Ligand-induced internalization and recycling of the human neuropeptide Y2 receptor is regulated by its carboxyl-terminal tail

Illuminating the neuropeptide Y4 receptor and its ligand pancreatic polypeptide from a structural, functional, and therapeutic perspective

The neuropeptide Y4 receptor (Y4R), a rhodopsin-like G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and the hormone pancreatic polypeptide (PP) are members of the neuropeptide Y family consisting of four receptors (Y1R, Y2R, Y4R, Y5R) and three highly homologous peptide ligands (neuropeptide Y, peptide YY, PP). In this family, the Y4R is of particular interest as it is the only subtype with high affinity to PP over NPY. The Y4R, as a mediator of PP signaling, has a pivotal role in appetite regulation and energy homeostasis, offering potential avenues for the treatment of metabolic disorders such as obesity. PP as anorexigenic peptide is released postprandial from the pancreas in response to food intake, induces satiety signals and contributes to hamper excessive food intake. Moreover, this system was also described to be associated with different types of cancer: overexpression of Y4R have been found in human adenocarcinoma cells, while elevated levels of PP are related to the development of pancreatic endocrine tumors. The pharmacological relevance of the Y4R advanced the search for potent and selective ligands for this receptor subtype, which will be significantly progressed through the elucidation of the active state PP-Y4R cryo-EM structure. This review summarizes the development of novel PP-derived ligands, like Obinepitide as dual Y2R/Y4R agonist in clinical trials or UR-AK86c as small hexapeptide agonist with picomolar affinity, as well as the first allosteric modulators that selectively target the Y4R, e.g. VU0506013 as potent Y4R positive allosteric modulator or (S)-VU0637120 as allosteric antagonist. Here, we provide valuable insights into the complex physiological functions of the Y4R and PP and the pharmacological relevance of the system in appetite regulation to open up new avenues for the development of tool compounds for targeted therapies with potential applications in metabolic disorders.

The Chemerin Receptor CMKLR1 Requires Full-Length Chemerin for High Affinity in Contrast to GPR1 as Demonstrated by a New Nanoluciferase-Based Binding Assay

To study the binding mode of the adipokine chemerin as well as the short peptide agonist chemerin-9 (C9) to its two receptors chemokine-like receptor 1 (CMKLR1) and G protein-coupled receptor 1 (GPR1), we generated 5-carboxytetramethylrhodamine (TAMRA) modified variants of both ligands. In addition, we labeled GPR1 and CMKLR1 with a nanoluciferase at the N-terminus to perform NanoBRET binding assays. For GPR1, both ligands show high affinity and comparable binding. Significant differences were found for CMKLR1, whereby only full-length chemerin binds with high affinity in saturation and displacement assays. For TAMRA-C9 a biphasic binding consisting of two binding states has been found and no displacement studies could be performed. Thus, we conclude that CMKLR1 requires full-length chemerin for stable binding in contrast to GPR1. This work demonstrates the NanoBRET binding assay as a new tool for binding studies at chemerin receptors and it enables deeper insights into the ligand binding parameters.

Dynamic in Situ Confinement Triggers Ligand-Free Neuropeptide Receptor Signaling

Membrane receptor clustering is fundamental to cell-cell communication; however, the physiological function of receptor clustering in cell signaling remains enigmatic. Here, we developed a dynamic platform to induce cluster formation of neuropeptide Y₂ hormone receptors (Y₂R) in situ by a chelator nanotool. The multivalent interaction enabled a dynamic exchange of histidine-tagged Y₂R within the clusters. Fast Y₂R enrichment in clustered areas triggered ligand-independent signaling as determined by an increase in cytosolic calcium and cell migration. Notably, the calcium and motility response to ligand-induced activation was amplified in preclustered cells, suggesting a key role of receptor clustering in sensitizing the dose response to lower ligand concentrations. Ligand-independent versus ligand-induced signaling differed in the binding of arrestin-3 as a downstream effector, which was recruited to the clusters only in the presence of the ligand. This approach allows in situ receptor clustering, raising the possibility to explore different receptor activation modalities.

Arrestin-dependent internalization of rhodopsin-like G protein-coupled receptors

The internalization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is an important mechanism regulating the signal strength and limiting the opportunity of receptor activation. Based on the importance of GPCRs, the detailed knowledge about the regulation of signal transduction is crucial. Here, current knowledge about the agonist-induced, arrestin-dependent internalization process of rhodopsin-like GPCRs is reviewed. Arrestins are conserved molecules that act as key players within the internalization process of many GPCRs. Based on highly conserved structural characteristics within the rhodopsin-like GPCRs, the identification of arrestin interaction sites in model systems can be compared and used for the investigation of internalization processes of other receptors. The increasing understanding of this essential regulation mechanism of receptors can be used for drug development targeting rhodopsin-like GPCRs. Here, we focus on the neuropeptide Y receptor family, as these receptors transmit various physiological processes such as food intake, energy homeostasis, and regulation of emotional behavior, and are further involved in pathophysiological processes like cancer, obesity and mood disorders. Hence, this receptor family represents an interesting target for the development of novel therapeutics requiring the understanding of the regulatory mechanisms influencing receptor mediated signaling.

