Search

GRK2 and arrestin3, key players in the functional regulation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), are ubiquitinated by Mdm2, a nuclear protein. The agonist-induced increase in arrestin3 ubiquitination occurs in the nucleus, underscoring the crucial role of its nuclear translocation in this process. The ubiquitination of arrestin3 occurs in the nucleus, highlighting the pivotal role of its nuclear translocation in this process. In contrast, GRK2 cannot translocate into the nucleus; thus, facilitation of the cytosolic translocation of nuclear Mdm2 is required to ubiquitinate GRK2 in the cytosol. Among the explored cellular components and processes, arrestin, Gβγ, clathrin, and receptor phosphorylation were found to be required for the nuclear import of arrestin3, the ubiquitination of arrestin3 in the nucleus, nuclear export of Mdm2, and the ubiquitination of GRK2 in the cytosol. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that agonist-induced ubiquitination of arrestin3 in the nucleus is interconnected with cytosolic GRK2 ubiquitination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interleukin-4 (IL-4)- exposed microglia acquire neuroprotective properties, but their functions and regulation in Parkinson's disease (PD) are poorly understood. In this study, we demonstrate that IL-4 enhances anti-inflammatory microglia reactivity, ameliorates the pathological features of PD, and reciprocally affects expression of β-arrestin 1 and β-arrestin 2 in microglia in PD mouse models. We also show that manipulation of two β-arrestins produces contrary effects on the anti-inflammatory states and neuroprotective action of microglia induced by IL-4 in vivo and in vitro. We further find that the functional antagonism of two β-arrestins is mediated through sequential activation of sterile alpha motif domain containing 4 (Samd4), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS). Collectively, these data reveal opposing functions of two closely related β-arrestins in regulating the IL-4-induced microglia reactivity via the Samd4/mTOR/OXPHOS axis in PD mouse models and provide important insights into the pathogenesis and therapeutics of PD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Pancreatic islets are modulated by cross‐talk among different cell types and paracrine signalling plays important roles in maintaining glucose homeostasis. Urocortin 3 (UCN3) secreted by pancreatic β cells activates the CRF2 receptor (CRF2R) and downstream pathways mediated by different G protein or arrestin subtypes in δ cells to cause somatostatin (SST) secretion, and constitutes an important feedback circuit for glucose homeostasis. Experimental Approach: Here, we used Arrb1−/−, Arrb2−/−, Gsfl/fl and Gqfl/fl knockout mice, the G11‐shRNA‐GFPfl/fl lentivirus, as well as functional assays and pharmacological characterization to study how the coupling of Gs, G11 and β‐arrestin1 to CRF2R contributed to UCN3‐induced SST secretion in pancreatic δ cells. Key Results: Our study showed that CRF2R coupled to a panel of G protein and arrestin subtypes in response to UCN3 engagement. While RyR3 phosphorylation by PKA at the S156, S2706 and S4697 sites may underlie the Gs‐mediated UCN3‐ CRF2R axis for SST secretion, the interaction of SYT1 with β‐arrestin1 is also essential for efficient SST secretion downstream of CRF2R. The specific expression of the transcription factor Stat6 may contribute to G11 expression in pancreatic δ cells. Furthermore, we found that different UCN3 concentrations may have distinct effects on glucose homeostasis, and these effects may depend on different CRF2R downstream effectors. Conclusions and Implications: Collectively, our results provide a landscape view of signalling mediated by different G protein or arrestin subtypes downstream of paracrine UCN3‐ CRF2R signalling in pancreatic β‐δ‐cell circuits, which may facilitate the understanding of fine‐tuned glucose homeostasis networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OPRM1 gene codes for the mu opioid receptor (MOR) and polymorphisms are associated with complex patient clinical responses. The most studied single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in OPRM1 is adenine (A) substituted by guanine (G) at position 118 (118A>G, rs1799971) leading to a substitution of asparagine (Asn) for aspartic acid (Asp) at position 40 in the N terminus of the resulting protein. To date, no structural explanation for the associated clinical responses resulting from the 118A>G polymorphism has been proposed. We utilized computational modeling paired with functional cellular assays to predict unstructured N‐ and C‐terminal regions of MOR‐1. Using molecular docking and post‐docking energy minimizations with morphine, we show that the extracellular substitution of Asn at position 40 alters the cytoplasmic C‐terminal conformation, while leaving the G‐protein binding interface unaffected. A real‐time BRET assay measuring G‐protein and β‐arrestin association with MOR r generated data that tested this prediction. Consistent with this in silico prediction, we show changes in morphine‐mediated β‐arrestin association with receptor variants with little change in morphine‐mediated G‐protein association comparing MOR‐1 wild type (WT) to MOR‐1118A>G. We tested the system with different opioid agonists, the OPRM1 118A>G SNP, and different MOR splice variants (MOR‐1 and MOR‐1O). These results are consistent with the observation that patients with the 118A>G OPRM1 allele respond more readily to fentanyl than to morphine. In conclusion, the 118A>G substitution alters receptor responses to opioids through variable C‐terminal domain movements that are agonist and splice variant dependent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The α-arrestin ARRDC3 is a recently discovered tumor suppressor in invasive breast cancer that functions as a multifaceted adaptor protein to control protein trafficking and cellular signaling. However, the molecular mechanisms that control ARRDC3 function are unknown. Other arrestins are known to be regulated by posttranslational modifications, suggesting that ARRDC3 may be subject to similar regulatory mechanisms. Here we report that ubiquitination is a key regulator of ARRDC3 function and is mediated primarily by two proline-rich PPXY motifs in the ARRDC3 C-tail domain. Ubiquitination and the PPXY motifs are essential for ARRDC3 function in regulating GPCR trafficking and signaling. Additionally, ubiquitination and the PPXY motifs mediate ARRDC3 protein degradation, dictate ARRDC3 subcellular localization, and are required for interaction with the NEDD4-family E3 ubiquitin ligase WWP2. These studies demonstrate a role for ubiquitination in regulating ARRDC3 function and reveal a mechanism by which ARRDC3 divergent functions are controlled.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) control intracellular signaling cascades via agonist-dependent coupling to intracellular transducers including heterotrimeric G proteins, GPCR kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. In addition to their critical interactions with the transmembrane core of active GPCRs, all three classes of transducers have also been reported to interact with receptor C-terminal domains (CTDs). An underexplored aspect of GPCR CTDs is their possible role as lipid sensors given their proximity to the membrane. CTD-membrane interactions have the potential to control the accessibility of key regulatory CTD residues to downstream effectors and transducers. Here, we report that the CTDs of two closely related family C GPCRs, metabotropic glutamate receptor 2 (mGluR2) and mGluR3, bind to membranes and that this interaction can regulate receptor function. We first characterize CTD structure with NMR spectroscopy, revealing lipid composition-dependent modes of membrane binding. Using molecular dynamics simulations and structure-guided mutagenesis, we then identify key conserved residues and cancer-associated mutations that modulate CTD-membrane binding. Finally, we provide evidence that mGluR3 transducer coupling is controlled by CTD-membrane interactions in live cells, which may be subject to regulation by CTD phosphorylation and changes in membrane composition. This work reveals an additional mechanism of GPCR modulation, suggesting that CTD-membrane binding may be a general regulatory mode throughout the broad GPCR superfamily. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are mainly regulated by GPCR kinase (GRK) phosphorylation and subsequent β-arrestin recruitment. The ubiquitously expressed GRKs are classified into cytosolic GRK2/3 and membrane-tethered GRK5/6 subfamilies. GRK2/3 interact with activated G protein βγ-subunits to translocate to the membrane. Yet, this need was not linked as a factor for bias, influencing the effectiveness of β-arrestin-biased agonist creation. Using multiple approaches such as GRK2/3 mutants unable to interact with Gβγ, membrane-tethered GRKs and G protein inhibitors in GRK2/3/5/6 knockout cells, we show that G protein activation will precede GRK2/3-mediated β-arrestin2 recruitment to activated receptors. This was independent of the source of free Gβγ and observable for Gs-, Gi- and Gq-coupled GPCRs. Thus, β-arrestin interaction for GRK2/3-regulated receptors is inseparably connected with G protein activation. We outline a theoretical framework of how GRK dependence on free Gβγ can determine a GPCR's potential for biased agonism. Due to this inherent cellular mechanism for GRK2/3 recruitment and receptor phosphorylation, we anticipate generation of β-arrestin-biased ligands to be mechanistically challenging for the subgroup of GPCRs exclusively regulated by GRK2/3, but achievable for GRK5/6-regulated receptors, that do not demand liberated Gβγ. Accordingly, GRK specificity of any GPCR is foundational for developing arrestin-biased ligands. Using cytosolic or membrane-tethered GRK2/3 mutants and G protein inhibitors, authors show that G protein activation, releasing free Gβγ, and GRK2/3-mediated β-arrestin recruitment are inseparably intertwined. This adds to the concept of biased agonism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ferroptosis suppressor protein 1（FSP1） is another major ferroptosis regulator besides glutathione peroxidase 4, which can scavenge intracellular reactive oxygen species and lipid peroxides and inhibit ferroptosis. In view of the key role of the liver in iron and lipid metabolism and its susceptibility to oxidative damage, more and more evidence has shown that FSP1 plays an important role in liver diseases such as metabolic associated fatty liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, acute liver failure, and alcoholic liver disease, and the related targets of FSP1 are expected to become a potential treatment option. This article comprehensively reviews FSP1, with a focus on the role of FSP1 in the pathophysiology of several common liver diseases and the potential of FSP1 as a target of liver diseases, in order to provide new ideas for the treatment of liver diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose Experimental Approach Key Results Conclusions and Implications The gut hormone glucose‐dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) signals via the GIP receptor (GIPR), resulting in postprandial potentiation of glucose‐stimulated insulin secretion. The translation of results from rodent studies to human studies has been challenged by the unexpected effects of GIPR‐targeting compounds. We, therefore, investigated the variation between species, focusing on GIPR desensitization and the role of the receptor C‐terminus.The GIPR from humans, mice, rats, pigs, dogs and cats was studied in vitro for cognate ligand affinity, G protein activation (cAMP accumulation), recruitment of beta‐arrestin and internalization. Variants of the mouse, rat and human GIPRs with swapped C‐terminal tails were studied in parallel.The human GIPR is more prone to internalization than rodent GIPRs. Despite similar agonist affinities and potencies for Gαs activation, especially, the mouse GIPR shows reduced receptor desensitization, internalization and beta‐arrestin recruitment. Using an enzyme‐stabilized, long‐acting GIP analogue, the species differences were even more pronounced. ‘Tail‐swapped’ human, rat and mouse GIPRs were all fully functional in their Gαs coupling, and the mouse GIPR regained internalization and beta‐arrestin 2 recruitment properties with the human tail. The human GIPR lost the ability to recruit beta‐arrestin 2 when its own C‐terminus was replaced by the rat or mouse tail.Desensitization of the human GIPR is dependent on the C‐terminal tail. The species‐dependent functionality of the C‐terminal tail and the different species‐dependent internalization patterns, especially between human and mouse GIPRs, are important factors influencing the preclinical evaluation of GIPR‐targeting therapeutic compounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several branches of arrestin-mediated signaling are initiated by G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-bound arrestins. Numerous other signaling functions are mediated by free arrestins, including the mutants that cannot bind GPCRs. Biased ligands and receptor barcoding by phosphorylation patterns can only affect arrestin functions that depend on their binding to GPCRs. Manipulation of receptor-independent arrestin functions requires molecules that directly act on arrestins. Biological activity of free arrestins is often overlooked. Based on available data, we compare arrestin-mediated signaling that requires and does not require binding to G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Receptor-bound arrestins activate ERK1/2, Src, and focal adhesion kinase (FAK). Yet, arrestin-3 regulation of Src family member Fgr does not appear to involve receptors. Free arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK family kinases, preferentially binds E3 ubiquitin ligases Mdm2 and parkin, and facilitates parkin-dependent mitophagy. The binding of arrestins to microtubules and calmodulin and their function in focal adhesion disassembly and apoptosis also do not involve receptors. Biased GPCR ligands and the phosphorylation barcode can only affect receptor-dependent arrestin signaling. Thus, elucidation of receptor dependence or independence of arrestin functions has important scientific and therapeutic implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mini-G proteins are engineered, thermostable variants of Gα subunits designed to stabilize G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) in their active conformations. Because of their small size and ease of use, they are popular tools for assessing GPCR behaviors in cells, both as reporters of receptor coupling to Gα subtypes and for cellular assays to quantify compartmentalized signaling at various subcellular locations. Here, we report that overexpression of mini-G proteins with their cognate GPCRs disrupted GPCR endocytic trafficking and associated intracellular signaling. In cells expressing the Gαs-coupled GPCR glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R), coexpression of mini-Gs, a mini-G protein derived from Gαs, blocked β-arrestin 2 recruitment and receptor internalization and disrupted endosomal GLP-1R signaling. These effects did not involve changes in receptor phosphorylation or lipid nanodomain segregation. Moreover, we found that mini-G proteins derived from Gαi and Gαq also inhibited the internalization of GPCRs that couple to them. Finally, we developed an alternative intracellular signaling assay for GLP-1R using a nanobody specific for active Gαs:GPCR complexes (Nb37) that did not affect GLP-1R internalization. Our results have important implications for designing methods to assess intracellular GPCR signaling. Editor's summary: Mini-G proteins are engineered forms of Gα subunits that stably interact with activated G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) and are often used to investigate GPCR signaling from specific subcellular compartments. Manchanda et al. found that mini-G proteins interfered with GPCR internalization and compartmentalized signaling. Overexpression of a mini-G protein derived from Gαs prevented agonist-induced β-arrestin 2 recruitment to the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R), which inhibited receptor internalization and signaling at endosomes. Other GPCRs also showed reduced internalization when the mini-G versions of their cognate Gα subunits were overexpressed. These potentially confounding effects indicate that results from experiments using mini-G proteins to measure compartmentalized GPCR signaling should be interpreted cautiously. —Annalisa M. VanHook [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The stabilization of different active conformations of G protein–coupled receptors is thought to underlie the varying efficacies of biased and balanced agonists. Here, profiling the activation of signal transducers by angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) agonists revealed that the extent and kinetics of β-arrestin binding exhibited substantial ligand-dependent differences, which were lost when receptor internalization was inhibited. When AT1R endocytosis was prevented, even weak partial agonists of the β-arrestin pathway acted as full or near-full agonists, suggesting that receptor conformation did not exclusively determine β-arrestin recruitment. The ligand-dependent variance in β-arrestin translocation was much larger at endosomes than at the plasma membrane, showing that ligand efficacy in the β-arrestin pathway was spatiotemporally determined. Experimental investigations and mathematical modeling demonstrated how multiple factors concurrently shaped the effects of agonists on endosomal receptor–β-arrestin binding and thus determined the extent of functional selectivity. Ligand dissociation rate and G protein activity had particularly strong, internalization-dependent effects on the receptor–β-arrestin interaction. We also showed that endocytosis regulated the agonist efficacies of two other receptors with sustained β-arrestin binding: the V2 vasopressin receptor and a mutant β2-adrenergic receptor. In the absence of endocytosis, the agonist-dependent variance in β-arrestin2 binding was markedly diminished. Our results suggest that endocytosis determines the spatiotemporal bias in GPCR signaling and can aid in the development of more efficacious, functionally selective compounds. Editor's summary: Biased agonists of GPCRs stimulate signaling through either G proteins or β-arrestins, which is clinically relevant if one pathway is therapeutic and the other produces side effects. Tóth et al. found that the endocytosis of the angiotensin II receptor AT1R and other GPCRs determined signaling strength through the β-arrestin pathway. Blocking endocytosis elicited responses from weak β-arrestin–biased agonists that resembled those generated by full agonists. As a result, ligand efficacy in β-arrestin signaling may be determined more by spatiotemporal regulation than by the induction of different receptor conformations at the plasma membrane by distinct agonists. These findings may guide the development of GPCR-targeting drugs that more effectively produce only the desired therapeutic response. —John F. Foley [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Activated GPCRs are phosphorylated and internalized mostly via clathrin-mediated endocytosis (CME), which are then sorted for recycling or degradation. We investigated how differential activation of the same GPCR affects its endocytic trafficking in vivo using rhodopsin as a model in pupal photoreceptors of flies expressing mCherry-tagged rhodopsin 1 (Rh1-mC) or GFP-tagged arrestin 1 (Arr1-GFP). Upon blue light stimulation, activated Rh1 recruited Arr1-GFP to the rhabdomere, which became co-internalized and accumulated in cytoplasmic vesicles of photoreceptors. This internalization was eliminated in shits1 mutants affecting dynamin. Moreover, it was blocked by either rdgA or rdgB mutations affecting the PIP2 biosynthesis. Together, the blue light-initiated internalization of Rh1 and Arr1 belongs to CME. Green light stimulation also triggered the internalization and accumulation of activated Rh1-mC in the cytoplasm but with faster kinetics. Importantly, Arr1-GFP was also recruited to the rhabdomere but not co-internalized with Rh1-mC. This endocytosis was not affected in shits1 nor rdgA mutants, indicating it is not CME. We explored the fate of internalized Rh1-mC following CME and observed it remained in cytoplasmic vesicles following 30 min of dark adaptation. In contrast, in the non-CME Rh1-mC appeared readily recycled back to the rhabdomere within five min of dark treatment. This faster recycling may be regulated by rhodopsin phosphatase, RdgC. Together, we demonstrate two distinct endocytic and recycling mechanisms of Rh1 via two light stimulations. It appears that each stimulation triggers a distinct conformation leading to different phosphorylation patterns of Rh1 capable of recruiting Arr1 to rhabdomeres. However, a more stable interaction leads to the co-internalization of Arr1 that orchestrates CME. A stronger Arr1 association appears to impede the recycling of the phosphorylated Rh1 by preventing the recruitment of RdgC. We conclude that conformations of activated rhodopsin determine the downstream outputs upon phosphorylation that confers differential protein-protein interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) type 3 (LPA3) receptor mutants were generated in which the sites detected phosphorylated were substituted by non-phosphorylatable amino acids. Substitutions were made in the intracellular loop 3 (IL3 mutant), the carboxyl terminus (Ctail), and both domains (IL3/Ctail). The wild-type (WT) receptor and the mutants were expressed in T-REx HEK293 cells, and the consequences of the substitutions were analyzed employing different functional parameters. Agonist- and LPA-mediated receptor phosphorylation was diminished in the IL3 and Ctail mutants and essentially abolished in the IL3/Ctail mutant, confirming that the main phosphorylation sites are present in both domains and their role in receptor phosphorylation eliminated by substitution and distributed in both domains. The WT and mutant receptors increased intracellular calcium and ERK 1/2 phosphorylation in response to LPA and PMA. The agonist, Ki16425, diminished baseline intracellular calcium, which suggests some receptor endogenous activity. Similarly, baseline ERK1/2 phosphorylation was diminished by Ki16425. An increase in baseline ERK phosphorylation was detected in the IL3/Ctail mutant. LPA and PMA-induced receptor interaction with β-arrestin 2 and LPA3 internalization were severely diminished in cells expressing the mutants. Mutant-expressing cells also exhibit increased baseline proliferation and response to different stimuli, which were inhibited by the antagonist Ki16425, suggesting a role of LPA receptors in this process. Migration in response to different attractants was markedly increased in the Ctail mutant, which the Ki16425 antagonist also attenuated. Our data experimentally show that receptor phosphorylation in the distinct domains is relevant for LPA3 receptor function [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GPR84 is an understudied rhodopsin‐like class A G protein‐coupled receptor, which is arousing particular interest from a therapeutic perspective. Not least this reflects that gpr84 expression is significantly up‐regulated following acute inflammatory stimuli and in inflammatory diseases, and that receptor activation plays a role in regulating pro‐inflammatory responses and migration of cells of the innate immune system such as neutrophils, monocytes, macrophages and microglia. Although most physiological responses of GPR84 reflect receptor coupling to Gαi/o‐proteins, several studies indicate that agonist‐activated GPR84 can recruit arrestin adaptor proteins and this regulates receptor internalisation and desensitisation. To date, little is known on the patterns of either basal or ligand regulated GPR84 phosphorylation and how these might control these processes. Here, we consider what is known about the regulation of GPR84 signalling with a focus on how G protein receptor kinase‐mediated phosphorylation regulates arrestin protein recruitment and receptor function. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed issue GPR84 Pharmacology. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v181.10/issuetoc [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) promote the expression of immediate early genes required for learning and memory. Here, we showed that β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) stimulation induced the nuclear export of phosphodiesterase 4D5 (PDE4D5), an enzyme that degrades the second messenger cAMP, to enable memory consolidation. We demonstrated that the endocytosis of β2AR phosphorylated by GPCR kinases (GRKs) mediated arrestin3-dependent nuclear export of PDE4D5, which was critical for promoting nuclear cAMP signaling and gene expression in hippocampal neurons for memory consolidation. Inhibition of the arrestin3-PDE4D5 association prevented β2AR-induced nuclear cAMP signaling without affecting receptor endocytosis. Direct PDE4 inhibition rescued β2AR-induced nuclear cAMP signaling and ameliorated memory deficits in mice expressing a form of the β2AR that could not be phosphorylated by GRKs. These data reveal how β2AR phosphorylated by endosomal GRK promotes the nuclear export of PDE4D5, leading to nuclear cAMP signaling, changes in gene expression, and memory consolidation. This study also highlights the translocation of PDEs as a mechanism to promote cAMP signaling in specific subcellular locations downstream of GPCR activation.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute a diverse and extensive array of cell surface receptors, rendering them essential targets for drugs aimed at various human diseases. Responding to a range of extracellular or intracellular cues, GPCRs regulate cellular signaling through downstream transducers such as heterotrimer G proteins, GPCR kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. The wealth of 3D structures available for GPCRs and their signaling complexes significantly enhances our understanding of GPCR biology and expedites the development of structure-based drug discovery methods aimed at GPCR signaling. While the structural exploration of GPCR-G protein complexes has advanced, recent years have seen substantial breakthroughs in unraveling the mechanism behind arrestin-mediated GPCR signaling. This review aims to explore emerging insights into arrestin activation and its interaction with GPCRs, shedding light on the various ways GPCRs engage with arrestins both conservatively and diversely. Additionally, we summarize recent endeavors focused on designing functionally selective (’biased’) ligands targeting GPCRs, with desired effects on/off arrestin signaling. Our goal with this review is to spotlight studies investigating the structural aspects of GPCR activation and arrestin-binding modes, with a specific emphasis on arrestin-mediated GPCR signaling.

