Search

As members of arrestins family, β-arrestins are widely expressed in monocytes, macrophages, neutrophils and other immune cells. They can regulate the immune response of bodies through various ways. In the present study, a β-arrestin homolog named Hcβ-arrestin was cloned and identified from Hyriopsis cumingii. Predicted Hcβ-arrestin protein contained a conserved arrestin domain, which could be further divided into arrestin-N (39-192aa) and arrestin-C (211-365aa). Amino acid sequence alignment showed that it had the highest identity with Mytilus galloprovincialis and Mytilus edulis counterpart, which was 89.02% and 87.68%, respectively. Furthermore, real-time quantitative PCR analysis showed that the Hcβ-arrestin gene was widely expressed in the detected tissues and with the highest expression in hepatopancreas. The transcription of Hcβ-arrestin in hepatopancreas and gill of mussels was significantly up-regulated after stimulation with peptidoglycan, lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and polyinosinic polycytidylic acid. Knockdown of Hcβ-arrestin gene significantly increased the expression of some antibacterial effector genes, such as lysozyme, LPS-binding protein/bactericidal permeability increasing protein and theromacin in hepatopancreas and gills of LPS stimulated mussels, but only had little effect on TLR pathway genes. In addition, GST pull-down assay confirmed that Hcβ-arrestin can bind to HcTRAF6 protein in vitro. Dual luciferase reporter assay showed that the co-expression of HcTRAF6 and Hcβ-arrestin inhibited the activation of NF-κB reporter by HcTRAF6. These findings indicated that Hcβ-arrestins could interact with HcTRAF6 to negatively regulate the NF-κB pathway in H. cumingii.

Functional non-HLA antibodies (antibodies to non-human leukocyte antigens) targeting the G protein-coupled receptors angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) and endothelin-1 type A receptor (ETAR) are implicated in the pathogenesis of transplant vasculopathy. While ERK signaling (a regulator of cell growth) may represent a general cellular response to agonist stimulation, the molecular link between receptor stimulation and development of vascular obliteration has not been fully established. Here we hypothesize involvement of the versatile adaptor proteins, β-arrestins, and the major regulator of cell growth, PI3K/mTOR signaling, in impaired endothelial repair. To test this, human microvascular endothelial cells were treated with AT1R-/ETAR-antibodies isolated from patients with kidney transplant vasculopathy. These antibodies activated both mTOR complexes via AT1R and ETAR in a PI3K-dependent and ERK-independent manner. The mTOR inhibitor, rapamycin, completely abolished activation of mTORC1 and mTORC2 after long term treatment with receptor antibodies. Imaging studies revealed that β2- but not β1-arrestin was recruited to ETAR in response to ET1 and patient antibodies but not with antibodies isolated from healthy individuals. Silencing of β2-arrestin by siRNA transfection significantly reduced ERK1/2 and mTORC2 activation. Non-HLA antibodies impaired endothelial repair by AT1R and ETAR-induced mTORC2 signaling. Thus, we provide evidence that functional AT1R-/ETAR antibodies induce ERK1/2 and mTOR signaling involving β2-arrestin in human microvascular endothelium. Hence, our data may provide a translational rational for mTOR inhibitors in combination with receptor blockers in patients with non-HLA receptor recognizing antibodies.

Crystallography and cryo-electron microscopy have advanced atomic resolution perspectives of inactive and active states of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), alone and in complex with G proteins or arrestin. 19F NMR can play a role in ascertaining activation mechanisms and understanding the complete energy landscape associated with signal transduction. Fluorinated reporters are introduced biosynthetically via fluorinated amino acid analogs or chemically, via thiol-specific fluorinated reporters. The chemical shift sensitivity of these reporters makes it possible to discern details of conformational ensembles. In addition to spectroscopic details, paramagnetic species can be incorporated through orthogonal techniques to obtain distance information on fluorinated reporters, while T2-and T1-based relaxation experiments provide details on exchange kinetics in addition to fluctuations within a given state.

All physiological events in living organisms originated as specific chemical/biochemical signals on the cell surface and transmitted into the cytoplasm. This signal is translated within milliseconds–hours to a specific and unique order required to maintain optimum performance and homeostasis of living organisms. Examples of daily biological functions include neuronal communication and neurotransmission in the process of learning and memory, secretion (hormones, sweat, and saliva), muscle contraction, cellular growth, differentiation and migration during wound healing, and immunity to fight infections. Among the different transducers for such life-dependent signals is the large family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). GPCRs constitute roughly 800 genes, corresponding to 2% of the human genome. While GPCRs control a plethora of pathophysiological disorders, only approximately one-third of GPCR families have been deorphanized and characterized. Recent drug data show that around 40% of the recommended drugs available in the market target mainly GPCRs. In this review, we presented how such system signals, either through G protein or via other players, independent of G protein, function within the biological system. We also discussed drugs in the market or clinical trials targeting mainly GPCRs in various diseases, including cancer.

The arrestin family of proteins is known to regulate receptor desensitization and trafficking of cell surface receptors, especially G protein–coupled receptors. While several physiological processes have been linked to arrestins, the mechanism of action is not always clear. Because arrestins can act as scaffolding proteins, they offer a platform to influence several signaling pathways in different manners. In this review, we first highlight recent studies investigating metabolic functions associated with members of the arrestin family. Next, current breakthroughs in structural studies of G protein–coupled receptor––β-arrestin complexes will be discussed to elaborate on the conformational determinants of arrestin functions. Finally, we review concepts and limitations of arrestin-based sensors to study arrestin functions in living cells and how they might help to enhance our understanding of arrestin biology.

Rhodopsin is a canonical class A photosensitive G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR), yet relatively few pharmaceutical agents targeting this visual receptor have been identified, in part due to the unique characteristics of its light-sensitive, covalently bound retinal ligands. Rhodopsin becomes activated when light isomerizes 11-cis-retinal into an agonist, all-trans-retinal (ATR), which enables the receptor to activate its G protein. We have previously demonstrated that, despite being covalently bound, ATR can display properties of equilibrium binding, yet how this is accomplished is unknown. Here, we describe a new approach for both identifying compounds that can activate and attenuate rhodopsin and testing the hypothesis that opsin binds retinal in equilibrium. Our method uses opsin-based fluorescent sensors, which directly report the formation of active receptor conformations by detecting the binding of G protein or arrestin fragments that have been fused onto the receptor's C terminus. We show that these biosensors can be used to monitor equilibrium binding of the agonist, ATR, as well as the noncovalent binding of β-ionone, an antagonist for G protein activation. Finally, we use these novel biosensors to observe ATR release from an activated, unlabeled receptor and its subsequent transfer to the sensor in real time. Taken together, these data support the retinal equilibrium binding hypothesis. The approach we describe should prove directly translatable to other GPCRs, providing a new tool for ligand discovery and mutant characterization.

