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

Arrestins: A Small Family of Multi-Functional Proteins

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

Convergent evolution of dim light vision in owls and deep-diving whales

Animals with enhanced dim-light sensitivity are at higher risk of light-induced retinal degeneration when exposed to bright light conditions.1,2,3,4 This trade-off is mediated by the rod photoreceptor sensory protein, rhodopsin (RHO), and its toxic vitamin A chromophore by-product, all-trans retinal.5,6,7,8 Rod arrestin (Arr-1) binds to RHO and promotes sequestration of excess all-trans retinal,9,10 which has recently been suggested as a protective mechanism against photoreceptor cell death.2,11 We investigated Arr-1 evolution in animals at high risk of retinal damage due to periodic bright-light exposure of rod-dominated retinas. Here, we find the convergent evolution of enhanced Arr-1/RHO all-trans-retinal sequestration in owls and deep-diving whales. Statistical analyses reveal a parallel acceleration of Arr-1 evolutionary rates in these lineages, which is associated with the introduction of a rare Arr-1 mutation (Q69R) into the RHO-Arr-1 binding interface. Using in vitro assays, we find that this single mutation significantly enhances RHO-all-trans-retinal sequestration by ∼30%. This functional convergence across 300 million years of evolutionary divergence suggests that Arr-1 and RHO may play an underappreciated role in the photoprotection of the eye, with potentially vast clinical significance.

In-Cell Arrestin-Receptor Interaction Assays

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent ∼30% of current drug targets. Ligand binding to these receptors activates G proteins and arrestins, which function in different signaling pathways. Given that functionally selective or biased ligands preferentially activate one of these two groups of pathways, they may be superior medications for certain disease states. The identification of such ligands requires robust drug screening assays for both G protein and arrestin activity. This unit describes protocols for assays that monitor reversible arrestin recruitment to GPCRs in living cells using either bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) or nanoluciferase complementation (NanoLuc). Two types of assays can be used: one configuration directly measures arrestin recruitment to a GPCR fused to a protein tag at its intracellular C-terminus, whereas the other configuration detects arrestin translocation to the plasma membrane in response to activation of an unmodified GPCR. Together, these assays are powerful tools for studying dynamic interactions between GPCRs and arrestins. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: Receptor-arrestin BRET assay to measure ligand-induced recruitment of arrestin to receptors Basic Protocol 2: Receptor-arrestin NANOBIT assay to measure ligand-induced recruitment of arrestin to receptors Alternative Protocol 1: BRET assay to measure ligand-induced recruitment of arrestin to the plasma membrane Alternative Protocol 2: NANOBIT assay to measure ligand-induced recruitment of arrestin to the plasma membrane Support Protocol 1: Optimization of polyethylenimine (PEI) concentration for transfection.

Expression of Untagged Arrestins in E. coli and Their Purification

Purified arrestin proteins are necessary for biochemical, biophysical, and structural studies of these versatile regulators of cell signaling. Described herein is a basic protocol for arrestin expression in Escherichia coli and purification of tag-free wild-type and mutant arrestins. The method includes ammonium sulfate precipitation of arrestins from cell lysates, followed by Heparin-Sepharose chromatography. Depending on the arrestin type and/or mutations, the next step is Q-Sepharose or SP-Sepharose chromatography. In many cases, the nonbinding column is used as a filter to bind contaminants without retaining arrestin. In some cases, both chromatographic steps must be performed sequentially to achieve high purity. Purified arrestins can be concentrated up to 10 mg/ml, remain fully functional, and withstand several cycles of freezing and thawing, provided that the overall salt concentration is maintained at or above physiological levels. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Large-scale expression and purification of arrestins Alternate Protocol: Purification of arrestin-3 and truncated form of arrestin-1-(1-378) Support Protocol: Small-scale test expression of wild-type and mutant arrestins in E. coli.

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

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

Structural details of a Class B GPCR-arrestin complex revealed by genetically encoded crosslinkers in living cells

Understanding the molecular basis of arrestin-mediated regulation of GPCRs is critical for deciphering signaling mechanisms and designing functional selectivity. However, structural studies of GPCR-arrestin complexes are hampered by their highly dynamic nature. Here, we dissect the interaction of arrestin-2 (arr2) with the secretin-like parathyroid hormone 1 receptor PTH1R using genetically encoded crosslinking amino acids in live cells. We identify 136 intermolecular proximity points that guide the construction of energy-optimized molecular models for the PTH1R-arr2 complex. Our data reveal flexible receptor elements missing in existing structures, including intracellular loop 3 and the proximal C-tail, and suggest a functional role of a hitherto overlooked positively charged region at the arrestin N-edge. Unbiased MD simulations highlight the stability and dynamic nature of the complex. Our integrative approach yields structural insights into protein-protein complexes in a biologically relevant live-cell environment and provides information inaccessible to classical structural methods, while also revealing the dynamics of the system.

Do arrestin oligomers have specific functions?

Arrestins are a small family of versatile regulators of cell signaling. Arrestins regulate signaling and trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors, regulate and direct to particular subcellular compartments numerous protein kinases, ubiquitin ligases, etc. Three out of four arrestin subtypes expressed in vertebrates self-associate, each forming oligomers of a distinct size and shape. While the structures of the solution oligomers of arrestin-1, -2, and -3 have been elucidated, no function specific for the oligomeric form of either of these three subtypes has been identified thus far. Considering how multi-functional average-sized (~45 kDa) arrestin proteins were found to be, it appears likely that certain functions are predominantly or exclusively fulfilled by monomeric and oligomeric forms of each subtype.

