GPR56, an adhesion G-protein coupled receptor (aGPCRs) with constitutive and ligand-promoted activity, is involved in many physiological and pathological processes. Whether the receptor's constitutive or ligand-promoted activation occur through the same molecular mechanism, and whether different activation modes lead to functional selectivity between G proteins is unknown. Here we show that GPR56 constitutively activates both G12 and G13. Unlike constitutive activation and activation with 3-α-acetoxydihydrodeoxygedunin (3αDOG), stimulation with an antibody, 10C7, directed against GPR56's extracellular domain (ECD) led to an activation that favors G13 over G12. An autoproteolytically deficient mutant, GPR56-T383A, was also activated by 10C7 indicating that the tethered agonist (TA) exposed through autocatalytic cleavage, is not required for this activation modality. In contrast, this proteolysis-resistant mutant could not be activated by 3αDOG indicating different modes of activation by the two ligands. We show that an N-terminal truncated GPR56 construct (GPR56-Δ1-385) is devoid of constitutive activity but was activated by 3αDOG. Similarly to 3αDOG, 10C7 promoted the recruitment of β-arrestin-2 but GPR56 internalization was β-arrestin independent. Despite the slow activation mode of 10C7 that favors G13 over G12, it efficiently activated the downstream Rho pathway in BT-20 breast cancer cells. These data show that different GPR56 ligands have different modes of activation yielding differential G protein selectivity but converging on the activation of the Rho pathway both in heterologous expressions system and in cancer cells endogenously expressing the receptor. 10C7 is therefore an interesting tool to study both the processes underlying GPR56 activity and its role in cancer cells.

Understanding the impact of nuclear-localized GPCRs on cellular signalling

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have historically been associated with signalling events driven from the plasma membrane. More recently, signalling from endosomes has been recognized as a feature of internalizing receptors. However, there was little consideration given to the notion that GPCRs can be targeted to distinct subcellular locations that did not involve an initial trafficking to the cell surface. Here, we focus on the evidence for and the potential impact of GPCR signalling specifically initiated from the nuclear membrane. We also discuss the possibilities for selectively targeting this and other internal pools of receptors as novel venues for drug discovery.

Get Ready to Sharpen Your Tools: A Short Guide to Heterotrimeric G Protein Activity Biosensors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest class of transmembrane receptors encoded in the human genome, and they initiate cellular responses triggered by a plethora of extracellular stimuli ranging from neurotransmitters and hormones to photons. Upon stimulation, GPCRs activate heterotrimeric G proteins (Gαβγ) in the cytoplasm, which then convey signals to their effectors to elicit cellular responses. Given the broad biological and biomedical relevance of GPCRs and G proteins in physiology and disease, there is great interest in developing and optimizing approaches to measure their signaling activity with high accuracy and across experimental systems pertinent to their functions in cellular communication. This review provides a historical perspective on approaches to measure GPCR-G protein signaling, from quantification of second messengers and other indirect readouts of activity to biosensors that directly detect the activity of G proteins. The latter is the focus of a more detailed overview of the evolution of design principles for various optical biosensors of G protein activity with different experimental capabilities. We will highlight advantages and limitations of biosensors that detect different G protein activation hallmarks, like dissociation of Gα and Gβγ or nucleotide exchange on Gα, as well as their suitability to detect signaling mediated by endogenous versus exogenous signaling components or in physiologically relevant systems like primary cells. Overall, this review intends to provide an assessment of the state-of-the-art for biosensors that directly measure G protein activity to allow readers to make informed decisions on the selection and implementation of currently available tools. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: G protein activity biosensors have become essential and widespread tools to assess GPCR signaling and pharmacology. Yet, investigators face the challenge of choosing from a growing list of G protein activity biosensors. This review provides an overview of the features and capabilities of different optical biosensor designs for the direct detection of G protein activity in cells, with the aim of facilitating the rational selection of systems that align with the specific scientific questions and needs of investigators.