Recent advancements in structural biology have facilitated the elucidation of complexes involving G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and their associated signal transducers, including G proteins and arrestins. A comprehensive analysis of these structures provides profound insights into the dynamics of signaling mechanisms. These structural revelations can potentially guide the development of drugs to minimize side effects through targeted and selective signaling. Understanding the binding modes of different signal-selective ligands is imperative for future drug research and development. Here, we conduct a comparative examination of the structural details of various GPCR–signal transducer complexes and delve into the molecular basis of the currently proposed signal selectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arrestins are known to be involved not only in the desensitization and internalization of G protein-coupled receptors but also in the G protein-independent activation of mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases, such as extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) and c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK), to regulate cell proliferation and inflammation. Our previous study revealed that the histamine H1 receptor-mediated activation of ERK is dually regulated by Gq proteins and arrestins. In this study, we investigated the roles of Gq proteins and arrestins in the H1 receptor-mediated activation of JNK in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells expressing wild-type (WT) human H1 receptors, the Gq protein-biased mutant S487TR, and the arrestin-biased mutant S487A. In these mutants, the Ser487 residue in the C-terminus region of the WT was truncated (S487TR) or mutated to alanine (S487A). Histamine significantly stimulated JNK phosphorylation in CHO cells expressing WT and S487TR but not S487A. Histamine-induced JNK phosphorylation in CHO cells expressing WT and S487TR was suppressed by inhibitors against H1 receptors (ketotifen and diphenhydramine), Gq proteins (YM-254890), and protein kinase C (PKC) (GF109203X) as well as an intracellular Ca2+ chelator (BAPTA-AM) but not by inhibitors against G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRK2/3) (cmpd101), β-arrestin2 (β-arrestin2 siRNA), and clathrin (hypertonic sucrose). These results suggest that the H1 receptor-mediated phosphorylation of JNK is regulated by Gq-protein/Ca2+/PKC-dependent but GRK/arrestin/clathrin-independent pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate diverse cell signaling cascades after recognizing extracellular ligands. Despite the successful history of known GPCR drugs, a lack of mechanistic insight into GPCR challenges both the deorphanization of some GPCRs and optimization of the structure–activity relationship of their ligands. Notably, replacing a small substituent on a GPCR ligand can significantly alter extracellular GPCR–ligand interaction patterns and motion of transmembrane helices in turn to occur post-binding events of the ligand. In this study, we designed 3D multilevel features to describe the extracellular interaction patterns. Subsequently, these 3D features were utilized to predict the post-binding events that result from conformational dynamics from the extracellular to intracellular areas. To understand the adaptability of GPCR ligands, we collected the conformational information of flexible residues during binding and performed molecular featurization on a broad range of GPCR–ligand complexes. As a result, we developed GPCR–ligand interaction patterns, binding pockets, and ligand features as score (GPCR-IPL score) for predicting the functional selectivity of GPCR ligands (agonism versus antagonism), using the multilevel features of (1) zoomed-out 'residue level' (for flexible transmembrane helices of GPCRs), (2) zoomed-in 'pocket level' (for sophisticated mode of action) and (3) 'atom level' (for the conformational adaptability of GPCR ligands). GPCR-IPL score demonstrated reliable performance, achieving area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.938 and area under the precision-recall curve of 0.907 (available in gpcr-ipl-score.onrender.com). Furthermore, we used the molecular features to predict the biased activation of downstream signaling (Gi/o, Gq/11, Gs and β-arrestin) as well as the functional selectivity. The resulting models are interpreted and applied to out-of-set validation with three scenarios including the identification of a new MRGPRX antagonist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arrestin domain containing 2 and 3 (Arrdc2/3) are genes whose mRNA contents are decreased in young skeletal muscle following mechanical overload. Arrdc3 is linked to the regulation of signaling pathways in nonmuscle cells that could influence skeletal muscle size. Despite a similar amino acid sequence, Arrdc2 function remains undefined. The purpose of this study was to further explore the relationship of Arrdc2/Arrdc3 expression with changes in mechanical load in young and aged muscle and define the effect of Arrdc2/3 expression on C2C12 myotube diameter. In young and aged mice, mechanical load was decreased using hindlimb suspension whereas mechanical load was increased by reloading previously unloaded muscle or inducing high-force contractions. Arrdc2 and Arrdc3 mRNAs were overexpressed in C2C12 myotubes using adenoviruses. Myotube diameter was determined 48-h posttransfection, and RNA sequencing was performed on those samples. Arrdc2 and Arrdc3 mRNA content was higher in the unloaded muscle within 1 day of disuse and remained higher up through 10 days. The induction of Arrdc2 mRNA was more pronounced in aged muscle than young muscle in response to unloading. Reloading previously unloaded muscle of young and aged mice restored Arrdc2 and Arrdc3 levels to ambulatory levels. Increasing mechanical load beyond normal ambulatory levels lowered Arrdc2 mRNA, but not Arrdc3 mRNA, in young and aged muscle. Arrdc2 overexpression only was suf- ficient to lower myotube diameter in C2C12 cells in part by altering the transcriptome favoring muscle atrophy. These data are consistent with Arrdc2 contributing to disuse atrophy, particularly in aged muscle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aim: The presence of a monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) even in small amounts may trigger tissue damage through immunological or other mechanisms, irrespective of the potential for malignant transformation. The aim of the study was to present a case of monoclonal gammopathy of clinical significance with ocular manifestations and discuss relevant literature. Case Report: In our case, a patient presented with vision disturbances that was eventually attributed to the underlying IgM MGUS after extensive workup to exclude other potential etiologies. The patient showed a clinical response with the fixed-duration DRC (dexamethasone, rituximab, cyclophosphamide) regimen that persisted for at least 1.5 years. Herein, we present, in detail, the patient management and discuss the underlying pathophysiology of this rare entity with few available published data in this field. Conclusion: A high level of clinical suspicion is necessary in order to detect the association between MGUS and a clinical sign or symptom that cannot be attributed elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

T‐2 toxin causes renal dysfunction with proteinuria and glomerular podocyte damage. This work explores the role of metabolic disorder/reprogramming‐mediated epigenetic modification in the progression of T‐2 toxin‐stimulated podocyte injury. A metabolomics experiment is performed to assess metabolic responses to T‐2 toxin infection in human podocytes. Roles of protein O‐linked‐N‐acetylglucosaminylation (O‐GlcNAcylation) in regulating T‐2 toxin‐stimulated podocyte injury in mouse and podocyte models are assessed. O‐GlcNAc target proteins are recognized by mass spectrometry and co‐immunoprecipitation experiments. Moreover, histone acetylation and autophagy levels are measured. T‐2 toxin infection upregulates glucose transporter type 1 (GLUT1) expression and enhances hexosamine biosynthetic pathway in glomerular podocytes, resulting in a significant increase in β‐arrestin‐1 O‐GlcNAcylation. Decreasing β‐arrestin‐1 or O‐GlcNAc transferase (OGT) effectively prevents T‐2 toxin‐induced renal dysfunction and podocyte injury. Mechanistically, O‐GlcNAcylation of β‐arrestin‐1 stabilizes β‐arrestin‐1 to activate the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway as well as to inhibit autophagy during podocyte injury by promoting H4K16 acetylation. To sum up, OGT‐mediated β‐arrestin‐1 O‐GlcNAcylation is a vital regulator in the development of T‐2 toxin‐stimulated podocyte injury via activating the mTOR pathway to suppress autophagy. Targeting β‐arrestin‐1 or OGT can be a potential therapy for T‐2 toxin infection‐associated glomerular injury, especially podocyte injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physiologically G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are an important class of cell surface proteins capable of sensing the exogenous signals across the cell membrane through G-protein-dependent and independent pathways. Activated GPCRs initiate diverse G-protein-independent signalling through interaction with arrestin. Arrestins comprise a family of four proteins that act as signal regulators of GPCRs. Arrestin specificity and assembly orientation with a particular GPCR depend on the finger loop's residues. Recent cryo-EM structural elucidation of neurotensin receptor-1(NTSR1)-ß-arrestin1complex reveals its striking difference from Rhodopsin-visual-Arrestin by a 90° rotation of ß-Arrestin1 concerning the receptor. Alignment of neurotensin receptor 1(NTSR1)-ß-Arrestin1 assembly with 5-HTR1B (Serotonin receptor) structure shows an ionic interaction mediated complex formation between receptor binding cleft and finger loop of arrestin. Mutational analysis of finger loop residues R65, D67, and D69 of ß-Arrestin1 by tango assay confirms its possible interaction with an electropositive pocket of K79 and R161 in 5-HTR1B. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significance: Adaptor proteins control the spatiotemporal dynamics of cellular signaling. Dysregulation of adaptor protein function can cause aberrant cell signaling and promote cancer. The arrestin family of adaptor proteins are known to regulate signaling by the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The GPCRs are highly druggable and implicated in cancer progression. However, the molecular mechanisms responsible for arrestin dysregulation and the impact on GPCR function in cancer have yet to be fully elucidated. Recent Advances: A new family of mammalian arrestins, termed the α-arrestins, was recently discovered. The α-arrestin, arrestin domain-containing protein 3 (ARRDC3), in particular, has been identified as a tumor suppressor and is reported to control cellular signaling of GPCRs in cancer. Critical Issues: Compared with the extensively studied mammalian β-arrestins, there is limited information regarding the regulatory mechanisms that control α-arrestin activation and function. Here, we discuss the molecular mechanisms that regulate ARRDC3, which include post-translational modifications such as phosphorylation and ubiquitination. We also provide evidence that ARRDC3 can interact with a wide array of proteins that control diverse biological functions. Future Directions: ARRDC3 interacts with numerous proteins and is likely to display diverse functions in cancer, metabolic disease, and other syndromes. Thus, understanding the regulatory mechanisms of ARRDC3 activity in various cellular contexts is critically important. Recent studies suggest that α-arrestins may be regulated through post-translational modification, which is known to impact adaptor protein function. However, additional studies are needed to determine how these regulatory mechanisms affect ARRDC3 tumor suppressor function. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 36, 1066-1079.