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.

Shuttling of Peptide-Drug Conjugates by G Protein-Coupled Receptors Is Significantly Improved by Pulsed Application

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can be used to shuttle peptide-drug conjugates into cells. But, for efficient therapy, a high concentration of cargo needs to be delivered. To explore this, we studied the pharmacologically interesting neuropeptide Y1 receptor (Y1 R) in one recombinant and three oncogenic cell systems that endogenously express the receptor. We demonstrate that recycled receptors behave identically to newly synthesized receptors with respect to ligand binding and internalization pathways. Depending on the cell system, biosynthesis, recycling efficiency, and peptide uptake differ partially, but shuttling was efficient in all systems. However, by comparing continuous application of the ligand for four hours to four cycles of internalization and recycling in between, a significantly higher amount of peptide uptake was achieved in the pulsed application (150-250 % to 300-400 %). Accordingly, in this well-suited drug shuttle system pulsed application is superior under all investigated conditions and should be considered for innovative, targeted drug delivery in general.

Receptor-based targeting of engineered nanocarrier against solid tumors: Recent progress and challenges ahead

Background In past few decades, the research on engineered nanocarriers (NCs) has gained significant attention in cancer therapy due to selective delivery of drug molecules on the diseased cells thereby preventing unwanted uptake into healthy cells to cause toxicity. Scope of review The applicability of enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect for the delivery of nanomedicines in cancer therapy has gained limited success due to poor accessibility of the drugs to the target cells where non-specific payload delivery to the off target region lack substantial reward over the conventional therapeutic systems. Major conclusions In spite of the fact, nanomedicines fabricated from the biocompatible nanocarriers have reduced targeting potential for meaningful clinical benefits. However, over expression of receptors on the tumor cells provides opportunity to design functional nanomedicine to bind substantially and deliver therapeutics to the cells or tissues of interest by alleviating the bio-toxicity and unwanted effects. This critique will give insight into the over expressed receptor in various tumor and targeting potential of functional nanomedicine as new therapeutic avenues for effective treatment. General significance This review shortly shed light on EPR-based drug targeting using nanomedicinal strategies, their limitation, and advances in therapeutic targeting to the tumor cells.

Unusually persistent Gαi-signaling of the neuropeptide Y2 receptor depletes cellular Gi/o pools and leads to a Gi-refractory state

BACKGROUND

A sensitive balance between receptor activation and desensitization is crucial for cellular homeostasis. Like many other GPCR, the human neuropeptide Y₂ receptor (hY₂R) undergoes ligand dependent activation and internalization into intracellular compartments, followed by recycling to the plasma membrane. This receptor is involved in the pathophysiology of distinct diseases e.g. epilepsy and cancer progression and conveys anorexigenic signals which makes it an interesting and promising anti-obesity target. However, Y₂R desensitization was observed after daily treatment with a selective PYY_13-36 analog in vivo by a yet unknown mechanism.

MATERIALS

We studied the desensitization and activatability of recycled Y₂R in transiently transfected HEK293 cells as well as in endogenously Y₂R expressing SH-SY5Y and SMS-KAN cells. Results were evaluated by one-way ANOVA and Tukey post test.

RESULTS

We observed strong desensitization of the Y₂R in a second round of stimulation despite its reappearance at the membrane. Already the first activation of the Y₂R leads to depletion of the functional cellular Gα_i/o protein pool and consequently desensitizes the linked signal transduction pathways, independent of receptor internalization. This desensitization also extends to other Gα_i/o-coupled GPCR and can be detected in transfected HEK293 as well as in SH-SY5Y and SMS-KAN cell lines, both expressing the Y₂R endogenously. By overexpression of chimeric Gα_qi proteins in a model system, activation has been rescued, which identifies a critical role of the G protein status for cellular signaling. Furthermore, Y₂R displays strong allosteric coupling to inhibitory G proteins in radioligand binding assays, and loses 10-fold affinity in the G protein-depleted state observed after activation, which can be largely abrogated by overexpression of the Gα_i-subunit.

CONCLUSION

The unusually persistent Gα_i-signaling of the Y₂R leads to a state of cellular desensitization of the inhibitory Gα_i-pathway. The strong allosteric effects of the Y₂R-Gα_i-interaction might be a mechanism that contributes to the burst of Gα_i-signaling, but also serves as a mechanism to limit the Y₂-mediated signaling after recycling. Thus, the cell is left in a refractory state, preventing further Gα_i-signaling of the Y₂R itself but also other Gα_i/o-coupled receptors by simply controlling the repertoire of downstream effectors. Video abstract.

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.