Application of FRET- and BRET-based live-cell biosensors in deorphanization and ligand discovery studies on orphan G protein-coupled receptors

Bioluminescence- and fluorescence-based resonance energy transfer assays have gained considerable attention in pharmacological research as high-throughput scalable tools applicable to drug discovery. To this end, G protein-coupled receptors represent the biggest target class for marketed drugs, and among them, orphan G protein-coupled receptors have the biggest untapped therapeutic potential. In this review, the cases where biophysical methods, BRET and FRET, were employed for deorphanization and ligand discovery studies on orphan G protein-coupled receptors are listed and discussed.

Functional consequences of spatial, temporal and ligand bias of G protein-coupled receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate every aspect of kidney function by mediating the effects of various endogenous and exogenous substances. A key concept in GPCR function is biased signalling, whereby certain ligands may selectively activate specific pathways within the receptor's signalling repertoire. For example, different agonists may induce biased signalling by stabilizing distinct active receptor conformations - a concept that is supported by advances in structural biology. However, the processes underlying functional selectivity in receptor signalling are extremely complex, involving differences in subcellular compartmentalization and signalling dynamics. Importantly, the molecular mechanisms of spatiotemporal bias, particularly its connection to ligand binding kinetics, have been detailed for GPCRs critical to kidney function, such as the AT1 angiotensin receptor (AT1R), V2 vasopressin receptor (V2R) and the parathyroid hormone 1 receptor (PTH1R). This expanding insight into the multifaceted nature of biased signalling paves the way for innovative strategies for targeting GPCR functions; the development of novel biased agonists may represent advanced pharmacotherapeutic approaches to the treatment of kidney diseases and related systemic conditions, such as hypertension, diabetes and heart failure.

Characterization of genetic variants of GIPR reveals a contribution of β-arrestin to metabolic phenotypes

Incretin-based therapies are highly successful in combatting obesity and type 2 diabetes1. Yet both activation and inhibition of the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptor (GIPR) in combination with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor (GLP-1R) activation have resulted in similar clinical outcomes, as demonstrated by the GIPR-GLP-1R co-agonist tirzepatide2 and AMG-133 (ref. 3) combining GIPR antagonism with GLP-1R agonism. This underlines the importance of a better understanding of the GIP system. Here we show the necessity of β-arrestin recruitment for GIPR function, by combining in vitro pharmacological characterization of 47 GIPR variants with burden testing of clinical phenotypes and in vivo studies. Burden testing of variants with distinct ligand-binding capacity, Gs activation (cyclic adenosine monophosphate production) and β-arrestin 2 recruitment and internalization shows that unlike variants solely impaired in Gs signalling, variants impaired in both Gs and β-arrestin 2 recruitment contribute to lower adiposity-related traits. Endosomal Gs-mediated signalling of the variants shows a β-arrestin dependency and genetic ablation of β-arrestin 2 impairs cyclic adenosine monophosphate production and decreases GIP efficacy on glucose control in male mice. This study highlights a crucial impact of β-arrestins in regulating GIPR signalling and overall preservation of biological activity that may facilitate new developments in therapeutic targeting of the GIPR system.

Constitutive internalisation of EP2 differentially regulates G protein signalling

The prostanoid G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) EP2 is widely expressed and implicated in endometriosis, osteoporosis, obesity, pre-term labour and cancer. Internalisation and intracellular trafficking are critical for shaping GPCR activity, yet little is known regarding the spatial programming of EP2 signalling and whether this can be exploited pharmacologically. Using three EP2-selective ligands that favour activation of different EP2 pathways, we show that EP2 undergoes limited agonist-driven internalisation but is constitutively internalised via dynamin-dependent, β-arrestin-independent pathways. EP2 was constitutively trafficked to early and very early endosomes (VEE), which was not altered by ligand activation. APPL1, a key adaptor and regulatory protein of the VEE, did not impact EP2 agonist-mediated cAMP. Internalisation was required for ~70% of the acute butaprost- and AH13205-mediated cAMP signalling, yet PGN9856i, a Gαs-biased agonist, was less dependent on receptor internalisation for its cAMP signalling, particularly in human term pregnant myometrial cells that endogenously express EP2. Inhibition of EP2 internalisation partially reduced calcium signalling activated by butaprost or AH13205 and had no effect on PGE2 secretion. This indicates an agonist-dependent differential spatial requirement for Gαs and Gαq/11 signalling and a role for plasma membrane-initiated Gαq/11-Ca2+-mediated PGE2 secretion. These findings reveal a key role for EP2 constitutive internalisation in its signalling and potential spatial bias in mediating its downstream functions. This, in turn, could highlight important considerations for future selective targeting of EP2 signalling pathways.