Proteins exert their function through protein–protein interactions. In Drosophila, G protein-coupled receptors like rhodopsin (Rh1) interact with a G protein to activate visual signal transduction and with arrestins to terminate activation. Also, membrane proteins like Rh1 engage in protein–protein interactions during folding within the endoplasmic reticulum, during their vesicular transport and upon removal from the cell surface and degradation. Here, we expressed a Rh1-TurboID fusion protein (Rh1::TbID) in Drosophila photoreceptors to identify in vivo Rh1 interaction partners by biotin proximity labeling. We show that Rh1::TbID forms a functional rhodopsin that mediates biotinylation of arrestin 2 in conditions where arrestin 2 interacts with rhodopsin. We also observed biotinylation of Rh1::TbID and native Rh1 as well as of most visual signal transduction proteins. These findings indicate that the signaling components in the rhabdomere approach rhodopsin closely, within a range of ca. 10 nm. Furthermore, we have detected proteins engaged in the maturation of rhodopsin and elements responsible for the trafficking of membrane proteins, resembling potential interaction partners of Rh1. Among these are chaperons of the endoplasmic reticulum, proteins involved in Clathrin-mediated endocytosis as well as previously unnoticed contributors to rhodopsin transportation, such as Rab32, Vap33, or PIP82. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The α-arrestins form a large family of evolutionally conserved modulators that control diverse signaling pathways, including both G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-mediated and non-GPCR-mediated pathways, across eukaryotes. However, unlike β-arrestins, only a few α-arrestin targets and functions have been characterized. Here, using affinity purification and mass spectrometry, we constructed interactomes for 6 human and 12 Drosophila α-arrestins. The resulting high-confidence interactomes comprised 307 and 467 prey proteins in human and Drosophila, respectively. A comparative analysis of these interactomes predicted not only conserved binding partners, such as motor proteins, proteases, ubiquitin ligases, RNA splicing factors, and GTPase-activating proteins, but also those specific to mammals, such as histone modifiers and the subunits of V-type ATPase. Given the manifestation of the interaction between the human α-arrestin, TXNIP, and the histone-modifying enzymes, including HDAC2, we undertook a global analysis of transcription signals and chromatin structures that were affected by TXNIP knockdown. We found that TXNIP activated targets by blocking HDAC2 recruitment to targets, a result that was validated by chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. Additionally, the interactome for an uncharacterized human α-arrestin ARRDC5 uncovered multiple components in the V-type ATPase, which plays a key role in bone resorption by osteoclasts. Our study presents conserved and species-specific protein-protein interaction maps for α-arrestins, which provide a valuable resource for interrogating their cellular functions for both basic and clinical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis show a strongly upregulated expression of chemokine CXCL14, whose target is still unknown. Screening of CXCL14 in a panel of human G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) revealed its potent and selective activation of the orphan MAS-related GPCR X2 (MRGPRX2). This receptor is expressed on mast cells and − like CXCL14 − upregulated in bronchial inflammation. CXCL14 induces robust activation of MRGPRX2 and its putative mouse ortholog MRGPRB2 in G protein-dependent and β-arrestin recruitment assays that is blocked by a selective MRGPRX2/B2 antagonist. Truncation combined with mutagenesis and computational studies identified the pharmacophoric sequence of CXCL14 and its presumed interaction with the receptor. Intriguingly, C-terminal domain sequences of CXCL14 consisting of 4 to 11 amino acids display similar or increased potency and efficacy compared to the full CXCL14 sequence (77 amino acids). These results provide a rational basis for the future development of potential idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis therapies. This study reveals that the proinflammatory chemokine CXCL14 activates MAS-related G protein-coupled receptor MRGPRX2; these results provide a rational basis for the future development of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

β-arrestins (βarrs) are multifunctional proteins involved in signaling and regulation of seven transmembrane receptors (7TMRs), and their interaction is driven primarily by agonist-induced receptor activation and phosphorylation. Here, we present seven cryo–electron microscopy structures of βarrs either in the basal state, activated by the muscarinic receptor subtype 2 (M2R) through its third intracellular loop, or activated by the βarr-biased decoy D6 receptor (D6R). Combined with biochemical, cellular, and biophysical experiments, these structural snapshots allow the visualization of atypical engagement of βarrs with 7TMRs and also reveal a structural transition in the carboxyl terminus of βarr2 from a β strand to an α helix upon activation by D6R. Our study provides previously unanticipated molecular insights into the structural and functional diversity encoded in 7TMR-βarr complexes with direct implications for exploring novel therapeutic avenues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Earlier studies have shown that peptide glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor (GLP‐1R) agonists with reduced β‐arrestin recruitment show enhanced anti‐hyperglycaemic efficacy through avoidance of GLP‐1R desensitization. However, the ligand modifications needed to decrease β‐arrestin recruitment usually also reduces GLP‐1R affinity, therefore higher doses are needed. Here we aimed to develop new, long‐acting, G protein‐biased GLP‐1R agonists with acute signalling potency comparable with semaglutide, to provide insights into specific experimental and therapeutic scenarios. Materials and Methods: New GLP‐1R agonist peptides were assessed using a variety of in vitro and in vivo assays. Results: First, we show that very substantial reductions in β‐arrestin recruitment efficacy are required to realize fully the benefits of GLP‐1R agonism on blood glucose lowering in mice, with more moderate reductions being less effective. Secondly, our lead compound (SRB107) performs substantially better than semaglutide for effects on blood glucose and weight loss, which may be jointly attributable to its biased agonist action and protracted pharmacokinetics. Thirdly, we show that biased agonist‐specific GLP‐1R internalization profiles occur at clinically relevant pharmacological concentrations. Finally, we show that SRB107 cAMP signalling is differentially modulated by single and double GLP1R coding variants seen in human populations, with implications for GLP‐1R agonist pharmacogenomics. Conclusions: Completely abolishing β‐arrestin recruitment improves the anti‐hyperglycaemic effects of GLP‐1R agonists in mice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serotonergic psychedelics possess considerable therapeutic potential. Although 5-HT2A receptor activation mediates psychedelic effects, prototypical psychedelics activate both 5-HT2A-Gq/11 and β-arrestin2 transducers, making their respective roles unclear. To elucidate this, we develop a series of 5-HT2A-selective ligands with varying Gq efficacies, including β-arrestin-biased ligands. We