β-arrestin1 promotes tauopathy by transducing GPCR signaling, disrupting microtubules and autophagy

GPCRs regulator, β-arrestin1, is increased in FTLD-tau patients, is required for β2-adrenergic receptor and metabotropic glutamate receptor 2-induced tau phosphorylation, promotes tau aggregation by impairing autophagy, and destabilizes microtubule dynamics, whereas genetic reduction in β-arrestin1 mitigates tauopathy and cognitive impairments.

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been shown to play integral roles in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis. However, it is unclear how diverse GPCRs similarly affect Aβ and tau pathogenesis. GPCRs share a common mechanism of action via the β-arrestin scaffolding signaling complexes, which not only serve to desensitize GPCRs by internalization, but also mediate multiple downstream signaling events. As signaling via the GPCRs, β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR), and metabotropic glutamate receptor 2 (mGluR2) promotes hyperphosphorylation of tau, we hypothesized that β-arrestin1 represents a point of convergence for such pathogenic activities. Here, we report that β-arrestins are not only essential for β2AR and mGluR2-mediated increase in pathogenic tau but also show that β-arrestin1 levels are increased in brains of Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD-tau) patients. Increased β-arrestin1 in turn drives the accumulation of pathogenic tau, whereas reduced ARRB1 alleviates tauopathy and rescues impaired synaptic plasticity and cognitive impairments in PS19 mice. Biochemical and cellular studies show that β-arrestin1 drives tauopathy by destabilizing microtubules and impeding p62/SQSTM1 autophagy flux by interfering with p62 body formation, which promotes pathogenic tau accumulation.

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

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

The ring size of monocyclic ET-1 controls selectivity and signaling efficiency at both endothelin receptor subtypes

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) like hypertension are a major cause for death worldwide. In the cardiovascular tissue, the endothelin system-consisting of the receptor subtypes A (ET_A R) and B (ET_B R) and the mixed agonist endothelin 1 (ET-1)-is a major key player in the regulation of vascular tone and blood pressure. Tight control of this system is required to maintain homeostasis; otherwise, the endothelin system can cause severe CVDs like pulmonary artery hypertension. The high sequence homology between both receptor subtypes limits the development of novel and selective ligands. Identification of small differences in receptor-ligand interactions and determination of selectivity constraints are crucial to fine-tune ligand properties and subsequent signaling events. Here, we report on novel ET-1 analogs and their detailed pharmacological characterization. We generated simplified ET-1-derived monocyclic peptides to provide an accessible synthesis route. By detailed in vitro characterization, we demonstrated that both G protein signaling and the subsequent arrestin recruitment of activated ET_B R remain intact, whereas activation of the ET_A R depends on the intramolecular ring size. Increasing of the intramolecular ring structure reduces activity at the ET_A R and shifts the peptide toward ET_B R selectivity. All ET-1 analogs displayed efficient ET_B R-mediated signaling by G protein activation and arrestin 3 recruitment. Our study provides in-depth characterization of the ET-1/ET_A R and ET-1/ET_B R interactions, which has the potential for future development of endothelin-based drugs for CVD treatment. By identification of Lys⁹ for selective labeling, novel analogs for peptide-mediated shuttling by ET-1 are proposed.

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.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin

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

PAR4 activation involves extracellular loop 3 and transmembrane residue Thr153

Protease-activated receptor 4 (PAR4) mediates sustained thrombin signaling in platelets and is required for a stable thrombus. PAR4 is activated by proteolysis of the N terminus to expose a tethered ligand. The structural basis for PAR4 activation and the location of its ligand binding site (LBS) are unknown. Using hydrogen/deuterium exchange (H/D exchange), computational modeling, and signaling studies, we determined the molecular mechanism for tethered ligand-mediated PAR4 activation. H/D exchange identified that the LBS is composed of transmembrane 3 (TM3) domain and TM7. Unbiased computational modeling further predicted an interaction between Gly48 from the tethered ligand and Thr153 from the LBS. Mutating Thr153 significantly decreased PAR4 signaling. H/D exchange and modeling also showed that extracellular loop 3 (ECL3) serves as a gatekeeper for the interaction between the tethered ligand and LBS. A naturally occurring sequence variant (P310L, rs2227376) and 2 experimental mutations (S311A and P312L) determined that the rigidity conferred by prolines in ECL3 are essential for PAR4 activation. Finally, we examined the role of the polymorphism at position 310 in venous thromboembolism (VTE) using the International Network Against Venous Thrombosis (INVENT) consortium multi-ancestry genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis. Individuals with the PAR4 Leu310 allele had a 15% reduction in relative risk for VTE (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.94) compared with the Pro310 allele. These data are consistent with our H/D exchange, molecular modeling, and signaling studies. In conclusion, we have uncovered the structural basis for PAR4 activation and identified a previously unrecognized role for PAR4 in VTE.