G protein-coupled receptor endocytosis generates spatiotemporal bias in β-arrestin signaling

The stabilization of different active conformations of G protein-coupled receptors is thought to underlie the varying efficacies of biased and balanced agonists. Here, profiling the activation of signal transducers by angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) agonists revealed that the extent and kinetics of β-arrestin binding exhibited substantial ligand-dependent differences, which were lost when receptor internalization was inhibited. When AT1R endocytosis was prevented, even weak partial agonists of the β-arrestin pathway acted as full or near-full agonists, suggesting that receptor conformation did not exclusively determine β-arrestin recruitment. The ligand-dependent variance in β-arrestin translocation was much larger at endosomes than at the plasma membrane, showing that ligand efficacy in the β-arrestin pathway was spatiotemporally determined. Experimental investigations and mathematical modeling demonstrated how multiple factors concurrently shaped the effects of agonists on endosomal receptor-β-arrestin binding and thus determined the extent of functional selectivity. Ligand dissociation rate and G protein activity had particularly strong, internalization-dependent effects on the receptor-β-arrestin interaction. We also showed that endocytosis regulated the agonist efficacies of two other receptors with sustained β-arrestin binding: the V2 vasopressin receptor and a mutant β2-adrenergic receptor. In the absence of endocytosis, the agonist-dependent variance in β-arrestin2 binding was markedly diminished. Our results suggest that endocytosis determines the spatiotemporal bias in GPCR signaling and can aid in the development of more efficacious, functionally selective compounds.

Conformation- and activation-based BRET sensors differentially report on GPCR-G protein coupling

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate cellular signaling processes by coupling to diverse combinations of heterotrimeric G proteins composed of Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits. Biosensors based on bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) have advanced our understanding of GPCR functional selectivity. Some BRET biosensors monitor ligand-induced conformational changes in the receptor or G proteins, whereas others monitor the recruitment of downstream effectors to sites of G protein activation. Here, we compared the ability of conformation-and activation-based BRET biosensors to assess the coupling of various class A and B GPCRs to specific Gα proteins in cultured cells. These GPCRs included serotonin 5-HT2A and 5-HT7 receptors, the GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R), and the M3 muscarinic receptor. We observed different signaling profiles between the two types of sensors, highlighting how data interpretation could be affected by the nature of the biosensor. We also found that the identity of the Gβγ subunits used in the assay could differentially influence the selectivity of a receptor toward Gα subtypes, emphasizing the importance of the receptor-Gβγ pairing in determining Gα coupling specificity. Last, the addition of epitope tags to the receptor could affect stoichiometry and coupling selectivity and yield artifactual findings. These results highlight the need for careful sensor selection and experimental design when probing GPCR-G protein coupling.

Generation of Comprehensive GPCR-Transducer-Deficient Cell Lines to Dissect the Complexity of GPCR Signaling

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) compose the largest family of transmembrane receptors and are targets of approximately one-third of Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs owing to their involvement in almost all physiologic processes. GPCR signaling occurs through the activation of heterotrimeric G-protein complexes and β-arrestins, both of which serve as transducers, resulting in distinct cellular responses. Despite seeming simple at first glance, accumulating evidence indicates that activation of either transducer is not a straightforward process as a stimulation of a single molecule has the potential to activate multiple signaling branches. The complexity of GPCR signaling arises from the aspects of G-protein-coupling selectivity, biased signaling, interpathway crosstalk, and variable molecular modifications generating these diverse signaling patterns. Numerous questions relative to these aspects of signaling remained unanswered until the recent development of CRISPR genome-editing technology. Such genome editing technology presents opportunities to chronically eliminate the expression of G-protein subunits, β-arrestins, G-protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and many other signaling nodes in the GPCR pathways at one's convenience. Here, we review the practicality of using CRISPR-derived knockout (KO) cells in the experimental contexts of unraveling the molecular details of GPCR signaling mechanisms. To mention a few, KO cells have revealed the contribution of β-arrestins in ERK activation, Gα protein selectivity, GRK-based regulation of GPCRs, and many more, hence validating its broad applicability in GPCR studies. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This review emphasizes the practical application of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) transducer knockout (KO) cells in dissecting the intricate regulatory mechanisms of the GPCR signaling network. Currently available cell lines, along with accumulating KO cell lines in diverse cell types, offer valuable resources for systematically elucidating GPCR signaling regulation. Given the association of GPCR signaling with numerous diseases, uncovering the system-based signaling map is crucial for advancing the development of novel drugs targeting specific diseases.