show that 5-HT2A-Gq but not 5-HT2A-β-arrestin2 recruitment efficacy predicts psychedelic potential, assessed using head-twitch response (HTR) magnitude in male mice. We further show that disrupting Gq-PLC signaling attenuates the HTR and a threshold level of Gq activation is required to induce psychedelic-like effects, consistent with the fact that certain 5-HT2A partial agonists (e.g., lisuride) are non-psychedelic. Understanding the role of 5-HT2A Gq-efficacy in psychedelic-like psychopharmacology permits rational development of non-psychedelic 5-HT2A agonists. We also demonstrate that β-arrestin-biased 5-HT2A receptor agonists block psychedelic effects and induce receptor downregulation and tachyphylaxis. Overall, 5-HT2A receptor Gq-signaling can be fine-tuned to generate ligands distinct from classical psychedelics. Serotonin 5-HT2A receptor signaling mechanisms associated with predicting psychedelic potential remain elusive. Using 5-HT2A-selective β-arrestin-biased ligands, here the authors show that a threshold level of 5-HT2A-Gq efficacy and not β-arrestin recruitment is associated with psychedelic potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) are family C, dimeric G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), which play critical roles in synaptic transmission. Despite an increasing appreciation of the molecular diversity of this family, how distinct mGluR subtypes are regulated remains poorly understood. We reveal that different group II/III mGluR subtypes show markedly different beta-arrestin (β-arr) coupling and endocytic trafficking. While mGluR2 is resistant to internalization and mGluR3 shows transient β-arr coupling, which enables endocytosis and recycling, mGluR8 and β-arr form stable complexes, which leads to efficient lysosomal targeting and degradation. Using chimeras and mutagenesis, we pinpoint carboxyl-terminal domain regions that control β-arr coupling and trafficking, including the identification of an mGluR8 splice variant with impaired internalization. We then use a battery of high-resolution fluorescence assays to find that heterodimerization further expands the diversity of mGluR regulation. Together, this work provides insight into the relationship between GPCR/β-arr complex formation and trafficking while revealing diversity and intricacy in the regulation of mGluRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Membrane G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are key components of most eukaryotic signaling systems, transducing external signals to intracellular effector proteins. Activation of GPCRs occurs through the specific binding of ligands of different nature to their orthosteric site. However, regulation of the affinity of an orthosteric agonist for the receptor, control of its effectiveness, and selection of the preferentially activated intracellular signaling cascade is carried out using allosteric mechanisms. This is due to the presence in GPCRs of many allosteric sites, which differ in structural and functional organization and topology in the receptor molecule, and are located in all its functional subdomains. The endogenous regulators of these sites are simple ions (Na+, Zn2+, Mg2+, Ca2+, Cl– and others), lipids (cholesterol, phospholipids, steroids), amino acids and their derivatives, polypeptides, as well as signaling proteins that form functionally active complexes with GPCRs (G proteins, β-arrestins, RAMPs), and autoantibodies to the extracellular regions of GPCRs. Based on pharmacological activity, ligands of allosteric sites of GPCRs are divided into positive, negative or silent modulators of the effects of orthosteric agonists, as well as full and inverse agonists or neutral antagonists, which affect the basal activity of the receptor in the absence of an orthosteric agonist, although combining the properties of a modulator and an agonist is also possible. The multiplicity of allosteric sites and allosteric regulators, complex interactions between them, and the involvement of allosteric mechanisms in the formation of receptor complexes play a key role in fine-tuning the functional activity of signaling cascades, in biased agonism, and predetermine the processes of receptor desensitization and the fate of the receptor complex after hormonal signal transduction. The review summarizes and analyzes current concepts and new trends in the field of studying the allosteric regulation of GPCRs, the localization and functional role of allosteric sites, and their endogenous and synthetic ligands. As an example, synthetic allosteric regulators of the receptors of thyroid-stimulating and luteinizing hormones, as potential drugs for the correction of endocrine disorders, are discussed in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animal opsins are light activated G-protein-coupled receptors, capable of optogenetic control of G-protein signalling for research or therapeutic applications. Animal opsins offer excellent photosensitivity, but their temporal resolution can be limited by long photoresponse duration when expressed outside their native cellular environment. Here, we explore methods for addressing this limitation for a prototypical animal opsin (human rod opsin) in HEK293T cells. We find that the application of the canonical rhodopsin kinase (GRK1)/visual arrestin signal termination mechanism to this problem is complicated by a generalised suppressive effect of GRK1 expression. This attenuation can be overcome using phosphorylation-independent mutants of arrestin, especially when these are tethered to the opsin protein. We further show that point mutations targeting the Schiff base stability of the opsin can also reduce signalling lifetime. Finally, we apply one such mutation (E122Q) to improve the temporal fidelity of restored visual responses following ectopic opsin expression in the inner retina of a mouse model of retinal degeneration (rd1). Our results reveal that these two strategies (targeting either arrestin binding or Schiff-base hydrolysis) can produce more time-delimited opsin signalling under heterologous expression and establish the potential of this approach to improve optogenetic performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

β-Arrestins (βarrs) are functionally versatile proteins that play critical roles in the G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling pathways. While it is well established that the phosphorylated receptor tail plays a central role in βarr activation, emerging evidence highlights the contribution from membrane lipids. However, detailed molecular mechanisms of βarr activation by different binding partners remain elusive. In this work, we present a comprehensive study of the structural changes in critical regions of βarr1 during activation using 19F NMR spectroscopy. We show that phosphopeptides derived from different classes of GPCRs display different βarr1 activation abilities, whereas binding of the membrane phosphoinositide PIP2 stabilizes a distinct partially activated conformational state. Our results further unveil a sparsely-populated activation intermediate as well as complex cross-talks between different binding partners, implying a highly multifaceted conformational energy landscape of βarr1 that can be intricately modulated during signaling. The molecular basis for the functional versatility of β-arrestins in the G-protein coupled receptor signaling pathway is not well understood. Here, the authors use19F NMR spectroscopy to show that different binding partners activate β-arrestin-1 through distinct mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Modern