Biased agonists at the human Y1 receptor lead to prolonged membrane residency and extended receptor G protein interaction

Functionally selective ligands to address specific cellular responses downstream of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) open up new possibilities for therapeutics. We designed and characterized novel subtype- and pathway-selective ligands. Substitution of position Q34 of neuropeptide Y to glycine (G34-NPY) results in unprecedented selectivity over all other YR subtypes. Moreover, this ligand displays a significant bias towards activation of the Gi/o pathway over recruitment of arrestin-3. Notably, no bias is observed for an established Y1R versus Y2R selective ligand carrying a proline at position 34 (F7,P34-NPY). Next, we investigated the spatio-temporal signaling at the Y1R and demonstrated that G protein-biased ligands promote a prolonged localization at the cell membrane, which leads to enhanced G protein signaling, while endosomal receptors do not contribute to cAMP signaling. Thus, spatial components are critical for the signaling of the Y1R that can be modulated by tailored ligands and represent a novel mode for biased pathways.

Biological Role of Arrestin-1 Oligomerization

Members of the arrestin superfamily have great propensity of self-association, but the physiological significance of this phenomenon is unclear. To determine the biological role of visual arrestin-1 oligomerization in rod photoreceptors, we expressed mutant arrestin-1 with severely impaired self-association in mouse rods and analyzed mice of both sexes. We show that the oligomerization-deficient mutant is capable of quenching rhodopsin signaling normally, as judged by electroretinography and single-cell recording. Like wild type, mutant arrestin-1 is largely excluded from the outer segments in the dark, proving that the normal intracellular localization is not due the size exclusion of arrestin-1 oligomers. In contrast to wild type, supraphysiological expression of the mutant causes shortening of the outer segments and photoreceptor death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of arrestin-1 monomer, ensuring long-term photoreceptor survival.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Visual arrestin-1 forms dimers and tetramers. The biological role of its oligomerization is unclear. To test the role of arrestin-1 self-association, we expressed oligomerization-deficient mutant in arrestin-1 knock-out mice. The mutant quenches light-induced rhodopsin signaling like wild type, demonstrating that in vivo monomeric arrestin-1 is necessary and sufficient for this function. In rods, arrestin-1 moves from the inner segments and cell bodies in the dark to the outer segments in the light. Nonoligomerizing mutant undergoes the same translocation, demonstrating that the size of the oligomers is not the reason for arrestin-1 exclusion from the outer segments in the dark. High expression of oligomerization-deficient arrestin-1 resulted in rod death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of high levels of arrestin-1 monomer.

Exploring GPCR-arrestin interfaces with genetically encoded crosslinkers

β‐arrestins (βarr1 and βarr2) are ubiquitous regulators of G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling. Available data suggest that β‐arrestins dock to different receptors in different ways. However, the structural characterization of GPCR‐arrestin complexes is challenging and alternative approaches to study GPCR‐arrestin complexes are needed. Here, starting from the finger loop as a major site for the interaction of arrestins with GPCRs, we genetically incorporate non‐canonical amino acids for photo‐ and chemical crosslinking into βarr1 and βarr2 and explore binding topologies to GPCRs forming either stable or transient complexes with arrestins: the vasopressin receptor 2 (rhodopsin‐like), the corticotropin‐releasing factor receptor 1, and the parathyroid hormone receptor 1 (both secretin‐like). We show that each receptor leaves a unique footprint on arrestins, whereas the two β‐arrestins yield quite similar crosslinking patterns. Furthermore, we show that the method allows defining the orientation of arrestin with respect to the GPCR. Finally, we provide direct evidence for the formation of arrestin oligomers in the cell.

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

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

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

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

Phosphorylation barcode-dependent signal bias of the dopamine D1 receptor

Agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) must correctly select from hundreds of potential downstream signaling cascades and effectors. To accomplish this, GPCRs first bind to an intermediary signaling protein, such as G protein or arrestin. These intermediaries initiate signaling cascades that promote the activity of different effectors, including several protein kinases. The relative roles of G proteins versus arrestins in initiating and directing signaling is hotly debated, and it remains unclear how the correct final signaling pathway is chosen given the ready availability of protein partners. Here, we begin to deconvolute the process of signal bias from the dopamine D1 receptor (D1R) by exploring factors that promote the activation of ERK1/2 or Src, the kinases that lead to cell growth and proliferation. We found that ERK1/2 activation involves both arrestin and Gαs, while Src activation depends solely on arrestin. Interestingly, we found that the phosphorylation pattern influences both arrestin and Gαs coupling, suggesting an additional way the cells regulate G protein signaling. The phosphorylation sites in the D1R intracellular loop 3 are particularly important for directing the binding of G protein versus arrestin and for selecting between the activation of ERK1/2 and Src. Collectively, these studies correlate functional outcomes with a physical basis for signaling bias and provide fundamental information on how GPCR signaling is directed.