The structural basis of the arrestin binding to GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by more clinically used drugs than any other protein family. GPCR signaling via G proteins is quenched (desensitized) by the phosphorylation of the active receptor by specific GPCR kinases (GRKs) followed by tight binding of arrestins to active phosphorylated receptors. Thus, arrestins engage two types of receptor elements: those that contain GRK-added phosphates and those that change conformation upon activation. GRKs attach phosphates to serines and threonines in the GPCR C-terminus or any one of the cytoplasmic loops. In addition to these phosphates, arrestins engage the cavity that appears between trans-membrane helices upon receptor activation and several other non-phosphorylated elements. The residues that bind GPCRs are localized on the concave side of both arrestin domains. Arrestins undergo a global conformational change upon receptor binding (become activated). Arrestins serve as important hubs of cellular signaling, emanating from activated GPCRs and receptor-independent.

Time-Resolved Tracking of Separately Internalized Neuropeptide Y2 Receptors by Two-Color Pulse-Chase

Internalization and intracellular trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) plays an important role in the signal transduction. These processes are often highly dynamic and take place rapidly. In the past 10 years, it became obvious that internalized GPCRs are also capable of signaling via arrestin or heterotrimeric G proteins within the endosomal compartment. Real-time imaging of receptors in living cells can help to evaluate the temporal and spatial localization. We achieved a two-color pulse-chase labeling approach, which allowed the tracking of the human neuropeptide Y₂ receptor (hY₂R) in the same cell at different times. The ability to visualize the internalization pathway of two separately labeled and separately stimulated subsets of hY₂R in a time-resolved manner revealed a rapid trafficking. Fusion of the two hY₂R subsets was already observed 10 min after stimulation in the early endosomal compartment without subsequent separation of the fused receptor populations. The results demonstrate that the cells do not discriminate between receptors that were stimulated and internalized at different time points.

Identifying the localization and exploring a functional role for Gprc5c in the kidney

The investigation of orphan GPCRs (GPRs) has the potential to uncover novel insights into whole animal physiology. In this study, our goal was to determine the renal localization of Gprc5c, a receptor that we previously reported to be highly expressed in murine whole kidney, and to examine physiologic parameters in Gprc5c knockout (KO) mice to gain insight into function. Gprc5c localized to the apical membrane of renal proximal tubules (PTs) in mice, rats, and humans. With the comparison of Gprc5c wild-type (WT) and KO mice, we found that Gprc5c KO mice have altered acid-base homeostasis. Specifically, Gprc5c KO mice have lower blood pH and higher urine pH compared with WT mice, with a reduced level of titratable acids in their urine. In an in vitro GPCR internalization assay, we observed that Gprc5c internalization (an index of activation) was triggered by alkaline extracellular pH. Furthermore, with the use of an in vitro BCECF assay, we observed that Gprc5c increases Na⁺/H⁺ exchanger 3 (NHE3) activity at alkaline pH. We also find that the NHE3 activity is reduced in Gprc5c KO mice by 2 photon imaging in seminaphthorhodafluors (SNARF)-4F-loaded kidney sections. NHE3 is a primary contributor to apical transport of H⁺ in the renal PT. Together, these data imply that Gprc5c modulates the renal contribution to systemic pH homeostasis, at least in part, by taking part in the regulation of NHE3.-Rajkumar, P., Cha, B., Yin, J., Arend, L. J., Păunescu, T. G., Hirabayashi, Y., Donowitz, M., Pluznick, J. L. Identifying the localization and exploring a functional role for Gprc5c in the kidney.

C-terminal motif of human neuropeptide Y4 receptor determines internalization and arrestin recruitment

The human neuropeptide Y₄ receptor is a rhodopsin-like G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), which contributes to anorexigenic signals. Thus, this receptor is a highly interesting target for metabolic diseases. As GPCR internalization and trafficking affect receptor signaling and vice versa, we aimed to investigate the molecular mechanism of hY₄R desensitization and endocytosis. The role of distinct segments of the hY₄R carboxyl terminus was investigated by fluorescence microscopy, binding assays, inositol turnover experiments and bioluminescence resonance energy transfer assays to examine the internalization behavior of hY₄R and its interaction with arrestin-3. Based on results of C-terminal deletion mutants and substitution of single amino acids, the motif ^7.78EESEHLPLSTVHTEVSKGS^7.96 was identified, with glutamate, threonine and serine residues playing key roles, based on site-directed mutagenesis. Thus, we identified the internalization motif for the human neuropeptide Y₄ receptor, which regulates arrestin-3 recruitment and receptor endocytosis.