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) initiate signaling cascades via G-proteins and beta-arrestins (βarr). βarr-dependent actions begin with recruitment of βarr to the phosphorylated receptor tail and are followed by engagement with the receptor core. βarrs are known to act as adaptor proteins binding receptors and various effectors, but it is unclear whether in addition to the scaffolding role βarrs can allosterically activate their downstream targets. Here we demonstrate the direct allosteric activation of proto-oncogene kinase Src by GPCR–βarr complexes in vitro and establish the conformational basis of the activation. Whereas free βarr1 had no effect on Src activity, βarr1 in complex with M2 muscarinic or β2-adrenergic receptors reconstituted in lipid nanodiscs activate Src by reducing the lag phase in Src autophosphorylation. Interestingly, receptor–βarr1 complexes formed with a βarr1 mutant, in which the finger-loop, required to interact with the receptor core, has been deleted, fully retain the ability to activate Src. Similarly, βarr1 in complex with only a phosphorylated C-terminal tail of the vasopressin 2 receptor activates Src as efficiently as GPCR–βarr complexes. In contrast, βarr1 and chimeric M2 receptor with nonphosphorylated C-terminal tail failed to activate Src. Taken together, these data demonstrate that the phosphorylated GPCR tail interaction with βarr1 is necessary and sufficient to empower it to allosterically activate Src. Our findings may have implications for understanding more broadly the mechanisms of allosteric activation of downstream targets by βarrs.

Clathrin-mediated and caveolar endocytic pathways represent the major routes through which G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) could be internalized. GPCR kinase 2 (GRK2) and β-arrestins are representative proteins that mediate the GPCR endocytosis. However, the molecular mechanisms through which GRK2 and β-arrestin mediate clathrin-mediated and caveolar endocytosis remain unclear. In this study, we determined the cellular components and processes that mediate the selective interaction between clathrin/caveolin1 and GRK2/β-arrestins. For this we utilized the following: (i) mutant dopamine D2 receptor and β2 adrenoceptor in which the potential GRK2 phosphorylation sites were altered and (ii) cells in which clathrin, caveolin1, β-arrestins, or Mdm2 expression were knocked down. Our results showed that clathrin-mediated endocytosis occurs more rapidly than caveolar endocytosis. Clathrin-mediated endocytosis and the interaction between clathrin and GRK2/β-arrestin2 occurred in a GRK2-mediated receptor phosphorylation-dependent manner. In contrast, caveolar endocytosis and the interaction between caveolin1 and GRK2/β-arrestin2 were independent of receptor phosphorylation status. Mdm2-mediated ubiquitination of β-arrestin, which occurred in a receptor phosphorylation-dependent manner, was required for the interaction of arrestin with clathrin. Thus, this study shows that GRK2-mediated receptor phosphorylation accompanied by β-arrestin ubiquitination is a critical cellular event that links GRK2 and β-arrestins to clathrin-mediated endocytosis.

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

The angiotensin II (AngII) type 1 receptor (AT1R), a member of the G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) family, signals through G proteins and β-arrestins, which act as adaptors to regulate AT1R internalization and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) ERK1/2 activation. β-arrestin–dependent ERK1/2 regulation is the subject of important studies because its spatiotemporal control remains poorly understood for many GPCRs, including AT1R. To study the link between β-arrestin–dependent trafficking and ERK1/2 signaling, we investigated three naturally occurring AT1R variants that show distinct receptor–β-arrestin interactions: A163T, T282M, and C289W. Using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)–based and conformational fluorescein arsenical hairpin–BRET sensors coupled with high-resolution fluorescence microscopy, we show that all AT1R variants form complexes with β-arrestin2 at the plasma membrane and efficiently internalize into endosomes upon AngII stimulation. However, mutant receptors imposed distinct conformations in β-arrestin2 and differentially impacted endosomal trafficking and MAPK signaling. Notably, T282M accumulated in endosomes, but its ability to form stable complexes following internalization was reduced, markedly impairing its ability to co-traffic with β-arrestin2. We also found that despite β-arrestin2 overexpression, T282M's and C289W's residency with β-arrestin2 in endosomes was greatly reduced, leading to decreased β-arrestin–dependent ERK1/2 activation, faster recycling of receptors to the plasma membrane, and impaired AngII-mediated proliferation. Our findings reveal that naturally occurring AT1R variants alter the patterns of receptor/β-arrestin2 trafficking and suggest conformationally dependent β-arrestin–mediated MAPK activation as well as endosomal receptor–β-arrestin complex stabilization in the mitogenic response of AT1R.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) couple to diverse heterotrimeric G protein subtypes and then activate downstream signaling pathways in classical GPCR activation. It has also been found that GPCRs transduce signals through different regulatory proteins, such as arrestins. Recently, owing to the breakthroughs in cryo-electron macroscopy (Cryo-EM), numerous structures of GPCR-G protein or GPCR-arrestin complexes have been deciphered. In this review, we summarize most of reported GPCR signaling complex structures, with an emphasis on the structural features of rhodopsin-like GPCR activation and G protein-binding/arrestin-binding modes, to illustrate the activation and signaling mechanism of rhodopsin-like GPCRs.

Agonist stimulation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) typically leads to phosphorylation of GPCRs and binding to multifunctional proteins called β-arrestins (βarrs). The GPCR-βarr interaction critically contributes to GPCR desensitization, endocytosis, and downstream signaling, and GPCR-βarr complex formation can be used as a generic readout of GPCR and βarr activation. Although several methods are currently available to monitor GPCR-βarr interactions, additional sensors to visualize them may expand the toolbox and complement existing methods. We have previously described antibody fragments (FABs) that recognize activated βarr1 upon its interaction with the vasopressin V2 receptor C-terminal phosphopeptide (V2Rpp). Here, we demonstrate that these FABs efficiently report the formation of a GPCR-βarr1 complex for a broad set of chimeric GPCRs harboring the V2R C terminus. We adapted these FABs to an intrabody format by converting them to single-chain variable fragments (ScFvs) and used them to monitor the localization and trafficking of βarr1 in live cells. We observed that upon agonist simulation of cells expressing chimeric GPCRs, these intrabodies first translocate to the cell surface, followed by trafficking into intracellular vesicles. The translocation pattern of intrabodies mirrored that of βarr1, and the intrabodies co-localized with βarr1 at the cell surface and in intracellular vesicles. Interestingly, we discovered that intrabody sensors can also report βarr1 recruitment and trafficking for several unmodified GPCRs. Our characterization of intrabody sensors for βarr1 recruitment and trafficking expands currently available approaches to visualize GPCR-βarr1 binding, which may help decipher additional aspects of GPCR signaling and regulation.

Arrestin-1 is the arrestin family member responsible for inactivation of the G protein–coupled receptor rhodopsin in photoreceptors. Arrestin-1 is also well-known to interact with additional protein partners and to affect other signaling cascades beyond phototransduction. In this study, we investigated one of these alternative arrestin-1 binding partners, the glycolysis enzyme enolase-1, to map the molecular contact sites between these two proteins and investigate how the binding of arrestin-1 affects the catalytic activity of enolase-1. Using fluorescence quench protection of strategically placed fluorophores on the arrestin-1 surface, we observed that arrestin-1 primarily engages enolase-1 along a surface that is opposite of the side of arrestin-1 that binds photoactivated rhodopsin. Using this information, we developed a molecular model of the arrestin-1–enolase-1 complex, which was validated by targeted substitutions of charge-pair interactions. Finally, we identified the likely source of arrestin's modulation of enolase-1 catalysis, showing that selective substitution of two amino acids in arrestin-1 can completely remove its effect on enolase-1 activity while still remaining bound to enolase-1. These findings open up opportunities for examining the functional effects of arrestin-1 on enolase-1 activity in photoreceptors and their surrounding cells.