β-Arrestin2 oligomers impair the clearance of pathological tau and increase tau aggregates

Multiple G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are targets in the treatment of dementia, and the arrestins are common to their signaling. β-Arrestin2 was significantly increased in brains of patients with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD-tau), a disease second to Alzheimer's as a cause of dementia. Genetic loss and overexpression experiments using genetically encoded reporters and defined mutant constructs in vitro, and in cell lines, primary neurons, and tau P301S mice crossed with β-arrestin2-/- mice, show that β-arrestin2 stabilizes pathogenic tau and promotes tau aggregation. Cell and mouse models of FTLD showed this to be maladaptive, fueling a positive feedback cycle of enhanced neuronal tau via non-GPCR mechanisms. Genetic ablation of β-arrestin2 markedly ablates tau pathology and rescues synaptic plasticity defects in tau P301S transgenic mice. Atomic force microscopy and cellular studies revealed that oligomerized, but not monomeric, β-arrestin2 increases tau by inhibiting self-interaction of the autophagy cargo receptor p62/SQSTM1, impeding p62 autophagy flux. Hence, reduction of oligomerized β-arrestin2 with virus encoding β-arrestin2 mutants acting as dominant-negatives markedly reduces tau-laden neurofibrillary tangles in FTLD mice in vivo. Reducing β-arrestin2 oligomeric status represents a new strategy to alleviate tau pathology in FTLD and related tauopathies.

Targeting arrestin interactions with its partners for therapeutic purposes

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

Plethora of functions packed into 45 kDa arrestins: biological implications and possible therapeutic strategies

Mammalian arrestins are a family of four highly homologous relatively small ~ 45 kDa proteins with surprisingly diverse functions. The most striking feature is that each of the two non-visual subtypes can bind hundreds of diverse G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and dozens of non-receptor partners. Through these interactions, arrestins regulate the G protein-dependent signaling by the desensitization mechanisms as well as control numerous signaling pathways in the G protein-dependent or independent manner via scaffolding. Some partners prefer receptor-bound arrestins, some bind better to the free arrestins in the cytoplasm, whereas several show no apparent preference for either conformation. Thus, arrestins are a perfect example of a multi-functional signaling regulator. The result of this multi-functionality is that reduction (by knockdown) or elimination (by knockout) of any of these two non-visual arrestins can affect so many pathways that the results are hard to interpret. The other difficulty is that the non-visual subtypes can in many cases compensate for each other, which explains relatively mild phenotypes of single knockouts, whereas double knockout is lethal in vivo, although cultured cells lacking both arrestins are viable. Thus, deciphering the role of arrestins in cell biology requires the identification of specific signaling function(s) of arrestins involved in a particular phenotype. This endeavor should be greatly assisted by identification of structural elements of the arrestin molecule critical for individual functions and by the creation of mutants where only one function is affected. Reintroduction of these biased mutants, or introduction of monofunctional stand-alone arrestin elements, which have been identified in some cases, into double arrestin-2/3 knockout cultured cells, is the most straightforward way to study arrestin functions. This is a laborious and technically challenging task, but the upside is that specific function of arrestins, their timing, subcellular specificity, and relations to one another could be investigated with precision.

CCR5: Established paradigms and new frontiers for a 'celebrity' chemokine receptor

Because of the level of attention it received due to its role as the principal HIV coreceptor, CCR5 has been described as a 'celebrity' chemokine receptor. Here we describe the development of CCR5 inhibitory strategies that have been developed for HIV therapy and which are now additionally being considered for use in HIV prevention and cure. The wealth of CCR5-related tools that have been developed during the intensive investigation of CCR5 as an HIV drug target can now be turned towards the study of CCR5 as a model chemokine receptor. We also summarize what is currently known about the cell biology and pharmacology of CCR5, providing an update on new areas of investigation that have emerged in recent research. Finally, we discuss the potential of CCR5 as a drug target for diseases other than HIV, discussing the evidence linking CCR5 and its natural chemokine ligands with inflammatory diseases, particularly neuroinflammation, and certain cancers. These pathologies may provide new uses for the strategies for CCR5 blockade originally developed to combat HIV/AIDS.

TRPV1 promotes opioid analgesia during inflammation

Pain and inflammation are inherently linked responses to injury, infection, or chronic diseases. Given that acute inflammation in humans or mice enhances the analgesic properties of opioids, there is much interest in determining the inflammatory transducers that prime opioid receptor signaling in primary afferent nociceptors. Here, we found that activation of the transient receptor potential vanilloid type 1 (TRPV1) channel stimulated a mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway that was accompanied by the shuttling of the scaffold protein β-arrestin2 to the nucleus. The nuclear translocation of β-arrestin2 in turn prevented its recruitment to the μ-opioid receptor (MOR), the subsequent internalization of agonist-bound MOR, and the suppression of MOR activity that occurs upon receptor desensitization. Using the complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) inflammatory pain model to examine the role of TRPV1 in regulating endogenous opioid analgesia in mice, we found that naloxone methiodide (Nal-M), a peripherally restricted, nonselective, and competitive opioid receptor antagonist, slowed the recovery from CFA-induced hypersensitivity in wild-type, but not TRPV1-deficient, mice. Furthermore, we showed that inflammation prolonged morphine-induced antinociception in a mouse model of opioid receptor desensitization, a process that depended on TRPV1. Together, our data reveal a TRPV1-mediated signaling pathway that serves as an endogenous pain-resolution mechanism by promoting the nuclear translocation of β-arrestin2 to minimize MOR desensitization. This previously uncharacterized mechanism may underlie the peripheral opioid control of inflammatory pain. Dysregulation of the TRPV1-β-arrestin2 axis may thus contribute to the transition from acute to chronic pain.

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.