Computational analysis of the CB1 carboxyl-terminus in the receptor-G protein complex

Despite the important role of the carboxyl-terminus (Ct) of the activated brain cannabinoid receptor one (CB1) in the regulation of G protein signaling, a structural understanding of interactions with G proteins is lacking. This is largely due to the highly flexible nature of the CB1 Ct that dynamically adapts its conformation to the presence of G proteins. In the present study, we explored how the CB1 Ct can interact with the G protein by building on our prior modeling of the CB1-Gi complex (Shim, Ahn, and Kendall, The Journal of Biological Chemistry 2013;288:32449-32465) to incorporate a complete CB1 Ct (Glu416(Ct)-Leu472(Ct)). Based on the structural constraints from NMR studies, we employed ROSETTA to predict tertiary folds, ZDOCK to predict docking orientation, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to obtain two distinct plausible models of CB1 Ct in the CB1-Gi complex. The resulting models were consistent with the NMR-determined helical structure (H9) in the middle region of the CB1 Ct. The CB1 Ct directly interacted with both Gα and Gβ and stabilized the receptor at the Gi interface. The results of site-directed mutagenesis studies of Glu416(Ct), Asp423(Ct), Asp428(Ct), and Arg444(Ct) of CB1 Ct suggested that the CB1 Ct can influence receptor-G protein coupling by stabilizing the receptor at the Gi interface. This research provided, for the first time, models of the CB1 Ct in contact with the G protein.

Proteolytic degradation of neuropeptide Y (NPY) from head to toe: Identification of novel NPY-cleaving peptidases and potential drug interactions in CNS and Periphery

The bioactivity of neuropeptide Y (NPY) is either N-terminally modulated with respect to receptor selectivity by dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DP4)-like enzymes or proteolytic degraded by neprilysin or meprins, thereby abrogating signal transduction. However, neither the subcellular nor the compartmental differentiation of these regulatory mechanisms is fully understood. Using mass spectrometry, selective inhibitors and histochemistry, studies across various cell types, body fluids, and tissues revealed that most frequently DP4-like enzymes, aminopeptidases P, secreted meprin-A (Mep-A), and cathepsin D (CTSD) rapidly hydrolyze NPY, depending on the cell type and tissue under study. Novel degradation of NPY by cathepsins B, D, L, G, S, and tissue kallikrein could also be identified. The expression of DP4, CTSD, and Mep-A at the median eminence indicates that the bioactivity of NPY is regulated by peptidases at the interphase between the periphery and the CNS. Detailed ex vivo studies on human sera and CSF samples recognized CTSD as the major NPY-cleaving enzyme in the CSF, whereas an additional C-terminal truncation by angiotensin-converting enzyme could be detected in serum. The latter finding hints to potential drug interaction between antidiabetic DP4 inhibitors and anti-hypertensive angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, while it ablates suspected hypertensive side effects of only antidiabetic DP4-inhibitors application. The bioactivity of neuropeptide Y (NPY) is either N-terminally modulated with respect to receptor selectivity by dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DP4)-like enzymes or proteolytic degraded by neprilysin or meprins, thereby abrogating signal transduction. However, neither the subcellular nor the compartmental differentiation of these regulatory mechanisms is fully understood. Using mass spectrometry, selective inhibitors and histochemistry, studies across various cell types, body fluids, and tissues revealed that most frequently DP4-like enzymes, aminopeptidases P, secreted meprin-A (Mep-A), and cathepsin D (CTSD) rapidly hydrolyze NPY, depending on the cell type and tissue under study. Novel degradation of NPY by cathepsins B, D, L, G, S, and tissue kallikrein could also be identified. The expression of DP4, CTSD, and Mep-A at the median eminence indicates that the bioactivity of NPY is regulated by peptidases at the interphase between the periphery and the CNS. Detailed ex vivo studies on human sera and CSF samples recognized CTSD as the major NPY-cleaving enzyme in the CSF, whereas an additional C-terminal truncation by angiotensin-converting enzyme could be detected in serum. The latter finding hints to potential drug interaction between antidiabetic DP4 inhibitors and anti-hypertensive angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, while it ablates suspected hypertensive side effects of only antidiabetic DP4-inhibitors application.

Rapid Covalent Fluorescence Labeling of Membrane Proteins on Live Cells via Coiled-Coil Templated Acyl Transfer

Fluorescently labeled proteins enable the microscopic imaging of protein localization and function in live cells. In labeling reactions targeted against specific tag sequences, the size of the fluorophore-tag is of major concern. The tag should be small to prevent interference with protein function. Furthermore, rapid and covalent labeling methods are desired to enable the analysis of fast biological processes. Herein, we describe the development of a method in which the formation of a parallel coiled coil triggers the transfer of a fluorescence dye from a thioester-linked coil peptide conjugate onto a cysteine-modified coil peptide. This labeling method requires only small tag sequences (max 23 aa) and occurs with high tag specificity. We show that size matching of the coil peptides and a suitable thioester reactivity allow the acyl transfer reaction to proceed within minutes (rather than hours). We demonstrate the versatility of this method by applying it to the labeling of different G-protein coupled membrane receptors including the human neuropeptide Y receptors 1, 2, 4, 5, the neuropeptide FF receptors 1 and 2, and the dopamine receptor 1. The labeled receptors are fully functional and able to bind the respective ligand with high affinity. Activity is not impaired as demonstrated by activation, internalization, and recycling experiments.

