RAS ubiquitylation modulates effector interactions

Ubiquitylation by Rab40b/Cul5 regulates Rap2 localization and activity during cell migration

Cell migration is a complex process that involves coordinated changes in membrane transport and actin cytoskeleton dynamics. Ras-like small monomeric GTPases, such as Rap2, play a key role in regulating actin cytoskeleton dynamics and cell adhesions. However, how Rap2 function, localization, and activation are regulated during cell migration is not fully understood. We previously identified the small GTPase Rab40b as a regulator of breast cancer cell migration. Rab40b contains a suppressor of cytokine signaling (SOCS) box, which facilitates binding to Cullin5, a known E3 ubiquitin ligase component responsible for protein ubiquitylation. In this study, we show that the Rab40b/Cullin5 complex ubiquitylates Rap2. Importantly, we demonstrate that ubiquitylation regulates Rap2 activation as well as recycling of Rap2 from the endolysosomal compartment to the lamellipodia of migrating breast cancer cells. Based on these data, we propose that Rab40b/Cullin5 ubiquitylates and regulates Rap2-dependent actin dynamics at the leading edge, a process that is required for breast cancer cell migration and invasion.

Divergent Mechanisms Activating RAS and Small GTPases Through Post-translational Modification

RAS is a founding member of the RAS superfamily of GTPases. These small 21 kDa proteins function as molecular switches to initialize signaling cascades involved in various cellular processes, including gene expression, cell growth, and differentiation. RAS is activated by GTP loading and deactivated upon GTP hydrolysis to GDP. Guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) and GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) accelerate GTP loading and hydrolysis, respectively. These accessory proteins play a fundamental role in regulating activities of RAS superfamily small GTPase via a conserved guanine binding (G)-domain, which consists of five G motifs. The Switch regions lie within or proximal to the G2 and G3 motifs, and undergo dynamic conformational changes between the GDP-bound "OFF" state and GTP-bound "ON" state. They play an important role in the recognition of regulatory factors (GEFs and GAPs) and effectors. The G4 and G5 motifs are the focus of the present work and lie outside Switch regions. These motifs are responsible for the recognition of the guanine moiety in GTP and GDP, and contain residues that undergo post-translational modifications that underlie new mechanisms of RAS regulation. Post-translational modification within the G4 and G5 motifs activates RAS by populating the GTP-bound "ON" state, either through enhancement of intrinsic guanine nucleotide exchange or impairing GAP-mediated down-regulation. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of post-translational modifications in the RAS G4 and G5 motifs, and describe the role of these modifications in RAS activation as well as potential applications for cancer therapy.

Monoubiquitination of KRAS at Lysine104 and Lysine147 Modulates Its Dynamics and Interaction with Partner Proteins

KRAS, a 21 kDa guanine nucleotide-binding protein that functions as a molecular switch, plays a key role in regulating cellular growth. Dysregulation of this key signaling node leads to uncontrolled cell growth, a hallmark of cancer cells. KRAS undergoes post-translational modification by monoubiquitination at various locations, including at lysine104 (K104) and lysine147 (K147). Previous studies have suggested that K104 stabilizes helix-2/helix-3 interactions and K147 is involved in nucleotide binding. However, the impact of monoubiquitination at these residues on the overall structure, dynamics, or function of KRAS is not fully understood. In this study, we examined KRAS monoubiquitination at these sites using data from extensive (12 μs aggregate time) molecular dynamics simulations complemented by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy data. We found that ubiquitin forms dynamic nonspecific interactions with various regions of KRAS and that ubiquitination at both sites modulates conformational fluctuations. In both cases, ubiquitin samples a broad range of conformational space and does not form long-lasting noncovalent contacts with KRAS but it adopts several preferred orientations relative to KRAS. To examine the functional impact of these preferred orientations, we performed a systematic comparison of the dominant configurations of the ubiquitin/KRAS simulated complex with experimental structures of KRAS bound to regulatory and effector proteins as well as a model membrane. Results from these analyses suggest that conformational selection and population shift may minimize the deleterious effects of KRAS ubiquitination at K104 and K147 on binding to some but not all interaction partners. Our findings thus provide new insights into the steric effects of ubiquitin and suggest a potential avenue for therapeutic targeting.