The mu opioid receptor (MOR) is a diversely regulated target for the alleviation of pain in the clinical setting. However, untoward side effects such as tolerance, dependence, respiratory suppression, constipation, and abuse liability detract from the general activation of these receptors. Studies in genetically modified rodent models suggest that activating G protein signaling pathways while avoiding phosphorylation of the receptor or recruitment of β-arrestin scaffolding proteins could preserve the analgesic properties of MOR agonists while avoiding certain side effects. With the development of novel MOR "biased" agonists, which lead to preferential activation of G protein pathways over receptor phosphorylation, internalization, or interaction with other effectors, this hypothesis can be tested in a native, physiological setting. Overall, it is clear that the MOR is not a simple on-off switch and that the diverse means by which the receptor can be regulated may present an opportunity to refine therapeutics for the treatment of pain.

Arrestins control signaling via the G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), serving as both signal terminators and transducers. Previous studies identified several structural elements in arrestins that contribute to their functions as GPCR regulators. However, the importance of these elements in vivo is unclear, and the developmental roles of arrestins are not well understood. We carried out an in vivo structure-function analysis of Kurtz (Krz), the single ortholog of mammalian β-arrestins in the Drosophila genome. A combination of Krz mutations affecting the GPCR-phosphosensing and receptor core-binding (“finger loop”) functions (Krz-KKVL/A) resulted in a complete loss of Krz activity during development. Endosome recruitment and bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays revealed that the KKVL/A mutations abolished the GPCR-binding ability of Krz. We found that the isolated “finger loop” mutation (Krz-VL/A), while having a negligible effect on GPCR internalization, severely affected Krz function, suggesting that tight receptor interactions are necessary for proper termination of signaling in vivo. Genetic analysis as well as live imaging demonstrated that mutations in Krz led to hyperactivity of the GPCR Mist (also known as Mthl1), which is activated by its ligand Folded gastrulation (Fog) and is responsible for cellular contractility and epithelial morphogenesis. Krz mutations affected two developmental events that are under the control of Fog-Mist signaling: gastrulation and morphogenesis of the wing. Overall, our data reveal the functional importance in vivo of direct β-arrestin/GPCR binding, which is mediated by the recognition of the phosphorylated receptor tail and receptor core interaction. These Krz-GPCR interactions are critical for setting the correct level of Fog-Mist signaling during epithelial morphogenesis.

The angiotensin II (AngII) type 1 receptor (AT1R) is a member of the G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) family and binds β-arrestins (β-arrs), which regulate AT1R signaling and trafficking. These processes can be biased by different ligands or mutations in the AGTR1 gene. As for many GPCRs, the exact details for AT1R–β-arr interactions driven by AngII or β-arr–biased ligands remain largely unknown. Here, we used the amber-suppression technology to site-specifically introduce the unnatural amino acid (UAA) p-azido-l-phenylalanine (azF) into the intracellular loops (ICLs) and the C-tail of AT1R. Our goal was to generate competent photoreactive receptors that can be cross-linked to β-arrs in cells. We performed UV-mediated photolysis of 25 different azF-labeled AT1Rs to cross-link β-arr1 to AngII-bound receptors, enabling us to map important contact sites in the C-tail and in the ICL2 and ICL3 of the receptor. The extent of AT1R–β-arr1 cross-linking among azF-labeled receptors differed, revealing variability in β-arr's contact mode with the different AT1R domains. Moreover, the signature of ligated AT1R–β-arr complexes from a subset of azF-labeled receptors also differed between AngII and β-arr–biased ligand stimulation of receptors and between azF-labeled AT1R bearing and that lacking a bias signaling mutation. These observations further implied distinct interaction modalities of the AT1R–β-arr1 complex in biased signaling conditions. Our findings demonstrate that this photocross-linking approach is useful for understanding GPCR–β-arr complexes in different activation states and could be extended to study other protein–protein interactions in cells.

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) and arrestins mediate GPCR desensitization, internalization, and signaling. The spatial pattern of GPCR phosphorylation is predicted to trigger these discrete GRK and arrestin-mediated functions. Here, we provide evidence that distal carboxyl-terminal tail (C-tail), but not proximal, phosphorylation of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 specifies βarrestin1 (βarr1)-dependent signaling. We demonstrate by pharmacologic inhibition of GRK2/3-mediated phosphorylation of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 coupled with site-directed mutagenesis and bioluminescence resonance energy transfer approaches that distal, not proximal, C-tail phosphorylation sites are required for recruitment of the adaptor protein STAM1 (signal-transducing adaptor molecule) to βarr1 and focal adhesion kinase phosphorylation but not extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 phosphorylation. In addition, we show that GPCRs that have similarly positioned C-tail phosphoresidues are also able to recruit STAM1 to βarr1. However, although necessary for some GPCRs, we found that distal C-tail sites might not be sufficient to specify recruitment of STAM1 to βarr1 for other GPCRs. In conclusion, this study provides evidence that distal C-tail phosphorylation sites specify GRK-βarrestin-mediated signaling by CXCR4 and other GPCRs.

Acute alcohol exposure alters the trafficking and function of many G-protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) that are associated with aberrant behavioral responses to alcohol. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying alcohol-induced changes in GPCR function remain unclear. β-Arrestin is a key player involved in the regulation of GPCR internalization and thus controls the magnitude and duration of GPCR signaling. Although β-arrestin levels are influenced by various drugs of abuse, the effect of alcohol exposure on β-arrestin expression and β-arrestin–mediated GPCR trafficking is poorly understood. Here, we found that acute ethanol exposure increases β-arrestin2 degradation via its increased ubiquitination in neuroblastoma-2a (N2A) cells and rat prefrontal cortex (PFC). β-Arrestin2 ubiquitination was likely mediated by the E3 ligase MDM2 homolog (MDM2), indicated by an increased coupling between β-arrestin2 and MDM2 in response to acute ethanol exposure in both N2A cells and rat PFC homogenates. Importantly, ethanol-induced β-arrestin2 reduction was reversed by siRNA-mediated MDM2 knockdown or proteasome inhibition in N2A cells, suggesting β-arrestin2 degradation is mediated by MDM2 through the proteasomal pathway. Using serotonin 5-HT1A receptors (5-HT1ARs) as a model receptor system, we found that ethanol dose-dependently inhibits 5-HT1AR internalization and that MDM2 knockdown reverses this effect. Moreover, ethanol both reduced β-arrestin2 levels and delayed agonist-induced β-arrestin2 recruitment to the membrane. We conclude that β-arrestin2 dysregulation by ethanol impairs 5-HT1AR trafficking. Our findings reveal a critical molecular mechanism underlying ethanol-induced alterations in GPCR internalization and implicate β-arrestin as a potential player mediating behavioral responses to acute alcohol exposure.