Neuropeptide Y receptors: a promising target for cancer imaging and therapy

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) was first identified from porcine brain in 1982, and plays its biological functions in humans through NPY receptors (Y₁, Y₂, Y₄ and Y₅). NPY receptors are known to mediate various physiological functions and involve in a majority of human diseases, such as obesity, hypertension, epilepsy and metabolic disorders. Recently, NPY receptors have been found to be overexpressed in many cancers, so they emerged as promising target in cancer diagnosis and therapy. This review focuses on the latest research about NPY and NPY receptors, and summarizes the current knowledge on NPY receptors expression in cancers, selective ligands for NPY receptors and their application in cancer imaging and therapy.

Intracellular Trafficking of Neuropeptide Y Receptors

The multireceptor multiligand system of neuropeptide Y receptors and their ligands is involved in the regulation of a multitude of physiological and pathophysiological processes. Specific expression patterns, ligand-binding modes, and signaling properties contribute to the complex network regulating distinct cellular responses. Intracellular trafficking processes are important key steps that are regulated in context with accessory proteins. These proteins exert their influence by interacting directly or indirectly with the receptors, causing modification of the receptors, or operating as scaffolds for the assembly of larger signaling complexes. On the intracellular receptor faces, sequence-specific motifs have been identified that play an important role in this process. Interestingly, it is also possible to influence the receptor internalization by modification of the peptide ligand.

G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinases of the GRK4 Protein Subfamily Phosphorylate Inactive G Protein-coupled Receptors (GPCRs)

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) play a key role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. It is widely assumed that most GRKs selectively phosphorylate only active GPCRs. Here, we show that although this seems to be the case for the GRK2/3 subfamily, GRK5/6 effectively phosphorylate inactive forms of several GPCRs, including β2-adrenergic and M2 muscarinic receptors, which are commonly used as representative models for GPCRs. Agonist-independent GPCR phosphorylation cannot be explained by constitutive activity of the receptor or membrane association of the GRK, suggesting that it is an inherent ability of GRK5/6. Importantly, phosphorylation of the inactive β2-adrenergic receptor enhanced its interactions with arrestins. Arrestin-3 was able to discriminate between phosphorylation of the same receptor by GRK2 and GRK5, demonstrating preference for the latter. Arrestin recruitment to inactive phosphorylated GPCRs suggests that not only agonist activation but also the complement of GRKs in the cell regulate formation of the arrestin-receptor complex and thereby G protein-independent signaling.

Identification of serine 348 on the apelin receptor as a novel regulatory phosphorylation site in apelin-13-induced G protein-independent biased signaling

Phosphorylation plays vital roles in the regulation of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) functions. The apelin and apelin receptor (APJ) system is involved in the regulation of cardiovascular function and central control of body homeostasis. Here, using tandem mass spectrometry, we first identified phosphorylated serine residues in the C terminus of APJ. To determine the role of phosphorylation sites in APJ-mediated G protein-dependent and -independent signaling and function, we induced a mutation in the C-terminal serine residues and examined their effects on the interaction between APJ with G protein or GRK/β-arrestin and their downstream signaling. Mutation of serine 348 led to an elimination of both GRK and β-arrestin recruitment to APJ induced by apelin-13. Moreover, APJ internalization and G protein-independent ERK signaling were also abolished by point mutation at serine 348. In contrast, this mutant at serine residues had no demonstrable impact on apelin-13-induced G protein activation and its intracellular signaling. These findings suggest that mutation of serine 348 resulted in inactive GRK/β-arrestin. However, there was no change in the active G protein thus, APJ conformation was biased. These results provide important information on the molecular interplay and impact of the APJ function, which may be extrapolated to design novel drugs for cardiac hypertrophy based on this biased signal pathway.

Mutations in arrestin-3 differentially affect binding to neuropeptide Y receptor subtypes

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity in arrestins and the phylogenetic analysis of the arrestin (arr) family, we introduced fifteen mutations of receptor-discriminator residues in arr-3, which were identified previously using mutagenesis, in vitro binding, and BRET-based recruitment assay in intact cells. The effects of these mutations were tested using neuropeptide Y receptors Y1R and Y2R. NPY-elicited arr-3 recruitment to Y1R was not affected by these mutations, or even alanine substitution of all ten residues (arr-3-NCA), which prevented arr-3 binding to other receptors tested so far. However, NCA and two other mutations prevented agonist-independent arr-3 pre-docking to Y1R. In contrast, eight out of 15 mutations significantly reduced agonist-dependent arr-3 recruitment to Y2R. NCA eliminated arr-3 binding to active Y2R, whereas Tyr239Thr reduced it ~7-fold. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface generates arr-3 with high preference for Y1R over Y2R. Several mutations differentially affect arr-3 pre-docking and agonist-induced recruitment. Thus, arr-3 recruitment to the receptor involves several mechanistically distinct steps. Targeted mutagenesis can fine-tune arrestins directing them to specific receptors and particular activation states of the same receptor.