Exploiting Cell-Based Assays to Accelerate Drug Development for G Protein-Coupled Receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are relevant targets for health and disease as they regulate various aspects of metabolism, proliferation, differentiation, and immune pathways. They are implicated in several disease areas, including cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mental disorders. It is worth noting that about a third of all marketed drugs target GPCRs, making them prime pharmacological targets for drug discovery. Numerous functional assays have been developed to assess GPCR activity and GPCR signaling in living cells. Here, we review the current literature of genetically encoded cell-based assays to measure GPCR activation and downstream signaling at different hierarchical levels of signaling, from the receptor to transcription, via transducers, effectors, and second messengers. Singleplex assay formats provide one data point per experimental condition. Typical examples are bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays and protease cleavage assays (e.g., Tango or split TEV). By contrast, multiplex assay formats allow for the parallel measurement of multiple receptors and pathways and typically use molecular barcodes as transcriptional reporters in barcoded assays. This enables the efficient identification of desired on-target and on-pathway effects as well as detrimental off-target and off-pathway effects. Multiplex assays are anticipated to accelerate drug discovery for GPCRs as they provide a comprehensive and broad identification of compound effects.

GPCR kinases differentially modulate biased signaling downstream of CXCR3 depending on their subcellular localization

Some G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) demonstrate biased signaling such that ligands of the same receptor exclusively or preferentially activate certain downstream signaling pathways over others. This phenomenon may result from ligand-specific receptor phosphorylation by GPCR kinases (GRKs). GPCR signaling can also exhibit location bias because GPCRs traffic to and signal from subcellular compartments in addition to the plasma membrane. Here, we investigated whether GRKs contributed to location bias in GPCR signaling. GRKs translocated to endosomes after stimulation of the chemokine receptor CXCR3 or other GPCRs in cultured cells. GRK2, GRK3, GRK5, and GRK6 showed distinct patterns of recruitment to the plasma membrane and to endosomes depending on the identity of the biased ligand used to activate CXCR3. Analysis of engineered forms of GRKs that localized to either the plasma membrane or endosomes demonstrated that biased CXCR3 ligands elicited different signaling profiles that depended on the subcellular location of the GRK. Each GRK exerted a distinct effect on the regulation of CXCR3 engagement of β-arrestin, internalization, and activation of the downstream effector kinase ERK. Our work highlights a role for GRKs in location-biased GPCR signaling and demonstrates the complex interactions between ligands, GRKs, and cellular location that contribute to biased signaling.

G Protein-Coupled Receptor Signaling: New Insights Define Cellular Nanodomains

G protein-coupled receptors are the largest and pharmacologically most important receptor family and are involved in the regulation of most cell functions. Most of them reside exclusively at the cell surface, from where they signal via heterotrimeric G proteins to control the production of second messengers such as cAMP and IP3 as well as the activity of several ion channels. However, they may also internalize upon agonist stimulation or constitutively reside in various intracellular locations. Recent evidence indicates that their function differs depending on their precise cellular localization. This is because the signals they produce, notably cAMP and Ca2+, are mostly bound to cell proteins that significantly reduce their mobility, allowing the generation of steep concentration gradients. As a result, signals generated by the receptors remain confined to nanometer-sized domains. We propose that such nanometer-sized domains represent the basic signaling units in a cell and a new type of target for drug development.