Critical role of the finger loop in arrestin binding to the receptors

We tested the interactions with four different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) of arrestin-3 mutants with substitutions in the four loops, three of which contact the receptor in the structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex. Point mutations in the loop at the distal tip of the N-domain (Glu157Ala), in the C-loop (Phe255Ala), back loop (Lys313Ala), and one of the mutations in the finger loop (Gly65Pro) had mild variable effects on receptor binding. In contrast, the deletion of Gly65 at the beginning of the finger loop reduced the binding to all GPCRs tested, with the binding to dopamine D2 receptor being affected most dramatically. Thus, the presence of a glycine at the beginning of the finger loop appears to be critical for the arrestin-receptor interaction.

Arrestin mutations: Some cause diseases, others promise cure

Arrestins play a key role in homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate several other vital signaling pathways in cells. Considering the critical roles of these proteins in cellular signaling, surprisingly few disease-causing mutations in human arrestins were described. Most of these are loss-of-function mutations of visual arrestin-1 that cause excessive rhodopsin signaling and hence night blindness. Only one dominant arrestin-1 mutation was discovered so far. It reduces the thermal stability of the protein, which likely results in photoreceptor death via unfolded protein response. In case of the two nonvisual arrestins, only polymorphisms were described, some of which appear to be associated with neurological disorders and altered response to certain treatments. Structure-function studies revealed several ways of enhancing arrestins' ability to quench GPCR signaling. These enhanced arrestins have potential as tools for gene therapy of disorders associated with excessive signaling of mutant GPCRs.

Arrestins: Introducing Signaling Bias Into Multifunctional Proteins

Arrestins were discovered as proteins that bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and block their interactions with G proteins, i.e., for their role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. Mammals express only four arrestin subtypes, two of which are largely restricted to the retina. Two nonvisual arrestins are ubiquitous and interact with hundreds of different GPCRs and dozens of other binding partners. Changes of just a few residues on the receptor-binding surface were shown to dramatically affect GPCR preference of inherently promiscuous nonvisual arrestins. Mutations on the cytosol-facing side of arrestins modulate their interactions with individual downstream signaling molecules. Thus, it appears feasible to construct arrestin mutants specifically linking particular GPCRs with signaling pathways of choice or mutants that sever the links between selected GPCRs and unwanted pathways. Signaling-biased "designer arrestins" have the potential to become valuable molecular tools for research and therapy.

A Novel Polar Core and Weakly Fixed C-Tail in Squid Arrestin Provide New Insight into Interaction with Rhodopsin

Photoreceptors of the squid Loligo pealei contain a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling system that activates phospholipase C in response to light. Analogous to the mammalian visual system, signaling of the photoactivated GPCR rhodopsin is terminated by binding of squid arrestin (sArr). sArr forms a light-dependent, high-affinity complex with squid rhodopsin, which does not require prior receptor phosphorylation for interaction. This is at odds with classical mammalian GPCR desensitization where an agonist-bound phosphorylated receptor is needed to break stabilizing constraints within arrestins, the so-called "three-element interaction" and "polar core" network, before a stable receptor-arrestin complex can be established. Biophysical and mass spectrometric analysis of the squid rhodopsin-arrestin complex indicates that in contrast to mammalian arrestins, the sArr C-tail is not involved in a stable three-element interaction. We determined the crystal structure of C-terminally truncated sArr that adopts a basal conformation common to arrestins and is stabilized by a series of weak but novel polar core interactions. Unlike mammalian arrestin-1, deletion of the sArr C-tail does not influence kinetic properties of complex formation of sArr with the receptor. Hydrogen-deuterium exchange studies revealed the footprint of the light-activated rhodopsin on sArr. Furthermore, double electron-electron resonance spectroscopy experiments provide evidence that receptor-bound sArr adopts a conformation different from the one known for arrestin-1 and molecular dynamics simulations reveal the residues that account for the weak three-element interaction. Insights gleaned from studying this system add to our general understanding of GPCR-arrestin interaction.

Molecular Defects of the Disease-Causing Human Arrestin-1 C147F Mutant

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify the molecular defect in the disease-causing human arrestin-1 C147F mutant.

Methods

The binding of wild-type (WT) human arrestin-1 and several mutants with substitutions in position 147 (including C147F, which causes dominant retinitis pigmentosa in humans) to phosphorylated and unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin was determined. Thermal stability of WT and mutant human arrestin-1, as well as unfolded protein response in 661W cells, were also evaluated.

Results

WT human arrestin-1 was selective for phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. Substitutions of Cys-147 with smaller side chain residues, Ala or Val, did not substantially affect binding selectivity, whereas residues with bulky side chains in the position 147 (Ile, Leu, and disease-causing Phe) greatly increased the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin. Functional survival of mutant proteins with bulky substitutions at physiological and elevated temperature was also compromised. C147F mutant induced unfolded protein response in cultured cells.

Conclusions

Bulky Phe substitution of Cys-147 in human arrestin-1 likely causes rod degeneration due to reduced stability of the protein, which induces unfolded protein response in expressing cells.

Molecular mechanism of modulating arrestin conformation by GPCR phosphorylation

Arrestins regulate the signaling of ligand-activated, phosphorylated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Different patterns of receptor phosphorylation (phosphorylation barcode) can modulate arrestin conformations, resulting in distinct functional outcomes (for example, desensitization, internalization, and downstream signaling). However, the mechanism of arrestin activation and how distinct receptor phosphorylation patterns could induce different conformational changes on arrestin are not fully understood. We analyzed how each arrestin amino acid contributes to its different conformational states. We identified a conserved structural motif that restricts the mobility of the arrestin finger loop in the inactive state and appears to be regulated by receptor phosphorylation. Distal and proximal receptor phosphorylation sites appear to selectively engage with distinct arrestin structural motifs (that is, micro-locks) to induce different arrestin conformations. These observations suggest a model in which different phosphorylation patterns of the GPCR C terminus can combinatorially modulate the conformation of the finger loop and other phosphorylation-sensitive structural elements to drive distinct arrestin conformation and functional outcomes.