Targeting individual GPCRs with redesigned nonvisual arrestins

Numerous human diseases are caused by excessive signaling of mutant G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or receptors that are overstimulated due to upstream signaling imbalances. The feasibility of functional compensation by arrestins with enhanced ability to quench receptor signaling was recently tested in the visual system. The results showed that even in this extremely demanding situation of rods that have no ability to phosphorylate rhodopsin, enhanced arrestin improved rod morphology, light sensitivity, survival, and accelerated photoresponse recovery. Structurally distinct enhanced mutants of arrestins that bind phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated active GPCRs with much higher affinity than parental wild-type (WT) proteins have been constructed. These "super-arrestins" are likely to have the power to dampen the signaling by hyperactive GPCRs. However, most cells express 5-20 GPCR subtypes, only one of which would be overactive, while nonvisual arrestins are remarkably promiscuous, binding hundreds of different GPCRs. Thus, to be therapeutically useful, enhanced versions of nonvisual arrestins must be made fairly specific for particular receptors. Recent identification of very few arrestin residues as key receptor discriminators paves the way to the construction of receptor subtype-specific nonvisual arrestins.

Structural determinants of arrestin functions

Arrestins are a small protein family with only four members in mammals. Arrestins demonstrate an amazing versatility, interacting with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) subtypes, numerous nonreceptor signaling proteins, and components of the internalization machinery, as well as cytoskeletal elements, including regular microtubules and centrosomes. Here, we focus on the structural determinants that mediate various arrestin functions. The receptor-binding elements in arrestins were mapped fairly comprehensively, which set the stage for the construction of mutants targeting particular GPCRs. The elements engaged by other binding partners are only now being elucidated and in most cases we have more questions than answers. Interestingly, even very limited and imprecise identification of structural requirements for the interaction with very few other proteins has enabled the development of signaling-biased arrestin mutants. More comprehensive understanding of the structural underpinning of different arrestin functions will pave the way for the construction of arrestins that can link the receptor we want to the signaling pathway of our choosing.

Arrestins: role in the desensitization, sequestration, and vesicular trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors

Over the years, β-arrestins have emerged as multifunctional molecular scaffolding proteins regulating almost every imaginable G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) function. Originally discovered as GPCR-desensitizing molecules, they have been shown to also serve as important regulators of GPCR signaling, sequestration, and vesicular trafficking. This broad functional role implicates β-arrestins as key regulatory proteins for cellular function. Hence, this chapter summarizes the current understanding of the β-arrestin family's unique ability to control the kinetics as well as the extent of GPCR activity at the level of desensitization, sequestration, and subsequent intracellular trafficking.

The anterograde transport of the human neuropeptide Y2 receptor is regulated by a subtype specific mechanism mediated by the C-terminus

The export of newly synthesized proteins, including G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR), from the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and further transport to the plasma membrane is a tightly regulated process. ER export and subsequent cell surface targeting of GPCR is initially mediated through COPII-coated vesicles. It is governed by specific amino acid sequences located in extracellular as well as intracellular receptor domains, for example in the C-terminus (CT) of the receptor. Herein, we determined the role of the CT in the anterograde transport of the human neuropeptide Y receptor (hYR) type 2. We identified a short sequence motif in the membrane proximal CT: Y(x)(3)F(x)(3)F in the region of the putative 8th helix has a critical functional relevance for the anterograde transport of hY(2)R, since its deletion leads to accumulation of the receptor in the ER. It is sequence and position specific. Furthermore we identified a distinct role of C-terminal sequences in hY(1)R, hY(2)R, hY(4)R and hY(5)R. Regulation of hY(5)R export is regulated by a different mechanism as compared to hY(2)R. Different sequence elements with respect to function and localization are involved as demonstrated by the construction of a hY(2)/hY(5) receptor chimera and a noneffective deletion in the region of helix eight in the hY(5)R. In contrast to hY(2)R, deletion of the corresponding helical segment F(x)(3)L(x)(3)F has no influence on anterograde transport of hY(1)R, whereas deletion of F(x)(3)I(x)(3)V in hY(4)R restrains the receptor to the Golgi apparatus. Interestingly this pattern is not mirrored by repression of COPII vesicle transport by Sar1[H79G] overexpression. Whereas the 8th helix is involved before or at the level of Sar1 dependent export pathways in the ER for the hY(2)R, in hY(4)R helix eight is involved at later stages of anterograde transport.