Investigating G-protein coupled receptor signalling with light-emitting biosensors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most frequent target of currently approved drugs and play a central role in both physiological and pathophysiological processes. Beyond the canonical understanding of GPCR signal transduction, the importance of receptor conformation, beta-arrestin (β-arr) biased signalling, and signalling from intracellular locations other than the plasma membrane is becoming more apparent, along with the tight spatiotemporal compartmentalisation of downstream signals. Fluorescent and bioluminescent biosensors have played a pivotal role in elucidating GPCR signalling events in live cells. To understand the mechanisms of action of the GPCR-targeted drugs currently available, and to develop new and better GPCR-targeted therapeutics, understanding these novel aspects of GPCR signalling is critical. In this review, we present some of the tools available to interrogate each of these features of GPCR signalling, we illustrate some of the key findings which have been made possible by these tools and we discuss their limitations and possible developments.

Selective activation of intracellular β1AR using a spatially restricted antagonist

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate several physiological and pathological processes and represent the target of approximately 30% of FDA-approved drugs. GPCR-mediated signaling was thought to occur exclusively at the plasma membrane. However, recent studies have unveiled their presence and function at subcellular membrane compartments. There is a growing interest in studying compartmentalized signaling of GPCRs. This requires development of novel tools to separate GPCRs signaling at the plasma membrane from the ones initiated at intracellular compartments. We took advantage of the structural and pharmacological information available for β1-adrenergic receptor (β1AR), an exemplary GPCR that functions at subcellular compartments, and rationally designed spatially restricted antagonists. We generated a cell impermeable β1AR antagonist by conjugating a suitable pharmacophore to a sulfonate-containing fluorophore. This cell-impermeable antagonist only inhibited β1AR on the plasma membrane. In contrast, a cell permeable β1AR agonist containing a non-sulfonated fluorophore, efficiently inhibited both the plasma membrane and Golgi pools of β1ARs. Furthermore, the cell impermeable antagonist selectively inhibited the phosphorylation of downstream effectors of PKA proximal to the plasma membrane in adult cardiomyocytes while β1AR intracellular pool remained active. Our tools offer promising avenues for investigating compartmentalized β1AR signaling in various context, potentially advancing our understanding of β1AR-mediated cellular responses in health and disease. They also offer a general strategy to study compartmentalized signaling for other GPCRs in various biological systems.

β-Arrestin-dependent and -independent endosomal G protein activation by the vasopressin type 2 receptor

The vasopressin type 2 receptor (V2R) is an essential G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) in renal regulation of water homeostasis. Upon stimulation, the V2R activates Gαs and Gαq/11, which is followed by robust recruitment of β-arrestins and receptor internalization into endosomes. Unlike canonical GPCR signaling, the β-arrestin association with the V2R does not terminate Gαs activation, and thus, Gαs-mediated signaling is sustained while the receptor is internalized. Here, we demonstrate that this V2R ability to co-interact with G protein/β-arrestin and promote endosomal G protein signaling is not restricted to Gαs, but also involves Gαq/11. Furthermore, our data imply that β-arrestins potentiate Gαs/Gαq/11 activation at endosomes rather than terminating their signaling. Surprisingly, we found that the V2R internalizes and promote endosomal G protein activation independent of β-arrestins to a minor degree. These new observations challenge the current model of endosomal GPCR signaling and suggest that this event can occur in both β-arrestin-dependent and -independent manners.

GLP-1R signaling neighborhoods associate with the susceptibility to adverse drug reactions of incretin mimetics

G protein-coupled receptors are important drug targets that engage and activate signaling transducers in multiple cellular compartments. Delineating therapeutic signaling from signaling associated with adverse events is an important step towards rational drug design. The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) is a validated target for the treatment of diabetes and obesity, but drugs that target this receptor are a frequent cause of adverse events. Using recently developed biosensors, we explored the ability of GLP-1R to activate 15 pathways in 4 cellular compartments and demonstrate that modifications aimed at improving the therapeutic potential of GLP-1R agonists greatly influence compound efficacy, potency, and safety in a pathway- and compartment-selective manner. These findings, together with comparative structure analysis, time-lapse microscopy, and phosphoproteomics, reveal unique signaling signatures for GLP-1R agonists at the level of receptor conformation, functional selectivity, and location bias, thus associating signaling neighborhoods with functionally distinct cellular outcomes and clinical consequences.