methods for quantifying signaling bias at G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) rely on using a single β-arrestin isoform. However, it is increasingly appreciated that the two β-arrestin isoforms have unique roles, requiring the ability to assess β-arrestin isoform preference. Thus, methods are needed to efficiently screen the recruitment of both β-arrestin isoforms as they compete for a target GPCR in cells. Methods: We used molecular cloning to develop fusion proteins of the δ-opioid receptor (δOR), β-arrestin 1, and β-arrestin 2 to fragments of click beetle green and click beetle red luciferases. In this assay architecture, recruitment of either βarrestin 1 or 2 to the δOR generates a spectrally distinct bioluminescent signal, allowing us to co-transfect all three constructs into cells prior to agonist challenge. Results: We demonstrate that our new assay, named “ClickArr,” is a live-cell assay that simultaneously reports the recruitment of both β-arrestin isoforms as they compete for interaction with the δOR. We further find that the partial δOR agonist TAN67 has a significant efficacy bias for β-arrestin 2 over β-arrestin 1 when recruitment is normalized to the reference agonist leu-enkephalin. We confirm that ClickArr reports this bias when run either as a high-throughput endpoint or high-throughput kinetic assay, and cross-validate this result using the PathHunter assay, an orthogonal commercial assay for reporting β-arrestin recruitment to the δOR. Conclusion: Our results suggest that agonist:GPCR complexes can have relative β-arrestin isoform bias, a novel signaling bias that may potentially open up a new dimension for drug development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dopamine D2 receptor (D2R) has been shown to activate extracellular signal‐regulated kinases (ERKs) via distinct pathways dependent on either G‐protein or β‐arrestin. However, there has not been a systematic study of the regulatory process of D2R‐mediated ERKs activation by G protein‐ versus β‐arrestin‐dependent signaling since D2R stimulation of ERKs reflects the simultaneous action of both pathways. Here, we investigated that differential regulation of D2R‐mediated ERKs activation via these two pathways. Our results showed that G protein‐dependent ERKs activation was transient, rapid, reached maximum level at around 2 min, and importantly, the activated ERKs were entirely confined to the cytoplasm. In contrast, β‐arrestin‐dependent ERKs activation was more sustained, slower, reached maximum level at around 10 min, and phosphorylated ERKs translocated into the nucleus. Src was found to be commonly involved in both the G protein‐ and β‐arrestin‐dependent pathway‐mediated ERKs activation. Pertussis toxin Gi/o inhibitor, GRK2‐CT, AG1478 epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, and wortmannin phosphoinositide 3‐kinase inhibitor all blocked G protein‐dependent ERKs activation. In contrast, GRK2 and β‐Arr2 played a main role in β‐arrestin‐dependent ERKs activation. Receptor endocytosis showed minimal effect on the activation of ERKs mediated by both pathways. Furthermore, we found that the formation of a complex composed of phospho‐ERKs, β‐Arr2, and importinβ1 promoted the nuclear translocation of activated ERKs. The differential regulation of various cellular components, as well as temporal and spatial patterns of ERKs activation via these two pathways, suggest the existence of distinct physiological outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our recent study confirmed that the mature neuropeptide FAM237A, also known as neurosecretory protein GL (NPGL), is an efficient agonist for GPR83. The paralog FAM237B was previously reported as a weak agonist for GPR83. In the present study, we prepared mature human FAM237B via an intein-fusion approach and demonstrated that it could cause a significant activation effect at the nanomolar range (1‒10 nM) in a NanoBiT-based β-arrestin recruitment assay. Thus, FAM237B appears to be another endogenous agonist for GPR83 and future in vivo studies will be required to confirm this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate many pathophysiological processes and are major therapeutic targets. The impact of disease on the subcellular distribution and function of GPCRs is poorly understood. We investigated trafficking and signaling of protease-activated receptor 2 (PAR2) in colitis. To localize PAR2 and assess redistribution during disease, we generated knockin mice expressing PAR2 fused to monomeric ultrastable green fluorescent protein (muGFP). PAR2-muGFP signaled and trafficked normally. PAR2 messenger RNA was detected at similar levels in Par2-mugfp and wild-type mice. Immunostaining with a GFP antibody and RNAScope in situ hybridization using F2rl1 (PAR2) and Gfp probes revealed that PAR2-muGFP was expressed in epithelial cells of the small and large intestine and in subsets of enteric and dorsal root ganglia neurons. In healthy mice, PAR2-muGFP was prominently localized to the basolateral membrane of colonocytes. In mice with colitis, PAR2-muGFP was depleted from the plasma membrane of colonocytes and redistributed to early endosomes, consistent with generation of proinflammatory proteases that activate PAR2 PAR2 agonists stimulated endocytosis of PAR2 and recruitment of Gαq, Gαi, and β-arrestin to early endosomes of T84 colon carcinoma cells. PAR2 agonists increased paracellular permeability of colonic epithelial cells, induced colonic inflammation and hyperalgesia in mice, and stimulated proinflammatory cytokine release from segments of human colon. Knockdown of dynamin-2 (Dnm2), the major colonocyte isoform, and Dnm inhibition attenuated PAR2 endocytosis, signaling complex assembly and colonic inflammation and hyperalgesia. Thus, PAR2 endocytosis sustains protease-evoked inflammation and nociception and PAR2 in endosomes is a potential therapeutic target for colitis.

β-Arrestins are master regulators of cellular signaling that operate by desensitizing ligand-activated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) at the plasma membrane and promoting their subsequent endocytosis. The endocytic activity of β-arrestins is ligand dependent, triggered by GPCR binding, and increasingly recognized to have a multitude of downstream signaling and trafficking consequences that are specifically programmed by the bound GPCR. However, only one biochemical 'mode' for GPCR-mediated triggering of the endocytic activity is presently known - displacement of the β-arrestin C-terminus (CT) to expose clathrin-coated pit-binding determinants that are masked in the inactive state. Here, we revise this view by uncovering a second mode of GPCR-triggered endocytic activity that is independent of the β-arrestin CT and, instead, requires the cytosolic base of the β-arrestin C-lobe (CLB). We further show each of the discrete endocytic modes is triggered in a receptor-specific manner, with GPCRs that bind β-arrestin transiently ('class A') primarily triggering the CLB-dependent mode and GPCRs that bind more stably ('class B') triggering both the CT and CLB-dependent modes in combination. Moreover, we show that different modes have opposing effects on the net signaling output of receptors - with the CLB-dependent mode promoting rapid signal desensitization and the CT-dependent mode enabling prolonged signaling. Together, these results fundamentally revise understanding of how β-arrestins operate as efficient endocytic adaptors while facilitating diversity and flexibility in the control of cell signaling.