Ligand directed signaling differences between rodent and human κ-opioid receptors

KOR activation of Gβγ dependent signaling results in analgesia, whereas the dysphoric effects of KOR agonists are mediated by a different pathway involving G protein receptor kinase and non-visual arrestin. Based on this distinction, a partial KOR agonist that does not efficiently activate arrestin-dependent biased signaling may produce analgesia without dysphoria. No KOR-selective partial agonists are currently available, and preclinical assessment is complicated by sequence differences between rodent (r) and human (h) KOR. In this study, we compared the signaling initiated by the available partial agonists. Pentazocine was significantly more potent at activating p38 MAPK in hKOR than rKOR expressed in HEK293 cells but equally potent at arrestin-independent activation of ERK1/2 in hKOR and rKOR. Similarly, butorphanol increased phospho-p38-ir in hKOR-expressing cells but did not activate p38 in rKOR-HEK293. Like pentazocine, butorphanol was equally efficacious at activating ERK1/2 in rKOR and hKOR. In contrast, levorphanol, nalorphine, and U50,488 did not distinguish between hKOR and rKOR in p38 MAPK activation. Consistent with its low potency at p38 activation, pentazocine did not produce conditioned place aversion in mice. hKOR lacks the Ser-369 phosphorylation site in rKOR required for G protein receptor kinase/arrestin-dependent p38 activation, but mutation of the Ser-358 to asparagine in hKOR blocked p38 activation without affecting the acute arrestin-independent activation of ERK1/2. This study shows that hKOR activates p38 MAPK through a phosphorylation and arrestin-dependent mechanism; however, activation differs between hKOR and rKOR for some ligands. These functional selectivity differences have important implications for preclinical screening of partial KOR agonists.

Synthetic biology with surgical precision: targeted reengineering of signaling proteins

The complexity of living systems exceeds everything else studied by natural sciences. Sophisticated networks of intimately intertwined signaling pathways coordinate cellular functions. Clear understanding how the integration of multiple inputs produces coherent behavior is one of the major challenges of cell biology. Integration via perfectly timed highly regulated protein-protein interactions and precise targeting of the "output" proteins to particular substrates is emerging as a common theme of signaling regulation. This often involves specialized scaffolding proteins, whose key function is to ensure that correct partners come together in an appropriate place at the right time. Defective or faulty signaling underlies many congenital and acquired human disorders. Several pioneering studies showed that ectopic expression of existing proteins or their elements can restore functions destroyed by mutations or normalize the signaling pushed out of balance by disease and/or current small molecule-based therapy. Several recent studies show that proteins with new functional modalities can be generated by mixing and matching existing domains, or via functional recalibration and fine-tuning of existing proteins by precisely targeted mutations. Using arrestins as an example, we describe how manipulation of individual functions yields signaling-biased proteins. Creative protein redesign generates novel tools valuable for unraveling the intricacies of cell biology. Engineered proteins with specific functional changes also have huge therapeutic potential in disorders associated with inherited or acquired signaling errors.

Surface masking shapes the traffic of the neuropeptide Y Y2 receptor

The neuropeptide Y (NPY) Y2 receptor shows a large masked surface population in adherent CHO cells or in forebrain cell aggregates, but not in dispersed cells or in particulates from these sources. This is related to adhesion via acidic motifs in the extracellular N-terminal domain. Masking of the Y2 receptor is lifted by non-permeabilizing mechanical dispersion of cells, which also increases internalization of Y2 agonists. Mechanical dispersion and detachment by EDTA expose the same number of surface sites. As we have already shown, phenylarsine oxide (PAO), a cysteine-bridging agent, and to a lesser extent also the cysteine alkylator N-ethylmaleimide, unmask the surface Y2 sites without cell detachment or permeabilization. We now demonstrate that unmasking by permeabilizing but non-detaching treatment with cholesterol-binding detergents digitonin and edelfosine compares with and overlaps that of PAO. The caveolar/raft cholesterol-targeting macrolide filipin III however produces only partial unmasking. Depletion of the surface sites by N-terminally clipped Y2 agonists indicates larger accessibility for a short highly helical peptide. These findings indicate presence of a dynamic masked pool including majority of the cell surface Y2 receptors in adherent CHO cells. This compartmentalization is obviously involved in the low internalization of Y2 receptors in these cells.

Manipulation of very few receptor discriminator residues greatly enhances receptor specificity of non-visual arrestins

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity of arrestins and the analysis of the evolution in the arrestin family, we introduced 10 mutations of "receptor discriminator" residues in arrestin-3. The recruitment of these mutants to M2 muscarinic (M2R), D1 (D1R) and D2 (D2R) dopamine, and β(2)-adrenergic receptors (β(2)AR) was assessed using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based assays in cells. Seven of 10 mutations differentially affected arrestin-3 binding to individual receptors. D260K and Q262P reduced the binding to β(2)AR, much more than to other receptors. The combination D260K/Q262P virtually eliminated β(2)AR binding while preserving the interactions with M2R, D1R, and D2R. Conversely, Y239T enhanced arrestin-3 binding to β(2)AR and reduced the binding to M2R, D1R, and D2R, whereas Q256Y selectively reduced recruitment to D2R. The Y239T/Q256Y combination virtually eliminated the binding to D2R and reduced the binding to β(2)AR and M2R, yielding a mutant with high selectivity for D1R. Eleven of 12 mutations significantly changed the binding to light-activated phosphorhodopsin. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface modifies receptor preference, enabling the construction of non-visual arrestins specific for particular receptor subtypes. These findings pave the way to the construction of signaling-biased arrestins targeting the receptor of choice for research or therapeutic purposes.