Interplay between G protein-coupled receptors and nanotechnology

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), as the largest family of membrane receptors, actively modulate plasma membrane and endosomal signalling. Importantly, GPCRs are naturally nanosized, and spontaneously formed nanoaggregates of GPCRs (natural nano-GPCRs) may enhance GPCR-related signalling and functions. Although GPCRs are the molecular targets of the majority of marketed drugs, the poor pharmacokinetics and physicochemical properties of GPCR ligands greatly limit their clinical applicability. Nanotechnology, as versatile techniques, can encapsulate GPCR ligands to assemble synthetic nano-GPCRs to overcome their obstacles, robustly elevating drug efficacy and safety. Moreover, endosomal delivery of GPCR ligands by nanoparticles can precisely initiate sustained endosomal signal transduction, while nanotechnology has been widely utilized for isolation, diagnosis, and detection of GPCRs. In turn, due to overexpression of GPCRs on the surface of various types of cells, GPCR ligands can endow nanoparticles with active targeting capacity for specific cells via ligand-receptor binding and mediate receptor-dependent endocytosis of nanoparticles. This significantly enhances the potency of nanoparticle delivery systems. Therefore, emerging evidence has revealed the interplay between GPCRs and nanoparticles, although investigations into their relationship have been inadequate. This review aims to summarize the interaction between GPCRs and nanotechnology for understanding their mutual influences and utilizing their interplay for biomedical applications. It will provide a fundamental platform for developing powerful and safe GPCR-targeted drugs and nanoparticle systems. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: GPCRs as molecular targets for the majority of marketed drugs are naturally nanosized, and even spontaneously form nano aggregations (nano-GPCRs). Nanotechnology has also been applied to construct synthetic nano-GPCRs or detect GPCRs, while endosomal delivery of GPCR ligands by nanoparticles can magnify endosomal signalling. Meanwhile, molecular engineering of nanoparticles with GPCRs or their ligands can modulate membrane binding and endocytosis, powerfully improving the efficacy of nanoparticle system. However, there are rare summaries on the interaction between GPCRs and nanoparticles. This review will not only provide a versatile platform for utilizing nanoparticles to modulate or detect GPCRs, but also facilitate better understanding of the designated value of GPCRs for molecular engineering of biomaterials with GPCRs in therapeutical application.

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.

β-arrestin-dependent and -independent endosomal G protein activation by the vasopressin type 2 receptor

The vasopressin type 2 receptor (V2R) is an essential GPCR in renal regulation of water homeostasis. Upon stimulation, the V2R activates Gαs and Gαq/11, which is followed by robust recruitment of β-arrestins and receptor internalization into endosomes. Unlike canonical GPCR signaling, the β-arrestin association with the V2R does not terminate Gαs activation, and thus, Gαs-mediated signaling is sustained while the receptor is internalized. Here, we demonstrate that this V2R ability to co-interact with G protein/β-arrestin and promote endosomal G protein signaling is not restricted to Gαs, but also involves Gαq/11. Furthermore, our data implies that β-arrestins potentiate Gαs/Gαq/11 activation at endosomes rather than terminating their signaling. Surprisingly, we found that the V2R internalizes and promote endosomal G protein activation independent of β-arrestins to a minor degree. These new observations challenge the current model of endosomal GPCR signaling and suggest that this event can occur in both β-arrestin-dependent and -independent manners.

Mammalian type opsin 5 preferentially activates G14 in Gq-type G proteins triggering intracellular calcium response

Mammalian type opsin 5 (Opn5m), a UV-sensitive G protein-coupled receptor opsin highly conserved in vertebrates, would provide a common basis for UV sensing from lamprey to humans. However, G protein coupled with Opn5m remains controversial due to variations in assay conditions and the origin of Opn5m across different reports. Here, we examined Opn5m from diverse species using an aequorin luminescence assay and Gα-KO cell line. Beyond the commonly studied major Gα classes, Gαq, Gα11, Gα14, and Gα15 in the Gq class were individually investigated in this study, as they can drive distinct signaling pathways in addition to a canonical calcium response. UV light triggered a calcium response via all the tested Opn5m proteins in 293T cells, which was abolished by Gq-type Gα deletion and rescued by cotransfection with mouse and medaka Gq-type Gα proteins. Opn5m preferentially activated Gα14 and close relatives. Mutational analysis implicated specific regions, including α3-β5 and αG-α4 loops, αG and α4 helices, and the extreme C terminus, in the preferential activation of Gα14 by Opn5m. FISH revealed co-expression of genes encoding Opn5m and Gα14 in the scleral cartilage of medaka and chicken eyes, supporting their physiological coupling. This suggests that the preferential activation of Gα14 by Opn5m is relevant for UV sensing in specific cell types.