Arrestins: structural disorder creates rich functionality

Arrestins are soluble relatively small 44–46 kDa proteins that specifically bind hundreds of active phosphorylated GPCRs and dozens of non-receptor partners. There are binding partners that demonstrate preference for each of the known arrestin conformations: free, receptor-bound, and microtubule-bound. Recent evidence suggests that conformational flexibility in every functional state is the defining characteristic of arrestins. Flexibility, or plasticity, of proteins is often described as structural disorder, in contrast to the fixed conformational order observed in high-resolution crystal structures. However, protein-protein interactions often involve highly flexible elements that can assume many distinct conformations upon binding to different partners. Existing evidence suggests that arrestins are no exception to this rule: their flexibility is necessary for functional versatility. The data on arrestins and many other multi-functional proteins indicate that in many cases, “order” might be artificially imposed by highly non-physiological crystallization conditions and/or crystal packing forces. In contrast, conformational flexibility (and its extreme case, intrinsic disorder) is a more natural state of proteins, representing true biological order that underlies their physiologically relevant functions.

Gs- versus Golf-dependent functional selectivity mediated by the dopamine D1 receptor

The two highly homologous subtypes of stimulatory G proteins Gαs (Gs) and Gαolf (Golf) display contrasting expression patterns in the brain. Golf is predominant in the striatum, while Gs is predominant in the cortex. Yet, little is known about their functional distinctions. The dopamine D₁ receptor (D1R) couples to Gs/olf and is highly expressed in cortical and striatal areas, making it an important therapeutic target for neuropsychiatric disorders. Using novel drug screening methods that allow analysis of specific G-protein subtype coupling, we found that, relative to dopamine, dihydrexidine and N-propyl-apomorphine behave as full D1R agonists when coupled to Gs, but as partial D1R agonists when coupled to Golf. The Gs/Golf-dependent biased agonism by dihydrexidine was consistently observed at the levels of cellular signaling, neuronal function, and behavior. Our findings of Gs/Golf-dependent functional selectivity in D1R ligands open a new avenue for the treatment of cortex-specific or striatum-specific neuropsychiatric dysfunction.

D1-like dopamine receptors are coupled to Golf proteins in the dorsal striatum but Gs in cortical and other areas. Here, the authors demonstrate selective agonism of Gs-coupled versus Golf-coupled D1 receptors.

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

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

Molecular Mechanisms of GPCR Signaling: A Structural Perspective

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are cell surface receptors that respond to a wide variety of stimuli, from light, odorants, hormones, and neurotransmitters to proteins and extracellular calcium. GPCRs represent the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by many clinically used drugs. Recent studies shed light on the conformational changes that accompany GPCR activation and the structural state of the receptor necessary for the interactions with the three classes of proteins that preferentially bind active GPCRs, G proteins, G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. Importantly, structural and biophysical studies also revealed activation-related conformational changes in these three types of signal transducers. Here, we summarize what is already known and point out questions that still need to be answered. Clear understanding of the structural basis of signaling by GPCRs and their interaction partners would pave the way to designing signaling-biased proteins with scientific and therapeutic potential.

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

BACKGROUND

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Differential manipulation of arrestin-3 binding to basal and agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors

Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we show that by introducing mutations into elements that directly bind receptors, the specificity of arrestin-3 can be altered. Several mutations in the two parts of the central "crest" of the arrestin molecule, middle-loop and C-loop, enhanced or reduced arrestin-3 interactions with several GPCRs in receptor subtype and functional state-specific manner. For example, the Lys139Ile substitution in the middle-loop dramatically enhanced the binding to inactive M₂ muscarinic receptor, so that agonist activation of the M₂ did not further increase arrestin-3 binding. Thus, the Lys139Ile mutation made arrestin-3 essentially an activation-independent binding partner of M₂, whereas its interactions with other receptors, including the β₂-adrenergic receptor and the D₁ and D₂ dopamine receptors, retained normal activation dependence. In contrast, the Ala248Val mutation enhanced agonist-induced arrestin-3 binding to the β₂-adrenergic and D₂ dopamine receptors, while reducing its interaction with the D₁ dopamine receptor. These mutations represent the first example of altering arrestin specificity via enhancement of the arrestin-receptor interactions rather than selective reduction of the binding to certain subtypes.

Novel Bivalent Ligands Based on the Sumanirole Pharmacophore Reveal Dopamine D2 Receptor (D2R) Biased Agonism

The development of bivalent ligands has attracted interest as a way to potentially improve the selectivity and/or affinity for a specific receptor subtype. The ability to bind two distinct receptor binding sites simultaneously can allow the selective activation of specific G-protein dependent or β-arrestin-mediated cascade pathways. Herein, we developed an extended SAR study using sumanirole (1) as the primary pharmacophore. We found that substitutions in the N-1- and/or N-5-positions, physiochemical properties of those substituents, and secondary aromatic pharmacophores can enhance agonist efficacy for the cAMP inhibition mediated by G_i/o-proteins, while reducing or suppressing potency and efficacy toward β-arrestin recruitment. Compound 19 was identified as a new lead for its selective D₂ G-protein biased agonism with an EC₅₀ in the subnanomolar range. Structure-activity correlations were observed between substitutions in positions N-1 and/or N-5 of 1 and the capacity of the new bivalent compounds to selectively activate G-proteins versus β-arrestin recruitment in D₂R-BRET functional assays.