A comprehensive analysis of RAS-effector interactions reveals interaction hotspots and new binding partners

RAS effectors specifically interact with GTP-bound RAS proteins to link extracellular signals to downstream signaling pathways. These interactions rely on two types of domains, called RAS-binding (RB) and RAS association (RA) domains, which share common structural characteristics. Although the molecular nature of RAS-effector interactions is well-studied for some proteins, most of the RA/RB-domain-containing proteins remain largely uncharacterized. Here, we searched through human proteome databases, extracting 41 RA domains in 39 proteins and 16 RB domains in 14 proteins, each of which can specifically select at least one of the 25 members in the RAS family. We next comprehensively investigated the sequence–structure–function relationship between different representatives of the RAS family, including HRAS, RRAS, RALA, RAP1B, RAP2A, RHEB1, and RIT1, with all members of RA domain family proteins (RASSFs) and the RB-domain-containing CRAF. The binding affinity for RAS-effector interactions, determined using fluorescence polarization, broadly ranged between high (0.3 μM) and very low (500 μM) affinities, raising interesting questions about the consequence of these variable binding affinities in the regulation of signaling events. Sequence and structural alignments pointed to two interaction hotspots in the RA/RB domains, consisting of an average of 19 RAS-binding residues. Moreover, we found novel interactions between RRAS1, RIT1, and RALA and RASSF7, RASSF9, and RASSF1, respectively, which were systematically explored in sequence–structure–property relationship analysis, and validated by mutational analysis. These data provide a set of distinct functional properties and putative biological roles that should now be investigated in the cellular context.

Inhibition of Nonfunctional Ras

Intuitively, functional states should be targeted; not nonfunctional ones. So why could drugging the inactive K-Ras4BG12Cwork-but drugging the inactive kinase will likely not? The reason is the distinct oncogenic mechanisms. Kinase driver mutations work by stabilizing the active state and/or destabilizing the inactive state. Either way, oncogenic kinases are mostly in the active state. Ras driver mutations work by quelling its deactivation mechanisms, GTP hydrolysis, and nucleotide exchange. Covalent inhibitors that bind to the inactive GDP-bound K-Ras4BG12C conformation can thus work. By contrast, in kinases, allosteric inhibitors work by altering the active-site conformation to favor orthosteric drugs. From the translational standpoint this distinction is vital: it expedites effective pharmaceutical development and extends the drug classification based on the mechanism of action. Collectively, here we postulate that drug action relates to blocking the mechanism of activation, not to whether the protein is in the active or inactive state.

Ubiquitin-based modifications in endothelial cell-cell contact and inflammation

Endothelial cell-cell contacts are essential for vascular integrity and physiology, protecting tissues and organs from edema and uncontrolled invasion of inflammatory cells. The vascular endothelial barrier is dynamic, but its integrity is preserved through a tight control at different levels. Inflammatory cytokines and G-protein-coupled receptor agonists, such as histamine, reduce endothelial integrity and increase vascular leakage. This is due to elevated myosin-based contractility, in conjunction with phosphorylation of proteins at cell-cell contacts. Conversely, reducing contractility stabilizes or even increases endothelial junctional integrity. Rho GTPases are key regulators of such cytoskeletal dynamics and endothelial cell-cell contacts. In addition to signaling-induced regulation, the expression of junctional proteins, such as occludin, claudins and vascular endothelial cadherin, also controls endothelial barrier function. There is increasing evidence that, in addition to protein phosphorylation, ubiquitylation (also known as ubiquitination) is an important and dynamic post-translational modification that regulates Rho GTPases, junctional proteins and, consequently, endothelial barrier function. In this Review, we discuss the emerging role of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation events in endothelial integrity and inflammation. The picture that emerges is one of increasing complexity, which is both fascinating and promising given the clinical relevance of vascular integrity in the control of inflammation, and of tissue and organ damage.