Light-induced endocytosis of rhodopsin in the retina is critical for preventing photoreceptor hyperactivity and for the survival of photoreceptor cells. In Drosophila, this process is mediated by arrestin1 (Arr1). Because Arr1 lacks a clathrin-binding domain required for receptor internalization and the C-terminal sequence that interacts with the β-subunit of the clathrin adaptor protein AP2, the mechanism of how Arr1 mediates endocytosis of the major rhodopsin Rh1 is unclear. Here, using several approaches, including Arr binding and pulldown assays, immunofluorescence techniques, and EM imaging, we found that Drosophila metallophosphoesterase (dMPPE) is involved in light-induced rhodopsin endocytosis. We observed that the photoreceptor cells of a dmppe mutant exhibit impaired light-induced rhodopsin endocytosis and that this impairment is independent of dMPPE phosphoesterase activity. Furthermore, dMPPE directly interacted with Arr1 and promoted the association of Arr1 with AP2. Of note, genetic dmppe deletion largely prevented retinal degeneration in norpA (encoding phospholipase C) mutants, which were reported previously to contribute to retinal degeneration, by suppressing Rh1 endocytosis. Our findings demonstrate that Arr1 interacts with AP2 and that dMPPE functions as a critical regulator in Rh1 endocytosis and retinal degeneration.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) have a long history of being considered a prime target for drug development to treat a plethora of diseases and disorders. In fact in 1827, the first approved therapeutic in the United States was morphine, a drug that targets a GPCR, namely the mu opioid receptor. However, with the rise in biologics over the last two decades, the market share of small molecules targeting GPCRs has declined. Still, two phenomena concerning GPCR pharmacology, specifically heteromerization and biased signaling, have bolstered new interests in this particular class of drug targets. Heteromerization, the process by which two distinct GPCRs come together to form a unique signaling complex, has been demonstrated between many different GPCRs and has spurred efforts to discover heteromer selective drugs. Additionally, the discovery of biased signaling, a concept by which a GPCR can transduce intracellular signaling by favoring a specific pathway (e.g. G-protein) over another pathway (e.g. arrestin), has led to the development of signal-biased drugs with potentially fewer side effects. Our goal for this review is to highlight studies that have investigated the interplay of these two phenomena by providing an overview of the current literature describing instances where GPCR heteromers have distinct arrestin recruitment profiles when compared to the individual GPCRs, with a focus on those GPCRs expressed in the central nervous system. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Receptor heteromers and their allosteric receptor-receptor interactions'.

Agonist-induced internalization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a significant step in receptor kinetics and is known to be involved in receptor down-regulation. However, the dopamine D3 receptor (D3R) has been an exception wherein agonist induces D3Rs to undergo desensitization followed by pharmacological sequestration - which is defined as the sequestration of cell surface receptors into a more hydrophobic fraction within the plasma membrane without undergoing the process of receptor internalization. Pharmacological sequestration renders the receptor in an inactive state on the membrane. In our previous study we demonstrated that a novel class of D3R agonists exemplified by SK608 have biased signaling properties via the G-protein dependent pathway and do not induce D3R desensitization. In this study, using radioligand binding assay, immunoblot or immunocytochemistry methods, we observed that SK608 induced internalization of human D3R stably expressed in CHO, HEK and SH-SY5Y cells which are derived from neuroblastoma cells, suggesting that it is not a cell-type specific event. Further, we have evaluated the potential mechanism of D3R internalization induced by these biased signaling agonists. SK608-induced D3R internalization was time- and concentration-dependent. In comparison, dopamine induced D3R upregulation and pharmacological sequestration in the same assays. GRK2 and clathrin/dynamin I/II are the key molecular players in the SK608-induced D3R internalization process, while β-arrestin 1/2 and GRK-interacting protein 1(GIT1) are not involved. These results suggest that SK608-promoted D3R internalization is similar to the type II internalization observed among peptide binding GPCRs.

Advances in resolving crystal structures of GPCRs and their binding partners as well as improvements in live-cell microscopy and the fluorescent proteins pallet has greatly driven new ideas for designing optical sensors for the same. Sensors have been developed to monitor ligand binding as well as the ensuing ligand-induced conformational changes in GPCRs, G-proteins and arrestins. In this review we will highlight the functionality of such sensor designs starting from monitoring ligand binding to receptor activation and interaction with arrestins. Furthermore, we will highlight the importance of sensor designs to monitor receptor-dependent arrestin conformations and give an idea about the various detected arrestin conformations and their possible implications.

Tolerance to cannabinoid agonists can develop through desensitization of the cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB(1)) following prolonged administration. Desensitization results from phosphorylation of CB(1) by a G protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK), and subsequent association of the receptor with arrestin. Mice expressing a mutant form of CB(1), in which the serine residues at two putative phosphorylation sites necessary for desensitization have been replaced by non-phosphorylatable alanines (S426A/S430A), display reduced tolerance to Δ(9)-tetrahydroeannabinol (Δ(9)-THC). Tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of WIN55,212-2 was delayed in S426A/S430A mutants using the tail-flick and formalin tests. However, tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of once daily CP55,940 injections was not significantly delayed in S426A/S430A mutant mice using either of these tests. Interestingly, the dose response curve shifts for the hypothermic and antinociceptive effects of CP55,940 that were induced by chronic treatment with this agonist in wild-type mice were blocked in S426A/S430A mutant mice. Assessment of mechanical allodynia in mice exhibiting chronic cisplatin-evoked neuropathic pain found that tolerance to the anti-allodynic effects WIN55,212-2 but not CP55,940 was delayed in S426A/S430A mice compared to wild-type littermates. Despite these deficits in tolerance, S426A/S430A mutant mice eventually developed tolerance to both WIN55,212-2 and CP55,940 for all pain assays that were examined, suggesting that other mechanisms likely contribute to tolerance for these cannabinoid agonists. These findings suggest that GRK- and (βarrestin2-mediated desensitization of CB(1) may strongly contribute to the rate of tolerance to the antinociceptive effects of WIN55,212-2, and raises the possibility of agonist-specific mechanisms of cannabinoid tolerance.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the second-most common uronephrological cancer. In the absence of specific symptoms, early diagnosis of RCC is challenging. Monitoring of the aberrant expression of tumour-associated antigens (TAAs) and related autoantibody response is considered as a novel approach of RCC diagnostics. The aim of this study was to examine the aberrant expression of arrestin-1 in renal tumours, to investigate the possible epigenetic mechanism underlying arrestin-1 expression, and to assess the frequency of anti-arrestin-1 autoantibody response. Immunohistochemistry was used to assess the presence of arrestin-1 in primary tumours and metastases of 39 patients with RCC and renal oncocytoma. Bisulfite sequencing was employed to analyse the methylation status of the promoter of the SAG gene encoding arrestin-1. Western blot analysis was performed to detect autoantibodies against arrestin-1 in serum samples of 36 RCC and oncocytoma patients. Arrestin-1 was found to be expressed in RCC (58.7% of cases) and renal oncocytoma (90% of cases) cells, while being absent in healthy kidney. The expression of arrestin-1 in RCC metastases was more prominent than in primary tumours. Hypomethylation of the SAG gene promoter is unlikely to be the mechanism for the aberrant expression of arrestin-1. Autoantibodies against arrestin-1 were detected in sera of 75% of RCC patients. Taken together, our findings suggest employment of autoantibody against arrestin-1 as biomarker of RCC.

Generation of cAMP through Gs-coupled G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) [e.g. β2-adrenoceptor (β2AR), adenosine A2B receptor (A2BR)] activation, induces arterial smooth muscle relaxation, counteracting the actions of vasoconstrictors. Gs-coupled GPCR signalling is regulated by G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRK) and arrestin proteins, and dysregulation of Gs/GPCR signalling is thought play a role in the development of hypertension, which may be a consequence of enhanced GRK2 and/or arrestin expression. However, despite numerous studies indicating that β2AR and A2BR can be substrates for GRK/arrestin proteins, currently little is known regarding GRK/arrestin regulation of these endogenous receptors in arterial smooth muscle. Here, endogenous GRK isoenzymes and arrestin proteins were selectively depleted using RNA-interference in rat arterial smooth muscle cells (RASM) and the consequences of this for β2AR- and A2BR-mediated adenylyl cyclase (AC) signalling were determined by assessing cAMP accumulation. GRK2 or GRK5 depletion enhanced and prolonged β2AR/AC signalling, while combined deletion of GRK2/5 has an additive effect. Conversely, activation of AC by A2BR was regulated by GRK5, but not GRK2. β2AR desensitization was attenuated following combined GRK2/GRK5 knockdown, but not by depletion of individual GRKs, arrestins, or by inhibiting PKA. Arrestin3 (but not arrestin2) depletion enhanced A2BR-AC signalling and attenuated A2BR desensitization, while β2AR-AC signalling was regulated by both arrestin isoforms. This study provides a first demonstration of how different complements of GRK and arrestin proteins contribute to the regulation of signalling and desensitization of these important receptors mediating vasodilator responses in arterial smooth muscle.