Analyzing the roles of multi-functional proteins in cells: The case of arrestins and GRKs

Most proteins have multiple functions. Obviously, conventional methods of manipulating the level of the protein of interest in the cell, such as over-expression, knockout or knockdown, affect all of its functions simultaneously. The key advantage of these methods is that over-expression, knockout or knockdown does not require any knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of the function(s) of the protein of interest. The disadvantage is that these approaches are inadequate to elucidate the role of an individual function of the protein in a particular cellular process. An alternative is the use of re-engineered proteins, in which a single function is eliminated or enhanced. The use of mono-functional elements of a multi-functional protein can also yield cleaner answers. This approach requires detailed knowledge of the structural basis of each function of the protein in question. Thus, a lot of preliminary structure-function work is necessary to make it possible. However, when this information is available, replacing the protein of interest with a mutant in which individual functions are modified can shed light on the biological role of those particular functions. Here, we illustrate this point using the example of protein kinases, most of which have additional non-enzymatic functions, as well as arrestins, known multi-functional signaling regulators in the cell.

Evidence that the Rhodopsin Kinase (GRK1) N-Terminus and the Transducin Gα C-Terminus Interact with the Same "Hydrophobic Patch" on Rhodopsin TM5

Phosphorylation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) terminates their ability to couple with and activate G proteins by increasing their affinity for arrestins. Unfortunately, detailed information regarding how GPCRs interact with the kinases responsible for their phosphorylation is still limited. Here, we purified fully functional GPCR kinase 1 (GRK1) using a rapid method and used it to gain insights into how this important kinase interacts with the GPCR rhodopsin. Specifically, we find that GRK1 uses the same site on rhodopsin as the transducin (Gt) Gtα C-terminal tail and the arrestin "finger loop", a cleft formed in the cytoplasmic face of the receptor upon activation. Our studies also show GRK1 requires two conserved residues located in this cleft (L226 and V230) that have been shown to be required for Gt activation due to their direct interactions with hydrophobic residues on the Gα C-terminal tail. Our data and modeling studies are consistent with the idea that all three proteins (Gt, GRK1, and visual arrestin) bind, at least in part, in the same site on rhodopsin and interact with the receptor through a similar hydrophobic contact-driven mechanism.

β-Arrestin biosensors reveal a rapid, receptor-dependent activation/deactivation cycle

(β-)Arrestins are important regulators of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). They bind to active, phosphorylated GPCRs and thereby shut off 'classical' signalling to G proteins, trigger internalization of GPCRs via interaction with the clathrin machinery and mediate signalling via 'non-classical' pathways. In addition to two visual arrestins that bind to rod and cone photoreceptors (termed arrestin1 and arrestin4), there are only two (non-visual) β-arrestin proteins (β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2, also termed arrestin2 and arrestin3), which regulate hundreds of different (non-visual) GPCRs. Binding of these proteins to GPCRs usually requires the active form of the receptors plus their phosphorylation by G-protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs). The binding of receptors or their carboxy terminus as well as certain truncations induce active conformations of (β-)arrestins that have recently been solved by X-ray crystallography. Here we investigate both the interaction of β-arrestin with GPCRs, and the β-arrestin conformational changes in real time and in living human cells, using a series of fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET)-based β-arrestin2 biosensors. We observe receptor-specific patterns of conformational changes in β-arrestin2 that occur rapidly after the receptor-β-arrestin2 interaction. After agonist removal, these changes persist for longer than the direct receptor interaction. Our data indicate a rapid, receptor-type-specific, two-step binding and activation process between GPCRs and β-arrestins. They further indicate that β-arrestins remain active after dissociation from receptors, allowing them to remain at the cell surface and presumably signal independently. Thus, GPCRs trigger a rapid, receptor-specific activation/deactivation cycle of β-arrestins, which permits their active signalling.

Functional and structural characterization of axonal opioid receptors as targets for analgesia

BACKGROUND

Opioids are the gold standard for the treatment of acute pain despite serious side effects in the central and enteric nervous system. µ-opioid receptors (MOPs) are expressed and functional at the terminals of sensory axons, when activated by exogenous or endogenous ligands. However, the presence and function of MOP along nociceptive axons remains controversial particularly in naïve animals. Here, we characterized axonal MOPs by immunofluorescence, ultrastructural, and functional analyses. Furthermore, we evaluated hypertonic saline as a possible enhancer of opioid receptor function.