Detecting and measuring of GPCR signaling - comparison of human induced pluripotent stem cells and immortal cell lines

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a large family of transmembrane proteins that play a major role in many physiological processes, and thus GPCR-targeted drug development has been widely promoted. Although research findings generated in immortal cell lines have contributed to the advancement of the GPCR field, the homogenous genetic backgrounds, and the overexpression of GPCRs in these cell lines make it difficult to correlate the results with clinical patients. Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) have the potential to overcome these limitations, because they contain patient specific genetic information and can differentiate into numerous cell types. To detect GPCRs in hiPSCs, highly selective labeling and sensitive imaging techniques are required. This review summarizes existing resonance energy transfer and protein complementation assay technologies, as well as existing and new labeling methods. The difficulties of extending existing detection methods to hiPSCs are discussed, as well as the potential of hiPSCs to expand GPCR research towards personalized medicine.

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.

Enhanced Bystander BRET (ebBRET) Biosensors as Biophysical Tools to Map the Signaling Profile of Neuropsychiatric Drugs Targeting GPCRs

Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) is a non-radiative energy transfer between a bioluminescent donor and a fluorescent acceptor with far-reaching applications in detecting physiologically relevant protein-protein interactions. The recently developed enhanced bystander BRET (ebBRET) biosensors have made it possible to rapidly determine the signaling profile of a series of ligands across a large number of GPCRs and their signaling repertoires, which has tremendous implications in the drug discovery process. Here we describe BRET and the ebBRET biosensors as investigational tools in establishing functional selectivity downstream of GPCRs.

Mechanism of Oxytocin-Induced Contraction in Rat Gastric Circular Smooth Muscle

Oxytocin produces an excitatory effect on gastric muscle through the activation of receptors present on stomach smooth muscle cells. However, the intracellular mechanisms that mediate oxytocin excitatory effects are still largely unknown. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the signaling pathways involved in oxytocin-induced contractions in gastric smooth muscle, shedding light on phospholipase C (PLC)-β1 signaling and its downstream molecules, including inositol 1,4,5- trisphosphate (IP₃) and myosin light chain kinase (MLCK). The contractions of gastric smooth muscle from male rats were measured in an organ bath set up in response to exogenous oxytocin 10^-7 M, in the presence and absence of inhibitors of the indicated signaling molecules. Oxytocin (10^-9-10^-5 M) induced dose-dependent stomach smooth muscle contraction. Pre-incubation with atosiban, an oxytocin receptor inhibitor, abolished the oxytocin-induced contraction. Moreover, PLC β1 inhibitor (U73122) and IP₃ inhibitor Xestospongin C inhibited oxytocin-induced muscle contraction to various degrees. Verapamil, a calcium channel blocker, inhibited oxytocin-induced contraction, and pre-incubation of the strips, with both verapamil and Xestospongin C, further inhibited the excitatory effect of oxytocin. Chelation of intracellular calcium with BAPT-AM (1,2-bis-(o-aminophenoxy) ethane-N,N,N',N'-tetraacetic acid) significantly inhibited the effect of oxytocin on muscle contraction. Finally, pre-incubation of the strips with the Ca²⁺/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase selective inhibitor STO-609 significantly inhibited the contraction induced by oxytocin. These results suggest that oxytocin directly stimulates its cell surface receptor to activate PLC β1, which in turn liberates IP₃, which eventually elevates intracellular calcium, the prerequisite for smooth muscle contraction.

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.