Summary Visual arrestin (Arr1) terminates rhodopsin signaling by blocking its interaction with transducin. To do this, Arr1 translocates from the inner to the outer segment of photoreceptors upon light stimulation. Mounting evidence indicates that inositol phosphates (InsPs) affect Arr1 activity, but the Arr1-InsP molecular interaction remains poorly defined. We report the structure of bovine Arr1 in a ligand-free state featuring a near-complete model of the previously unresolved C-tail, which plays a crucial role in regulating Arr1 activity. InsPs bind to the N-domain basic patch thus displacing the C-tail, suggesting that they prime Arr1 for interaction with rhodopsin and help direct Arr1 translocation. These structures exhibit intact polar cores, suggesting that C-tail removal by InsP binding is insufficient to activate Arr1. These results show how Arr1 activity can be controlled by endogenous InsPs in molecular detail.

Background: FFA4 is a receptor for long chain fatty acids and possible target for diabetes and inflammatory diseases. Results: Sites of phosphorylation and interaction with arrestin-3 were mapped within the C-terminal tail. Conclusion: Both phosphorylation and structural elements are required for interaction with arrestin-3. Significance: Insight gained into arrestin-3 versus G protein signaling and implications for biased ligand development may drive identification of improved therapeutics., In addition to being nutrients, free fatty acids act as signaling molecules by activating a family of G protein-coupled receptors. Among these is FFA4, previously called GPR120, which responds to medium and long chain fatty acids, including health-promoting ω-3 fatty acids, which have been implicated in the regulation of metabolic and inflammatory responses. Here we show, using mass spectrometry, mutagenesis, and phosphospecific antibodies, that agonist-regulated phosphorylation of the human FFA4 receptor occurred primarily at five residues (Thr347, Thr349, Ser350, Ser357, and Ser360) in the C-terminal tail. Mutation of these residues reduced both the efficacy and potency of ligand-mediated arrestin-3 recruitment as well as affecting recruitment kinetics. Combined mutagenesis of all five of these residues was insufficient to fully abrogate interaction with arrestin-3, but further mutagenesis of negatively charged residues revealed additional structural components for the interaction with arrestin-3 within the C-terminal tail of the receptor. These elements consist of the acidic residues Glu341, Asp348, and Asp355 located close to the phosphorylation sites. Receptor phosphorylation thus operates in concert with structural elements within the C-terminal tail of FFA4 to allow for the recruitment of arrestin-3. Importantly, these mechanisms of arrestin-3 recruitment operate independently from Gq/11 coupling, thereby offering the possibility that ligands showing stimulus bias could be developed that exploit these differential coupling mechanisms. Furthermore, this provides a strategy for the design of biased receptors to probe physiologically relevant signaling.

Arrestins regulate a wide range of signaling events, most notably when bound to active G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Among the known effectors recruited by GPCR-bound arrestins are Src family kinases, which regulate cellular growth and proliferation. Here, we focus on arrestin-3 interactions with Fgr kinase, a member of the Src family. Previous reports demonstrated that Fgr exhibits high constitutive activity, but can be further activated by both arrestin-dependent and arrestin-independent pathways. We report that arrestin-3 modulates Fgr activity with a hallmark bell-shaped concentration-dependence, consistent with a role as a signaling scaffold. We further demonstrate using NMR spectroscopy that a polyproline motif within arrestin-3 interacts directly with the SH3 domain of Fgr. To provide a framework for this interaction, we determined the crystal structure of the Fgr SH3 domain at 1.9 Å resolution and developed a model for the GPCR-arrestin-3-Fgr complex that is supported by mutagenesis. This model suggests that Fgr interacts with arrestin-3 at multiple sites and is consistent with the locations of disease-associated Fgr mutations. Collectively, these studies provide a structural framework for arrestin-dependent activation of Fgr.

GPCR internalization, which is induced by arrestin recruitment, is an important mechanism for the regulation of signaling and receptor quantity at the cell surface. In this study, differences in the mechanism of arrestin-3 (arr-3) recruitment to the neuropeptide Y1 and Y2 receptor were identified. These receptors play an essential role in the regulation of feeding, energy homeostasis and cancer. The Y1R displays high affinity to arr-3, which induces rapid internalization of the arrestin/receptor complex. In contrast, the Y2R has a lower affinity for arr-3. Internalization is induced by arrestin binding, but arr-3 is released from the receptor and remains at the membrane while the receptor internalizes. Moreover, the deletion of the finger loop region of arr-3 reduces its agonist-dependent recruitment to the Y2R significantly, but not to the Y1R suggesting different binding conformations. For the first time, the formation of a supercomplex consisting of Y receptor, Gα0 protein and arrestin was studied by BRET-assay. We demonstrated that the Y1R is able to bind Gα0 protein as well as arr-3 simultaneously and internalizes as a supercomplex. For the Y2R no supercomplex formation was observed. By substituting the C-terminus or specific residues within the intracellular loop 1 and 2 of the receptors, the arr-3 recruitment of the Y1R and Y2R can be switched. Thus, we shed light on the specific spatio-temporal distribution of Gα0 protein and arrestin in response to Y1 versus Y2 receptor activation and identified the molecular determinants.

Until the late 1990s class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) were believed to function as monomers. Then indirect evidence that they might internalize or even signal as dimers has emerged, along with proof that class C GPCRs are obligatory dimers. Crystal structures of GPCRs and their much larger binding partners were consistent with the idea that two receptors might engage a single G protein, GRK, or arrestin. However, recent biophysical, biochemical, and structural evidence invariably suggested that a single GPCR binds G proteins, GRKs, and arrestins. Here we review existing evidence of the stoichiometry of GPCR interactions with signal transducers and discuss potential biological roles of class A GPCR oligomers, including proposed homo- and heterodimers.

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) can be differentially activated by ligands to generate multiple and distinct downstream signaling profiles, a phenomenon termed biased agonism. The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) is a class B GPCR and a key drug target for managing metabolic disorders; however, its peptide agonists display biased signaling that affects their relative efficacies. In this study, we combined mutagenesis experiments and mapping of surface mutations onto recently described GLP-1R structures, which revealed two major domains in the GLP-1/GLP-1R/G(s) protein active structure that are differentially important for both receptor quiescence and ligand-specific initiation and propagation of biased agonism. Changes to the conformation of transmembrane helix (TM) 5 and TM 6 and reordering of extracellular loop 2 were essential for the propagation of signaling linked to cAMP formation and intracellular calcium mobilization, whereas ordering and packing of residues in TMs 1 and 7 were critical for extracellular signal–regulated kinase 1/2 (pERK) activity. On the basis of these findings, we propose a model of distinct peptide–receptor interactions that selectively control how these different signaling pathways are engaged. This work provides important structural insight into class B GPCR activation and biased agonism.

