Only a Portion of the Small Seatbelt Loop in Human Choriogonadotropin Appears Capable of Contacting the Lutropin Receptor

Two Hormones for One Receptor: Evolution, Biochemistry, Actions, and Pathophysiology of LH and hCG

LH and chorionic gonadotropin (CG) are glycoproteins fundamental to sexual development and reproduction. Because they act on the same receptor (LHCGR), the general consensus has been that LH and human CG (hCG) are equivalent. However, separate evolution of LHβ and hCGβ subunits occurred in primates, resulting in two molecules sharing ~85% identity and regulating different physiological events. Pituitary, pulsatile LH production results in an ~90-minute half-life molecule targeting the gonads to regulate gametogenesis and androgen synthesis. Trophoblast hCG, the "pregnancy hormone," exists in several isoforms and glycosylation variants with long half-lives (hours) and angiogenic potential and acts on luteinized ovarian cells as progestational. The different molecular features of LH and hCG lead to hormone-specific LHCGR binding and intracellular signaling cascades. In ovarian cells, LH action is preferentially exerted through kinases, phosphorylated extracellular-regulated kinase 1/2 (pERK1/2) and phosphorylated AKT (also known as protein kinase B), resulting in irreplaceable proliferative/antiapoptotic signals and partial agonism on progesterone production in vitro. In contrast, hCG displays notable cAMP/protein kinase A (PKA)-mediated steroidogenic and proapoptotic potential, which is masked by estrogen action in vivo. In vitro data have been confirmed by a large data set from assisted reproduction, because the steroidogenic potential of hCG positively affects the number of retrieved oocytes, and LH affects the pregnancy rate (per oocyte number). Leydig cell in vitro exposure to hCG results in qualitatively similar cAMP/PKA and pERK1/2 activation compared with LH and testosterone. The supposed equivalence of LH and hCG has been disproved by such data, highlighting their sex-specific functions and thus deeming it an oversight caused by incomplete understanding of clinical data.

The antigen binding sites of various hCG monoclonal antibodies show homology to different domains of LH receptor

The common feature of receptors and antibodies against the ligand is that both display very specific, high affinity binding towards the ligand. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that the paratope of antibodies may exhibit homology with distinct domains of the receptor. By locating the hormone epitopes and determining the structure of the paratopes, it should be possible to identify the contact points between the ligand and the receptor. This hypothesis has been tested using hCG monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) recognizing different epitopes and having different effects on hormone binding and response. The beta subunit and heterodimer specific antibodies inhibited both hormone binding and response, while the alpha subunit specific antibodies inhibited response without affecting binding. The single chain fragment variables (ScFvs) produced from these antibodies also retained the properties of the parent antibodies. The amino acid sequences of the ScFvs exhibited homology to different regions of the receptor; the beta subunit specific antibody being homologous to the concave surface of the leucine rich repeats (LRR) of the receptor, particularly the concave surface of the LRRs, while the heterodimer specific antibody showed homology to the hinge region. The alpha subunit specific antibody showed homology to the transmembrane domain of the receptor. The exact locations of the epitopes of the monoclonal antibodies in the hormone molecule have also been identified. The data presented here also support the model of glycoprotein hormone-receptor interaction in which the hormone binds to the extracellular domain through the beta subunit and then the alpha subunit is brought in contact with the transmembrane domain leading to signal transduction.

Molecular cloning of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)-beta subunit cDNA from duck pituitary

We have cloned FSH-beta cDNA from duck pituitary gland by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and rapid amplification of cDNA end (RACE) methods. The cloned duck FSH-beta cDNA contains 1909-bp nucleotides including 396-bp of open-reading frame and 1491-bp of 3'-untranslational region. The open-reading frame encodes a 131-amino acid protein with a putative 20-amino acid signal peptide and a putative 111-amino acid mature protein. The deduced amino acid sequence shows a remarkable similarity (94-98%) to those of other avian FSH-beta subunits; while it exhibits lower similarities with those of turtles (82-84%), mammals (63-71%), and amphibians (53-57%). The structural model analysis of duck FSH suggests that the cysteine-knot and beta-strands for maintaining the specific structural frame, and the "seat-belt" loop for specific binding to FSH receptor have been conserved in tetrapodian FSH-betas.

Models of glycoprotein hormone receptor interaction

The glycoprotein hormones regulate reproduction and development through their interactions with receptors in ovarian, testicular, and thyroid tissues. Efforts to design hormone agonists and antagonists useful for treat-ing infertility and hyperthyroidism would benefit from a molecular understanding of hormone-receptor interaction. The structure of a complex containing FSH bound to a fragment of its receptor has been determined at 2.9 Angstroms resolution, but this does not explain several observations made with cell-surface G protein receptors and may reflect the manner in which FSH binds a short alternate spliced receptor form. We discuss observations that must be explained by any model of the cell-surface G protein-coupled glycoprotein hormone receptors and suggest structures for these receptors that satisfy these requirements. Glycoprotein hormones appear to contact two distinct sites in the extracellular domains of their receptors, not just the leucine-rich repeat domain. These dual contacts contribute to ligand binding specificity and appear to be essential for signal transduction. As outlined in this minireview, differences in the manners in which these ligands contact their receptors explain why some ligands and ligand analogs interact with more than one class of receptor and why some receptors and receptor analogs bind more than one ligand. The unique manner in which these ligands appear to interact with their receptors may have facilitated hormone and receptor co-evolution during early vertebrate speciation.

Model of Glycoprotein Hormone Receptor Ligand Binding and Signaling

Studies described here were initiated to develop a model of glycoprotein hormone receptor structure and function. We found that the region that links the lutropin receptor leucine-rich repeat domain (LRD) to its transmembrane domain (TMD) has substantial roles in ligand binding and signaling, hence we term it the signaling specificity domain (SSD). Theoretical considerations indicated the short SSDs in marmoset lutropin and salmon follitropin receptors have KH domain folds. We assembled models of lutropin, follitropin, and thyrotropin receptors by aligning models of their LRD, TMD, and shortened SSD in a manner that explains how substitutions in follitropin and thyrotropin receptors distant from their apparent ligand binding sites enable them to recognize lutropins. In these models, the SSD is parallel to the concave surface of the LRD and makes extensive contacts with TMD outer loops 1 and 2. The LRD appears to contact TMD outer loop 3 and a few residues in helices 1, 5, 6, and 7. We propose that signaling results from contacts of the ligands with the SSD and LRD that alter the LRD, which then moves TMD helices 6 and 7. The positions of the LRD and SSD support the notion that the receptor can be activated by hormones that dock with these domains in either of two different orientations. This would account for the abilities of some ligands and ligand chimeras to bind multiple receptors and for some receptors to bind multiple ligands. This property of the receptor may have contributed significantly to ligand-receptor co-evolution.