Agonist-Dependent Coupling of the Promiscuous Adenosine A2B Receptor to Gα Protein Subunits

The adenosine A_2B receptor (A_2BAR) belongs to the rhodopsin-like G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) family. It is upregulated under hypoxic conditions, in inflammation and cancer. Previous studies indicated the coupling of the A_2BAR to different G proteins, mainly G_s, but in some cases G_q/11 or G_i, depending on the cell type. We have now utilized novel technologies, (i) heterologous expression of individual members of the Gα_q/11 protein family (Gα_q, Gα₁₁, Gα₁₄, and Gα₁₅) in Gα_q/11 knockout cells, and (ii) the TRUPATH platform, allowing the direct observation of Gα protein activation for each of the Gα subunits by bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) measurements. Three structurally diverse A_2BAR agonists were studied: the cognate agonist adenosine, its metabolically stable analog NECA, and the non-nucleosidic partial agonist BAY 60-6583. Adenosine and NECA activated most members of all four Gα protein families (Gα_s, Gα_q/11, Gα_i, and Gα_12/13). Significant differences in potencies and efficacies were observed; the highest efficacies were determined at the Gα₁₅, Gα_s, and Gα₁₂ proteins, and for NECA additionally at the Gα_i2 protein. In contrast, the partial agonist BAY 60-6583 only activated Gα₁₅, Gα_s, and Gα₁₂ proteins. Adenosine deaminase, an allosteric modulator of ARs, selectively increased the potency and efficacy of NECA and BAY 60-6583 at the Gα₁₅ protein, while it had no effect or decreased efficacy at the other Gα proteins. We conclude that the A_2BAR is preferably coupled to the Gα₁₅, Gα_s, and Gα₁₂ proteins. Upon upregulation of receptor or Gα protein expression, coupling to further Gα proteins likely occurs. Importantly, different agonists can display different activation profiles.

[G proteins: privileged transducers of 7-transmembrane spanning receptors]

G protein-coupled receptors or GPCR are the most abundant membrane receptors in our genome with around 800 members. They play an essential role in most physiological and pathophysiological phenomena. In addition, they constitute 30% of the targets of currently marketed drugs and remain an important reservoir for new innovative therapies. Their main effectors are heterotrimeric G proteins. These are composed of 3 subunits, α, β and γ, which, upon coupling with a GPCR, dissociate into G_α and G_βγ to activate numerous signaling pathways. This article describes some of the recent advances in understanding the function and role of heterotrimeric G proteins. After a short introduction to GPCRs, the history of the discovery of G proteins is briefly described. Then, the fundamental mechanisms of activation, signaling and regulation of G proteins are reviewed. New paradigms concerning intracellular signaling, specific recognition of G proteins by GPCRs as well as biased signaling are also discussed.

Roles of receptor phosphorylation and Rab proteins in G protein-coupled receptor function and trafficking

The G Protein-Coupled Receptors form the most abundant family of membrane proteins and are crucial physiological players in the homeostatic equilibrium, which we define as health. They also participate in the pathogenesis of many diseases and are frequent targets of therapeutic intervention. Considering their importance, it is not surprising that different mechanisms regulate their function, including desensitization, resensitization, internalization, recycling to the plasma membrane, and degradation. These processes are modulated in a highly coordinated and specific way by protein kinases and phosphatases, ubiquitin ligases, protein adaptors, interaction with multifunctional complexes, molecular motors, phospholipid metabolism, and membrane distribution. This review describes significant advances in the study of the regulation of these receptors by phosphorylation and endosomal traffic (where signaling can take place); we revisited the bar code hypothesis and include two additional observations: a) that different phosphorylation patterns seem to be associated with internalization and endosome sorting for recycling or degradation, and b) that, surprisingly, phosphorylation of some G protein-coupled receptors appears to be required for proper receptor insertion into the plasma membrane. Significance Statement G protein-coupled receptor phosphorylation is an early event in desensitization/ signaling switching, endosomal traffic, and internalization. These events seem crucial for receptor responsiveness, cellular localization, and fate (recycling/ degradation) with important pharmacological/ therapeutic implications. Phosphorylation sites vary depending on the cells in which they are expressed and on the stimulus that leads to such covalent modification. Surprisingly, evidence suggests that phosphorylation also seems to be required for proper insertion into the plasma membrane for some receptors.