Arrestins are a small family of proteins with four isoforms in humans. Remarkably, two arrestins regulate signaling from >800 G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or non-receptor activators by simultaneously binding an activator and one out of hundreds of other signaling proteins. When arrestins are bound to GPCRs or other activators, the affinity for these signaling partners changes. Thus, it is proposed that an activator alters arrestin’s ability to transduce a signal. The comparison of all available arrestin structures identifies several common conformational rearrangements associated with activation. In particular, it identifies elements that are directly involved in binding to GPCRs or other activators, elements that likely engage distinct downstream effectors, and elements that likely link the activator-binding sites with the effector-binding sites.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have emerged as key biological entities that regulate a plethora of physiological processes and participate in the onset and development of many diseases. Moreover, these receptors are important targets of almost 25% of the current therapeutic drugs in the market. Upon agonist binding, GPCRs activate a great number of signaling pathways, resulting in important cellular events like gene transcription, survival, proliferation and differentiation. In order to activate such events, GPCRs interact with a variety of scaffold and molecular entities, particularly with G proteins, but also with β-arrestins and the extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) pathway, forming unique signaling modules. The aim of this review is to analyze the signaling features of the multi-protein complex GPCR-β-arrestin-ERK1/2, a unique signaling module that has received considerable attention from different research groups due to its molecular and physiological roles in diverse cellular contexts.

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) are key signaling proteins that regulate nearly every aspect of cell function. Studies of GPCRs have benefited greatly from the development of molecular tools to monitor receptor activation and downstream signaling. Here, we show that mini G proteins are robust probes that can be used in a variety of assay formats to report GPCR activity in living cells. Mini G (mG) proteins are engineered GTPase domains of G subunits that were developed for struc- tural studies of active-state GPCRs. Confocal imaging revealed that mG proteins fused to fluorescent proteins were located diffusely in the cytoplasm and translocated to sites of receptor activation at the cell surface and at intracellular organ- elles. Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assays with mG proteins fused to either a fluorescent protein or luciferase reported agonist, superagonist, and inverse agonist activities. Variants of mG proteins (mGs, mGsi, mGsq, and mG12) corresponding to the four families of G subunits displayed appropriate coupling to their cognate GPCRs, allowing quantitative profiling of subtype-specific coupling to individual receptors. BRET between luciferase–mG fusion proteins and fluorescent markers indicated the presence of active GPCRs at the plasma membrane, Golgi apparatus, and endosomes. Complementation assays with fragments of NanoLuc luciferase fused to GPCRs and mG proteins reported constitutive receptor activity and agonist-induced activation with up to 20-fold increases in luminescence. We conclude that mG proteins are versatile tools for studying GPCR activation and coupling specificity in cells and should be useful for discovering and characterizing G protein sub- type–biased ligands.

Ligand activation of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R), a member of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) family, stimulates intracellular signaling to mediate a variety of physiological responses. The AT1R is also known to be a mechanical sensor. When activated by mechanical stretch, the AT1R can signal via the multifunctional adaptor protein β-arrestin, rather than through classical heterotrimeric G protein pathways. To date, the AT1R conformation induced by membrane stretch in the absence of ligand was thought to be the same as that induced by β-arrestin-biased agonists, which selectively engage β-arrestin thereby preventing G protein coupling. Here, we show that in contrast to the β-arrestin-biased agonists TRV120023 and TRV120026, membrane stretch uniquely promotes the coupling of the inhibitory G protein (Gαi) to the AT1R to transduce signaling. Stretch-triggered AT1R-Gαi coupling is required for the recruitment of β-arrestin2 and activation of downstream signaling pathways, such as EGFR transactivation and ERK phosphorylation. Our findings demonstrate additional complexity in the mechanism of receptor bias in which the recruitment of Gαi is required for allosteric mechanoactivation of the AT1R-induced β-arrestin-biased signaling.

Signaling of the prototypical G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) rhodopsin through its cognate G protein transducin (G(t)) is quenched when arrestin binds to the activated receptor. Although the overall architecture of the rhodopsin/arrestin complex is known, many questions regarding its specificity remain unresolved. Here, using FTIR difference spectroscopy and a dual pH/peptide titration assay, we show that rhodopsin maintains certain flexibility upon binding the “finger loop” of visual arrestin (prepared as synthetic peptide ArrFL-1). We found that two distinct complexes can be stabilized depending on the protonation state of E3.49 in the conserved (D)ERY motif. Both complexes exhibit different interaction modes and affinities of ArrFL-1 binding. The plasticity of the receptor within the rhodopsin/ArrFL-1 complex stands in contrast to the complex with the C terminus of the G(t) α-subunit (GαCT), which stabilizes only one specific substate out of the conformational ensemble. However, G(t) α-subunit binding and both ArrFL-1–binding modes involve a direct interaction to conserved R3.50, as determined by site-directed mutagenesis. Our findings highlight the importance of receptor conformational flexibility and cytoplasmic proton uptake for modulation of rhodopsin signaling and thereby extend the picture provided by crystal structures of the rhodopsin/arrestin and rhodopsin/ArrFL-1 complexes. Furthermore, the two binding modes of ArrFL-1 identified here involve motifs of conserved amino acids, which indicates that our results may have elucidated a common modulation mechanism of class A GPCR–G protein/-arrestin signaling.

The discovery of β-arrestin-dependent GPCR signaling has led to an exciting new field in GPCR pharmacology: to develop "biased agonists" that can selectively target a specific downstream signaling pathway that elicits beneficial therapeutic effects without activating other pathways that elicit negative side effects. This new trend in GPCR drug discovery requires us to understand the structural and molecular mechanisms of β-arrestin-biased agonism, which largely remain unclear. We have used cutting-edge mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics, combined with systems, chemical and structural biology to study protein function, macromolecular interaction, protein expression and posttranslational modifications in the β-arrestin-dependent GPCR signaling. These high-throughput proteomic studies have provided a systems view of β-arrestin-biased agonism from several perspectives: distinct receptor phosphorylation barcode, multiple receptor conformations, distinct β-arrestin conformations, and ligand-specific signaling. The information obtained from these studies offers new insights into the molecular basis of GPCR regulation by β-arrestin and provides a potential platform for developing novel therapeutic interventions through GPCRs.

The atypical chemokine receptor ACKR3 contributes to chemotaxis by binding, internalizing, and degrading the chemokines CXCL11 and CXCL12 to shape and terminate chemotactic gradients during development and immune responses. Although unable to trigger G protein activation, both ligands activate G protein–independent ACKR3 responses and prompt arrestin recruitment. This offers a model to specifically study ligand-specific receptor conformations leading to G protein–independent signaling and to functional parameters such as receptor transport and chemokine degradation. We here show chemokine specificity in arrestin recruitment, by different effects of single amino acid substitutions in ACKR3 on arrestin in response to CXCL12 or CXCL11. Chemokine specificity in receptor transport was also observed, as CXCL11 induced faster receptor internalization, slower recycling, and longer intracellular sojourn of ACKR3 than CXCL12. Internalization and recycling rates of the ACKR3 R1423.50A substitution in response to each chemokine were similar; however, ACKR3 R1423.50A degraded only CXCL12 and not CXCL11. This suggests that ligand-specific intracellular receptor transport is required for chemokine degradation. Remarkably, the failure of ACKR3 R1423.50A to degrade CXCL11 was not caused by the lack of arrestin recruitment; rather, arrestin was entirely dispensable for scavenging of either chemokine. This suggests the involvement of another, yet unidentified, ACKR3 effector in scavenging. In summary, our study correlates ACKR3 ligand-specific conformational transitions with chemokine-dependent receptor transport dynamics and points toward unexpected ligand specificity in the mechanisms of chemokine degradation.