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

The D2 dopamine receptor (D2R) signals through both G proteins and β-arrestins to regulate important physiological processes, such as movement, reward circuitry, emotion, and cognition. β-arrestins are believed to interact with G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) at the phosphorylated C-terminal tail or intracellular loops. GPCR kinases (GRKs) are the primary drivers of GPCR phosphorylation, and for many receptors, receptor phosphorylation is indispensable for β-arrestin recruitment. However, GRK-mediated receptor phosphorylation is not required for β-arrestin recruitment to the D2R, and the role of GRKs in D2R–β-arrestin interactions remains largely unexplored. In this study, we used GRK knockout cells engineered using CRISPR-Cas9 technology to determine the extent to which β-arrestin recruitment to the D2R is GRK-dependent. Genetic elimination of all GRK expression decreased, but did not eliminate, agonist-stimulated β-arrestin recruitment to the D2R or its subsequent internalization. However, these processes were rescued upon the re-introduction of various GRK isoforms in the cells with GRK2/3 also enhancing dopamine potency. Further, treatment with compound 101, a pharmacological inhibitor of GRK2/3 isoforms, decreased β-arrestin recruitment and receptor internalization, highlighting the importance of this GRK subfamily for D2R–β-arrestin interactions. These results were recapitulated using a phosphorylation-deficient D2R mutant, emphasizing that GRKs can enhance β-arrestin recruitment and activation independently of receptor phosphorylation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unstructured regions in functional proteins have gained attention in recent years due to advancements in informatics tools and biophysical methods. G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), a large family of cell surface receptors, contain unstructured regions in the form of the i3 loop and C-terminus. This review provides an overview of the functional significance of these regions in GPCRs. GPCRs transmit signals from the extracellular environment to the cell interior, regulating various physiological processes. The i3 loop, located between the fifth and sixth transmembrane helices, and the C-terminus, connected to the seventh transmembrane helix, are determinant of interactions with G proteins and with other intracellular partners such as arrestins. Recent studies demonstrate that the i3 loop and C-terminus play critical roles in allosterically regulating GPCR activation. They can act as autoregulators, adopting conformations that, by restricting G protein access, modulate receptor coupling specificity. The length and unstructured nature of the i3 loop and C-terminus provide unique advantages in GPCR interactions with intracellular protein partners. They act as "fishing lines", expanding the radius of interaction and enabling GPCRs to tether scaffolding proteins, thus facilitating receptor stability during cell membrane movements. Additionally, the i3 loop may be involved in domain swapping between GPCRs, generating novel receptor dimers with distinct binding and coupling characteristics. Overall, the i3 loop and C-terminus are now widely recognized as crucial elements in GPCR function and regulation. Understanding their functional roles enhances our comprehension of GPCR structure and signaling complexity and holds promise for advancements in receptor pharmacology and drug development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human G protein-coupled receptor 35 is regulated by agonist-mediated phosphorylation of a set of five phosphoacceptor amino acids within its C-terminal tail. Alteration of both Ser300 and Ser303 to alanine in the GPR35a isoform greatly reduces the ability of receptor agonists to promote interactions with arrestin adapter proteins. Here, we have integrated the use of cell lines genome edited to lack expression of combinations of G protein receptor kinases (GRKs), selective small molecule inhibitors of subsets of these kinases, and antisera able to specifically identify either human GPR35a or mouse GPR35 only when Ser300 and Ser303 (orce; the equivalent residues in mouse GPR35) have become phosphorylated to demonstrate that GRK5 and GRK6 cause agonist-dependent phosphorylation of these residues. Extensions of these studies demonstrated the importance of the GRK5/6-mediated phosphorylation of these amino acids for agonist-induced internalization of the receptor. Homology and predictive modeling of the interaction of human GPR35 with GRKs showed that the N terminus of GRK5 is likely to dock in the same methionine pocket on the intracellular face of GPR35 as the C terminus of the a5 helix of Ga13 and, that while this is also the case for GRK6, GRK2 and GRK3 are unable to do so effectively. These studies provide unique and wide-ranging insights into modes of regulation of GPR35, a receptor that is currently attracting considerable interest as a novel therapeutic target in diseases including ulcerative colitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GPR56/ADGRG1 is an adhesion G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR) and mutations on this receptor cause cortical malformation due to the over‐migration of neural progenitor cells on brain surface. At pial surface, GPR56 interacts with collagen III, induces Rho‐dependent activation through Gα12/13 and inhibits the neuronal migration. In human glioma cells, GPR56 inhibits cell migration through Gαq/11‐dependent Rho pathway. GPR56‐tetraspanin complex is known to couple Gαq/11. GPR56 is an aGPCR that couples with various G proteins and signals through different downstream pathways. In this study, bilateral frontoparietal polymicrogyria (BFPP) mutants disrupting GPR56 function but remaining to be expressed on plasma membrane were used to study receptor signalling through Gα12, Gα13 and Gα11 with BRET biosensors. GPR56 showed coupling with all three G proteins and activated heterotrimeric G protein signalling upon stimulation with Stachel peptide. However, BFPP mutants showed different signalling defects for each G protein indicative of distinct activation and signalling properties of GPR56 for Gα12, Gα13 or Gα11. β‐arrestin recruitment was also investigated following the activation of GPR56 with Stachel peptide using BRET biosensors. N‐terminally truncated GPR56 showed enhanced β‐arrestin recruitment; however, neither wild‐type receptor nor BFPP mutants gave any measurable recruitment upon Stachel stimulation, pointing different activation mechanisms for β‐arrestin involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

β-Arrestin, PP2A, and Akt form a signaling complex that affects the activation of GSK-3. GSK-3 affects the pathway leading to neurodegenerative diseases. Lithium is a known mood stabilizer which exhibits a direct or indirect inhibition of GSK-3. GSK-3 is the link between neurodegeneration and the mitigating potential of lithium via the direct and indirect inhibition of this enzyme. This review reveals the mechanisms associated with lithium neuroprotection and the synergies between β-arrestin, PP2A, AKT, and GSK-3, the limiting effects on the progression of neurodegeneration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G protein–coupled receptors engage both G proteins and β-arrestins, and their coupling can be biased by ligands and mutations. Here, to resolve structural elements and mechanisms underlying effector coupling to the angiotensin II (AngII) type 1 receptor (AT1R), we combined alanine scanning mutagenesis of the entire sequence of the receptor with pharmacological profiling of Gαq and β-arrestin engagement to mutant receptors and molecular dynamics simulations. We showed that Gαq coupling to AT1R involved a large number of residues spread across the receptor, whereas fewer structural regions of the receptor contributed to β-arrestin coupling regulation. Residue stretches in transmembrane domain 4 conferred β-arrestin bias and represented an important structural element in AT1R for functional selectivity. Furthermore, we identified allosteric small-molecule binding sites that were enclosed by communities of residues that produced biased signaling when mutated. Last, we showed that allosteric communication within AT1R emanating from the Gαq coupling site spread beyond the orthosteric AngII-binding site and across different regions of the receptor, including currently unresolved structural regions. Our findings reveal structural elements and mechanisms within AT1R that bias Gαq and β-arrestin coupling and that could be harnessed to design biased receptors for research purposes and to develop allosteric modulators. Editor's summary: The angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) exerts distinct biological effects depending on whether it couples to the G protein Gαq or the scaffolding protein β-arrestin. To identify residues that allosterically regulated effector coupling, Cao et al. characterized 359 alanine or glycine substitution mutants of AT1R. Those that affected Gαq coupling occurred throughout the receptor in multiple structural regions and were greater in number than those that modulated β-arrestin coupling, which were concentrated in transmembrane domain 4. Many residues were distal to the ligand-binding site. Moreover, AT1R contained multiple allosteric communication pathways, suggesting the possibility of identifying additional sites to allosterically modulate signaling downstream of AT1R activation. –Wei Wong [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family of transmembrane proteins and play a crucial role in regulating diverse cellular functions. They transmit their signaling via binding to intracellular signal transducers and effectors, such as G proteins, GPCR kinases, and β‐arrestins. To influence specific GPCR signaling behaviors, β‐arrestins recruit effectors to form larger signaling complexes. Intriguingly, they facilitate divergent functions for the binding to different receptors. Recent studies relying on advanced structural approaches, novel biosensors and interactome analyses bring us closer to understanding how this specificity is achieved. In this article, we share our hypothesis of how active GPCRs induce specific conformational rearrangements within β‐arrestins to reveal distinct binding interfaces, enabling the recruitment of a subset of effectors to foster specialized signaling complexes. Furthermore, we discuss methods of how to comprehensively assess β‐arrestin conformational states and present the current state of research regarding the functionality of these multifaceted scaffolding proteins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many peptide-activated rhodopsin-like GPCRs share a β-hairpin folding motif in the extracellular loop 2 (ECL2), which interacts with the peptide ligand while at the same time being connected to transmembrane helix 3 (TM3) via a highly conserved disulfide bond. Currently, it remains unknown whether the coupling of the specifically shaped ECL2 to TM3 influences the activation of peptide-activated GPCRs. We investigated this possibility in a selection of peptide GPCRs with known structures. Most of the receptors with cysteine to alanine mutations folded like the respective wild-type and resided in the cell membrane, challenging pure folding stabilization by the disulfide bridge. G-protein signaling of the disulfide mutants was retained to a greater extent in secretin-like GPCRs than in rhodopsin-like GPCRs, while recruitment of arrestin was completely abolished in both groups, which may be linked to alterations in ligand residence time. We found a correlation between receptor activity of the neuropeptide Y2 receptor and alterations in ECL2 dynamics using engineered disulfide bridges or site-directed spin labeling and EPR spectroscopy. These data highlight the functional importance of the TM3-ECL2 link for the activation of specific signaling pathways in peptide-activated GPCRs, which might have implications for future drug discovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]