RESULTS

Comparative immunolabeling showed that, among several tested antibodies, which all provided specific MOP detection in the rat central nervous system (CNS), only one monoclonal MOP-antibody yielded specificity and reproducibility for MOP detection in the rat peripheral nervous system including the sciatic nerve. Double immunolabeling documented that MOP immunoreactivity was confined to calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) positive fibers and fiber bundles. Almost identical labeling and double labeling patterns were found using mcherry-immunolabeling on sciatic nerves of mice producing a MOP-mcherry fusion protein (MOP-mcherry knock-in mice). Preembedding immunogold electron microscopy on MOP-mcherry knock-in sciatic nerves indicated presence of MOP in cytoplasm and at membranes of unmyelinated axons. Application of [D-Ala(2), N-MePhe(4), Gly-ol]-enkephalin (DAMGO) or fentanyl dose-dependently inhibited depolarization-induced CGRP release from rat sciatic nerve axons ex vivo, which was blocked by naloxone. When the lipophilic opioid fentanyl was applied perisciatically in naïve Wistar rats, mechanical nociceptive thresholds increased. Subthreshold doses of fentanyl or the hydrophilic opioid DAMGO were only effective if injected together with hypertonic saline. In vitro, using β-arrestin-2/MOP double-transfected human embryonic kidney cells, DAMGO as well as fentanyl lead to a recruitment of β-arrestin-2 to the membrane followed by a β-arrestin-2 reappearance in the cytosol and MOP internalization. Pretreatment with hypertonic saline prevented MOP internalization.

CONCLUSION

MOPs are present and functional in the axonal membrane from naïve animals. Hypertonic saline acutely decreases ligand-induced internalization of MOP and thereby might improve MOP function. Further studies should explore potential clinical applications of opioids together with enhancers for regional analgesia.

A G Protein-biased Designer G Protein-coupled Receptor Useful for Studying the Physiological Relevance of Gq/11-dependent Signaling Pathways

Designerreceptorsexclusivelyactivated by adesignerdrug (DREADDs) are clozapine-N-oxide-sensitive designer G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that have emerged as powerful novel chemogenetic tools to study the physiological relevance of GPCR signaling pathways in specific cell types or tissues. Like endogenous GPCRs, clozapine-N-oxide-activated DREADDs do not only activate heterotrimeric G proteins but can also trigger β-arrestin-dependent (G protein-independent) signaling. To dissect the relative physiological relevance of G protein-mediatedversusβ-arrestin-mediated signaling in different cell types or physiological processes, the availability of G protein- and β-arrestin-biased DREADDs would be highly desirable. In this study, we report the development of a mutationally modified version of a non-biased DREADD derived from the M3muscarinic receptor that can activate Gq/11with high efficacy but lacks the ability to interact with β-arrestins. We also demonstrate that this novel DREADD is activein vivoand that cell type-selective expression of this new designer receptor can provide novel insights into the physiological roles of G protein (Gq/11)-dependentversusβ-arrestin-dependent signaling in hepatocytes. Thus, this novel Gq/11-biased DREADD represents a powerful new tool to study the physiological relevance of Gq/11-dependent signaling in distinct tissues and cell types, in the absence of β-arrestin-mediated cellular effects. Such studies should guide the development of novel classes of functionally biased ligands that show high efficacy in various pathophysiological conditions but display a reduced incidence of side effects.

Evidence for Noncanonical Neurotransmitter Activation: Norepinephrine as a Dopamine D2-Like Receptor Agonist

The Gαi/o-coupled dopamine D2-like receptor family comprises three subtypes: the D2 receptor (D2R), with short and long isoform variants (D2SR and D2LR), D3 receptor (D3R), and D4 receptor (D4R), with several polymorphic variants. The common overlap of norepinephrine innervation and D2-like receptor expression patterns prompts the question of a possible noncanonical action by norepinephrine. In fact, previous studies have suggested that norepinephrine can functionally interact with D4R. To our knowledge, significant interactions between norepinephrine and D2R or D3R receptors have not been demonstrated. By using radioligand binding and bioluminescent resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays in transfected cells, the present study attempted a careful comparison between dopamine and norepinephrine in their possible activation of all D2-like receptors, including the two D2R isoforms and the most common D4R polymorphic variants. Functional BRET assays included activation of G proteins with all Gαi/o subunits, adenylyl cyclase inhibition, and β arrestin recruitment. Norepinephrine acted as a potent agonist for all D2-like receptor subtypes, with the general rank order of potency of D3R > D4R ≥ D2SR ≥ D2L. However, for both dopamine and norepinephrine, differences depended on the Gαi/o protein subunit involved. The most striking differences were observed with Gαi2, where the rank order of potencies for both dopamine and norepinephrine were D4R > D2SR = D2LR >> D3R. Furthermore the results do not support the existence of differences in the ability of dopamine and norepinephrine to activate different human D4R variants. The potency of norepinephrine for adrenergic α2A receptor was only about 20-fold higher compared with D3R and D4R across the three functional assays.

Using Bioluminescence Resonance Energy Transfer (BRET) to Characterize Agonist-Induced Arrestin Recruitment to Modified and Unmodified G Protein-Coupled Receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent ∼25% of current drug targets. Ligand binding to these receptors activates G proteins and arrestins, which are involved in differential signaling pathways. Because functionally selective or biased ligands activate one of these two pathways, they may be superior medications for certain diseases states. The identification of such ligands requires robust drug screening assays for both G protein and arrestin activity. This unit describes protocols for two bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based assays used to monitor arrestin recruitment to GPCRs. One assay requires modification of GPCRs by fusion to a BRET donor or acceptor moiety, whereas the other can detect arrestin recruitment to unmodified GPCRs.