Silent scaffolds: inhibition OF c-Jun N-terminal kinase 3 activity in cell by dominant-negative arrestin-3 mutant

We established a new in vivo arrestin-3-JNK3 interaction assay based on bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) between JNK3-luciferase and Venus-arrestins. We tested the ability of WT arrestin-3 and its 3A mutant that readily binds β2-adrenergic receptors as well as two mutants impaired in receptor binding, Δ7 and KNC, to directly bind JNK3 and to promote JNK3 phosphorylation in cells. Both receptor binding-deficient mutants interact with JNK3 significantly better than WT and 3A arrestin-3. WT arrestin-3 and Δ7 mutant robustly promoted JNK3 activation, whereas 3A and KNC mutants did not. Thus, receptor binding, JNK3 interaction, and JNK3 activation are three distinct arrestin functions. We found that the KNC mutant, which tightly binds ASK1, MKK4, and JNK3 without facilitating JNK3 phosphorylation, has a dominant-negative effect, competitively decreasing JNK activation by WT arrestin-3. Thus, KNC is a silent scaffold, a novel type of molecular tool for the suppression of MAPK signaling in living cells.

Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy, combined with bimolecular fluorescence complementation, reveals the effects of β-arrestin complexes and endocytic targeting on the membrane mobility of neuropeptide Y receptors

Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) and photon counting histogram (PCH) analysis are powerful ways to study mobility and stoichiometry of G protein coupled receptor complexes, within microdomains of single living cells. However, relating these properties to molecular mechanisms can be challenging. We investigated the influence of β-arrestin adaptors and endocytosis mechanisms on plasma membrane diffusion and particle brightness of GFP-tagged neuropeptide Y (NPY) receptors. A novel GFP-based bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) system also identified Y1 receptor-β-arrestin complexes. Diffusion co-efficients (D) for Y1 and Y2-GFP receptors in HEK293 cell plasma membranes were 2.22 and 2.15 × 10^− 9 cm² s^− 1 respectively. At a concentration which promoted only Y1 receptor endocytosis, NPY treatment reduced Y1-GFP motility (D 1.48 × 10^− 9 cm² s^− 1), but did not alter diffusion characteristics of the Y2-GFP receptor. Agonist induced changes in Y1 receptor motility were inhibited by mutations (6A) which prevented β-arrestin recruitment and internalisation; conversely they became apparent in a Y2 receptor mutant with increased β-arrestin affinity. NPY treatment also increased Y1 receptor-GFP particle brightness, changes which indicated receptor clustering, and which were abolished by the 6A mutation. The importance of β-arrestin recruitment for these effects was illustrated by reduced lateral mobility (D 1.20–1.33 × 10^− 9 cm² s^− 1) of Y1 receptor-β-arrestin BiFC complexes. Thus NPY-induced changes in Y receptor motility and brightness reflect early events surrounding arrestin dependent endocytosis at the plasma membrane, results supported by a novel combined BiFC/FCS approach to detect the underlying receptor-β-arrestin signalling complex.

Few residues within an extensive binding interface drive receptor interaction and determine the specificity of arrestin proteins

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated forms of G protein-coupled receptors, terminating G protein activation, orchestrating receptor trafficking, and redirecting signaling to alternative pathways. Visual arrestin-1 preferentially binds rhodopsin, whereas the two non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptor subtypes. Here we show that an extensive surface on the concave side of both arrestin-2 domains is involved in receptor binding. We also identified a small number of residues on the receptor binding surface of the N- and C-domains that largely determine the receptor specificity of arrestins. We show that alanine substitution of these residues blocks the binding of arrestin-1 to rhodopsin in vitro and of arrestin-2 and -3 to β2-adrenergic, M2 muscarinic cholinergic, and D2 dopamine receptors in intact cells, suggesting that these elements critically contribute to the energy of the interaction. Thus, in contrast to arrestin-1, where direct phosphate binding is crucial, the interaction of non-visual arrestins with their cognate receptors depends to a lesser extent on phosphate binding and more on the binding to non-phosphorylated receptor elements.

Neuropeptide Y receptors: ligand binding and trafficking suggest novel approaches in drug development

NPY, PYY and PP constitute the so-called NPY hormone family, which exert its biological functions in humans through YRs (Y₁, Y₂, Y₄ and Y₅). Systematic modulation of YR function became important as this multireceptor/multiligand system is known to mediate various essential physiological key functions and is involved in a variety of major human diseases such as epilepsy, obesity and cancer. As several YRs have been found to be overexpressed on different types of malignant tumors they emerge as promising target in modern drug development. Here, we summarize the current understanding of YRs function and the molecular mechanisms of ligand binding and trafficking. We further address recent advances in YR-based drug design, the development of promising future drug candidates and novel approaches in YR-targeted tumor diagnostics and therapy opportunities.