β-Arrestins are key regulators and signal transducers of G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs). The interaction between receptors and β-arrestins is generally believed to require both receptor activity and phosphorylation by GPCR kinases. In this study, we investigated whether β-arrestins are able to bind second messenger kinase–phosphorylated, but inactive receptors as well. Because heterologous phosphorylation is a common phenomenon among GPCRs, this mode of β-arrestin activation may represent a novel mechanism of signal transduction and receptor cross-talk. Here we demonstrate that activation of protein kinase C (PKC) by phorbol myristate acetate, Gq/11-coupled GPCR, or epidermal growth factor receptor stimulation promotes β-arrestin2 recruitment to unliganded AT1 angiotensin receptor (AT1R). We found that this interaction depends on the stability lock, a structure responsible for the sustained binding between GPCRs and β-arrestins, formed by phosphorylated serine–threonine clusters in the receptor's C terminus and two conserved phosphate-binding lysines in the β-arrestin2 N-domain. Using improved FlAsH-based serine-threonine clusters β-arrestin2 conformational biosensors, we also show that the stability lock not only stabilizes the receptor–β-arrestin interaction, but also governs the structural rearrangements within β-arrestins. Furthermore, we found that β-arrestin2 binds to PKC-phosphorylated AT1R in a distinct active conformation, which triggers MAPK recruitment and receptor internalization. Our results provide new insights into the activation of β-arrestins and reveal their novel role in receptor cross-talk.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) transduce a wide array of extracellular signals and regulate virtually every aspect of physiology. While GPCR signaling is essential, overstimulation can be deleterious, resulting in cellular toxicity or uncontrolled cellular growth. Accordingly, nature has developed a number of mechanisms for limiting GPCR signaling, which are broadly referred to as desensitization, and refer to a decrease in response to repeated or continuous stimulation. Short-term desensitization occurs over minutes, and is primarily associated with β-arrestins preventing G protein interaction with a GPCR. Longer-term desensitization, referred to as downregulation, occurs over hours to days, and involves receptor internalization into vesicles, degradation in lysosomes and decreased receptor mRNA levels through unclear mechanisms. Phosphorylation of the receptor by GPCR kinases (GRKs) and the recruitment of β-arrestins is critical to both these short- and long-term desensitization mechanisms. In addition to phosphorylation, both the GPCR and β-arrestins are modified post-translationally in several ways, including by ubiquitination. For many GPCRs, receptor ubiquitination promotes degradation of agonist-activated receptors in the lysosomes. Other proteins also play important roles in desensitization, including phosphodiesterases, RGS family proteins and A-kinase-anchoring proteins. Together, this intricate network of kinases, ubiquitin ligases, and adaptor proteins orchestrate the acute and prolonged desensitization of GPCRs.

GPR27 belongs, with GPR85 and GPR173, to a small subfamily of three receptors called "Super-Conserved Receptors Expressed in the Brain" (SREB). It has been postulated to participate in key physiological processes such as neuronal plasticity, energy metabolism, and pancreatic β-cell insulin secretion and regulation. Recently, we reported the first selective GPR27 agonist, 2,4-dichloro-N-(4-(N-phenylsulfamoyl)phenyl)benzamide (I, pEC50 6.34, Emax 100%). Here, we describe the synthesis and structure-activity relationships of a series of new derivatives and analogs of I. All products were evaluated for their ability to activate GPR27 in an arrestin recruitment assay. As a result, agonists were identified with a broad range of efficacies including partial and full agonists, showing higher efficacies than the lead compound I. The most potent agonist was 4-chloro-2,5-difluoro-N-(4-(N-phenylsulfamoyl)phenyl)benzamide (7y, pEC50 6.85, Emax 37%), and the agonists with higher efficacies were 4-chloro-2-methyl-N-(4-(N-phenylsulfamoyl)phenyl)benzamide (7p, pEC50 6.04, Emax 123%), and 2-bromo-4-chloro-N-(4-(N-phenylsulfamoyl)phenyl)benzamide (7r, pEC50 5.99, Emax 123%). Docking studies predicted the putative binding site and interactions of agonist 7p with GPR27. Selected potent agonists were found to be soluble and devoid of cellular toxicity within the range of their pharmacological activity. Therefore, they represent important new tools to further characterize the (patho)physiological roles of GPR27.

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), also known as seven transmembrane receptors (7TMRs), typically interact with two distinct signal-transducers, i.e., G proteins and β-arrestins (βarrs). Interestingly, there are some non-canonical 7TMRs that lack G protein coupling but interact with βarrs, although an understanding of their transducer coupling preference, downstream signaling, and structural mechanism remains elusive. Here, we characterize two such non-canonical 7TMRs, namely, the decoy D6 receptor (D6R) and the complement C5a receptor subtype 2 (C5aR2), in parallel with their canonical GPCR counterparts. We discover that D6R and C5aR2 efficiently couple to βarrs, exhibit distinct engagement of GPCR kinases (GRKs), and activate non-canonical downstream signaling pathways. We also observe that βarrs adopt distinct conformations for D6R and C5aR2, compared to their canonical GPCR counterparts, in response to common natural agonists. Our study establishes D6R and C5aR2 as βarr-coupled 7TMRs and provides key insights into their regulation and signaling with direct implication for biased agonism.

Pheromone receptors (PRs) recognize specific pheromone compounds to guide the behavioral outputs of insects, which are the most diverse group of animals on earth. The activation of PRs is known to couple to the calcium permeability of their coreceptor (Orco) or putatively with G proteins; however, the underlying mechanisms of this process are not yet fully understood. Moreover, whether this transverse seven transmembrane domain (7TM)-containing receptor is able to couple to arrestin, a common effector for many conventional 7TM receptors, is unknown. Herein, using the PR BmOR3 from the silk moth Bombyx mori and its coreceptor BmOrco as a template, we revealed that an agonist-induced conformational change of BmOR3 was transmitted to BmOrco through transmembrane segment 7 from both receptors, resulting in the activation of BmOrco. Key interactions, including an ionic lock and a hydrophobic zipper, are essential in mediating the functional coupling between BmOR3 and BmOrco. BmOR3 also selectively coupled with Gi proteins, which was dispensable for BmOrco coupling. Moreover, we demonstrated that trans-7TM BmOR3 recruited arrestin in an agonist-dependent manner, which indicates an important role for BmOR3-BmOrco complex formation in ionotropic functions. Collectively, our study identified the coupling of G protein and arrestin to a prototype trans-7TM PR, BmOR3, and provided important mechanistic insights into the coupling of active PRs to their downstream effectors, including coreceptors, G proteins, and arrestin.

Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and its receptor (GIPR) are part of the incretin system that regulates glucose homeostasis. A series of GIPR residues putatively important for ligand binding and receptor activation were mutated and pharmacologically evaluated using GIPR selective agonists in cAMP accumulation, ERK1/2 phosphorylation (pERK1/2) and β-arrestin 2 recruitment assays. The impact of mutation on ligand efficacy was determined by operational modelling of experimental data for each mutant, with results mapped onto the full-length, active-state GIPR structure. Two interaction networks, comprising transmembrane helix (TM) 7, TM1 and TM2, and extracellular loop (ECL) 2, TM5 and ECL3 were revealed, respectively. Both networks were critical for Gαs-mediated cAMP accumulation and the recruitment of β-arrestin 2, however, cAMP response was more sensitive to alanine substitution, with most mutated residues displaying reduced signaling. Unlike the other two assays, activation of ERK1/2 was largely independent of the network involving ECL2, TM5 and ECL3, indicating that pERK1/2 is at least partially distinct from Gαs or β-arrestin pathways and this network is also crucial for potential biased agonism at GIPR. Collectively, our work advances understanding of the structure–function relationship of GIPR and provides a framework for the design and/or interpretation of GIP analogues with unique signaling profiles.

GPR17 is a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) implicated in the regulation of glucose metabolism and energy homeostasis. Such evidence is primarily drawn from mouse knockout studies and suggests GPR17 as a potential novel therapeutic target for the treatment of metabolic diseases. However, links between human GPR17 genetic variants, downstream cellular signaling, and metabolic diseases have yet to be reported. Here, we analyzed GPR17 coding sequences from control and disease cohorts consisting of individuals with adverse clinical metabolic deficits including severe insulin resistance, hypercholesterolemia, and obesity. We identified 18 nonsynonymous GPR17 variants, including eight variants that were exclusive to the disease cohort. We characterized the protein expression levels, membrane localization, and downstream signaling profiles of nine GPR17 variants (F43L, V96M, V103M, D105N, A131T, G136S, R248Q, R301H, and G354V). These nine GPR17 variants had similar protein expression and subcellular localization as wild-type GPR17; however, they showed diverse downstream signaling profiles. GPR17-G136S lost the capacity for agonist-mediated cAMP, Ca2+, and β-arrestin signaling. GPR17-V96M retained cAMP inhibition similar to GPR17-WT, but showed impaired Ca2+ and β-arrestin signaling. GPR17-D105N displayed impaired cAMP and Ca2+ signaling, but unaffected agonist-stimulated β-arrestin recruitment. The identification and functional profiling of naturally occurring human GPR17 variants from individuals with metabolic diseases revealed receptor variants with diverse signaling profiles, including differential signaling perturbations that resulted in GPCR signaling bias. Our findings provide a framework for structure–function relationship studies of GPR17 signaling and metabolic disease.

β-Arrestin biased G protein-coupled receptor ligands represent important molecular probes and may increase favorable drug action and safety as novel therapeutics. Starting from recently discovered hydroxy-substituted heterocyclic piperazine scaffolds, we have developed a series of dopamine D2 receptor ligands with a pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyridine as secondary pharmacophore that is functionalized in position 3 by a formyl or hydroxyiminomethyl substituent. The ligands, especially the benzoxazinone 9d, were found to stimulate substantial β-arrestin-2 recruitment, while being nearly devoid of activity in a GTPγS binding assay. Investigating a new series of truncated analogs lacking a secondary pharmacophore, considerable β-arrestin-2 recruitment in the absence of G protein activation was found, when a 5-hydroxy-2H-benzo[b][1,4]oxazin-3(4H)-one was combined with an N-propyl-substituted 1,4-diazepane (15c). Although 15c displayed reduced potency compared to 9d, the dose-response curves indicate that a hydroxy-substituted heterocyclic primary pharmacophore is sufficient for the functionally selective activation of D2R.

Activation of Gs coupled receptors (e.g. β2-adrenoreceptor (β2AR)) expressed within the uterine muscle layer (myometrium), promotes intracellular cAMP generation, inducing muscle relaxation through short-term inhibition of contractile proteins, and longer-term modulation of cellular phenotype to promote quiescence. In the myometrium cAMP-driven modulation of cell phenotype is facilitated by CREB activity, however despite the importance of CREB signalling in the promotion of myometrial quiescence during pregnancy, little is currently known regarding the molecular mechanisms involved. Thus, we have characterised β-adrenoceptor-stimulated CREB signalling in the immortalised ULTR human myometrial cell line. The non-selective β-adrenoceptor agonist isoprenaline induced time- and concentration-dependent CREB phosphorylation, which was abolished by the β2AR selective antagonist ICI118,551. β2AR-stimulated CREB phosphorylation was mediated through a short-term PKA-dependent phase, and longer-term Src/p38 MAPK-dependent/PKA-independent phase. Since in model cells, arrestin2 can facilitate β2AR-mediated Src/p38 recruitment, we examined whether CREB signalling was activated through a similar process in myometrial cells. Depletion of arrestin2 attenuated p38 phosphorylation, whilst arrestin3 depletion enhanced and prolonged isoprenaline-stimulated p38 signals, which was reversed following inhibition of Src. Knockdown of arrestin2 led to enhanced short-term (up to 10min), and attenuated longer-term (>10min) isoprenaline-stimulated CREB phosphorylation. Contrastingly, removal of arrestin3 enhanced and prolonged isoprenaline-stimulated CREB phosphorylation, whilst depletion of both arrestins abolished CREB signals at time points >5min. In summary, we have delineated the molecular mechanisms coupling β2AR activity to CREB signalling in ULTR myometrial cells, revealing a biphasic activation process encompassing short-term PKA-dependent, and prolonged Src/arrestin2/p38-dependent components. Indeed, our data highlight a novel arrestin-mediated modulation of CREB signalling, suggesting a reciprocal relationship between arrestin2 and arrestin3, wherein recruitment of arrestin3 restricts the ability of β2AR to activate prolonged CREB phosphorylation by precluding recruitment of an arrestin2/Src/p38 complex.

Objective Antiretinal antibodies (ARAs) have previously been described in noninfectious uveitis. However, the antigen specificity of these ARAs has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to identify antigen-specific ARAs in noninfectious uveitis. Methods A total of 18 patients with noninfectious uveitis were enrolled. Surface plasmon resonance was used to measure binding responses of patient and control sera against several uveitogenic proteins: recoverin, S-antigen, interphotoreceptor retinoid binding (IRBP), retinal-pigment-epithelium-specific 65-kDa protein (RPE65), tyrosinase-related protein 1 (TRYP1), and tyrosinase-related protein 2 (TRYP2). Results The frequency of ARA positivity against S-antigen, IRBP, RPE65, TYRP1, and TYRP2 in patients with uveitis did not differ significantly from that of normal controls. However, ARA positivity for recoverin was more frequently observed in patients with uveitis ( p = 0.002). A total of 10 patients in the uveitis cohort had birdshot chorioretinopathy, and all 10 were positive for anti-recoverin ARAs. Conclusions Patients with noninfectious uveitis have increased frequency of ARA positivity against recoverin. This ARA deserves further investigations as a potential biomarker and pathogenic agent in noninfectious uveitis, especially in birdshot chorioretinopathy.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of cell surface receptors and are important drug targets for many human diseases. The determination of the 3-D structure of GPCRs and their signaling complexes has promoted our understanding of GPCR biology and provided templates for structure-based drug discovery. In this review, we focus on the recent structure work on GPCR signaling complexes, the β2-adrenoreceptor-Gs and the rhodopsin-arrestin complexes in particular, and highlight the structural features of GPCR complexes involved in G protein- and arrestin-mediated signal transduction. The crystal structures reveal distinct structural mechanisms by which GPCRs recruit a G protein and an arrestin. A comparison of the two complex structures provides insight into the molecular mechanism of functionally selective GPCR signaling, and a structural basis for the discovery of G protein- and arrestin-biased treatments of human diseases related to GPCR signal transduction.