Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer reveals ligand-induced conformational changes in CXCR4 homo- and heterodimers

Homo- and heterodimerization have emerged as prominent features of G-protein-coupled receptors with possible impact on the regulation of their activity. Using a sensitive bioluminescence resonance energy transfer system, we investigated the formation of CXCR4 and CCR2 chemokine receptor dimers. We found that both receptors exist as constitutive homo- and heterodimers and that ligands induce conformational changes within the pre-formed dimers without promoting receptor dimer formation or disassembly. Ligands with different intrinsic efficacies yielded distinct bioluminescence resonance energy transfer modulations, indicating the stabilization of distinct receptor conformations. We also found that peptides derived from the transmembrane domains of CXCR4 inhibited activation of this receptor by blocking the ligand-induced conformational transitions of the dimer. Taken together, our data support a model in which chemokine receptor homo- and heterodimers form spontaneously and respond to ligand binding as units that undergo conformational changes involving both protomers even when only one of the two ligand binding sites is occupied.     

Model of glycoprotein hormone receptor ligand binding and signaling

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

Three's company: two or more unrelated receptors pair with the same ligand

Intercellular communication relies on signal transduction mediated by extracellular ligands and their receptors. Although the ligand-receptor interaction is usually a two-player event, there are selective examples of one polypeptide ligand interacting with more than one phylogenetically unrelated receptor. Likewise, a few receptors interact with more than one polypeptide ligand, and sometimes with more than one coreceptor, likely through an interlocking of unique protein domains. Phylogenetic analyses suggest that for certain triumvirates, the matching events could have taken place at different evolutionary times. In contrast to a few polypeptide ligands interacting with more than one receptor, we found that many small nonpeptide ligands have been paired with two or more plasma membrane receptors, nuclear receptors, or channels. The observation that many small ligands are paired with more than one receptor type highlights the utilitarian use of a limited number of cellular components during metazoan evolution. These conserved ligands are ubiquitous cell metabolites likely favored by natural selection to establish novel regulatory networks. They likely possess structural features useful for designing agonistic and antagonistic drugs to target diverse receptors.     

Cutting edge: identification of a novel chemokine receptor that binds dendritic cell- and T cell-active chemokines including ELC, SLC, and TECK

Searching for new receptors of dendritic cell- and T cell-active chemokines, we used a combination of techniques to interrogate orphan chemokine receptors. We report here on human CCX CKR, previously represented only by noncontiguous expressed sequence tags homologous to bovine PPR1, a putative gustatory receptor. We employed a two-tiered process of ligand assignment, where immobilized chemokines constructed on stalks (stalkokines) were used as bait for adhesion of cells expressing CCX CKR. These cells adhered to stalkokines representing ELC, a chemokine previously thought to bind only CCR7. Adhesion was abolished in the presence of soluble ELC, SLC (CCR7 ligands), and TECK (a CCR9 ligand). Complete ligand profiles were further determined by radiolabeled ligand binding and competition with >80 chemokines. ELC, SLC, and TECK comprised high affinity ligands (IC50 <15 nM); lower affinity ligands include BLC and vMIP-II (IC50 <150 nM). With its high affinity for CC chemokines and homology to CC receptors, we provisionally designate this new receptor CCR10.     

A glucocorticoid/retinoic acid receptor chimera that displays cytoplasmic/nuclear translocation in response to retinoic acid. A real time sensing assay for nuclear receptor ligands

Members of the nuclear receptor superfamily play key roles in a host of physiologic and pathologic processes from embryogenesis to cancer. Some members, including the retinoic acid receptor (RAR), are activated by ligand binding but are unaffected in their subcellular distribution, which is predominantly nuclear. In contrast, several members of the steroid receptor family, including the glucocorticoid receptor, are cytoplasmic and only translocate to the nucleus after ligand binding. We have constructed chimeras between RAR and glucocorticoid receptor that selectively respond to RAR agonists but display cytoplasmic localization in the absence of ligand. These chimeric receptors manifest both nuclear translocation and gene activation functions in response to physiological concentrations of RAR ligands. The ability to achieve regulated subcellular trafficking with a heterologous ligand binding domain has implications both for current models of receptor translocation and for structural-functional conservation of ligand binding domains broadly across the receptor superfamily. When coupled to the green fluorescent protein, chimeric receptors offer a powerful new tool to 1) study mechanisms of steroid receptor translocation, 2) detect dynamic and graded distributions of ligands in complex microenvironments such as embryos, and 3) screen for novel ligands of "orphan" receptors in vivo.     

Structural Basis of Chemokine Receptor Function—A Model for Binding Affinity and Ligand Selectivity

Chemokine receptors play fundamental roles in human physiology from embryogenesis to inflammatory response. The receptors belong to the G-protein coupled receptor class, and are activated by chemokine ligands with a range of specificities and affinities that result in a complicated network of interactions. The molecular basis for function is largely a black box, and can be directly attributed to the lack of structural information on the receptors. Studies to date indicate that function can be best described by a two-site model, that involves interactions between the receptor N-domain and ligand N-terminal loop residues (site-I), and between receptor extracellular loop and the ligand N-terminal residues (site-II). In this review, we describe how the two-site model could modulate binding affinity and ligand selectivity, and also highlight some of the unique chemokine receptor features, and their role in function.     

Protein hormones and their receptors.

Technological advances in the isolation and characterization of novel receptors have led to a significant increase in our understanding of protein-ligand binding to receptors and the means by which responses are triggered. Hormones and their receptors are composed of structurally conserved domains, and several ligands appear to use similar surface regions for receptor binding. A key event in signal transduction is the aggregation by the ligand of one or more receptor subunits, and this can include the sharing of subunits between different ligands. These findings have allowed the design of ligands with receptor-antagonist properties.     

Ectodomain structures of Eph receptors

Eph receptors, the largest subfamily of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), and their ephrin ligands are important mediators of cell-cell communication that regulate axon guidance, long-term potentiation, and stem cell development, among others. By now, many Eph receptors and ephrins have also been found to play important roles in the progression of cancer. Since both the receptor and the ligand are membrane-bound, their interaction leads to the multimerization of both molecules to distinct clusters within their respective plasma membranes, resulting in the formation of discrete signaling centers. In addition, and unique to Eph receptors and ephrins, their interaction initiates bi-directional signaling cascades where information is transduced in the direction of both the receptor- and the ligand-bearing cells. The Ephs and the ephrins are divided into two subclasses, A and B, based on their affinities for each other and on sequence conservation. Crystal structures and other biophysical studies have indicated that isolated extracellular Eph and ephrin domains initially form high-affinity heterodimers around a hydrophobic loop of the ligand that is buried in a hydrophobic pocket on the surface of the receptor. The dimers can then further arrange by weaker interactions into higher-order Eph/ephrin clusters observed in vivo at the sites of cell-cell contact. Although the hetero-dimerization is a universal way to initiate signaling, other extracellular domains of Ephs are involved in the formation of higher-order clusters. The structures also show important differences defining the unique partner preferences of the two ligand and receptor subclasses, namely, how subclass specificity is determined both by individual interacting residues and by the precise architectural arrangement of ligands and receptors within the complexes.     

Mutational analysis of the structure and function of opioid receptors

The cloning of the opioid receptors allows the investigation of receptor domains involved in the peptidic and nonpeptidic ligand interaction and activation of the opioid receptors. Receptor chimera studies and mutational analysis of the primary sequences of the opioid receptors have provided insights into the structural domains required for the ligand recognition and receptor activation. In the current review, we examine the current reports on the possible involvement of extracellular domains and transmembrane domains in the high-affinity binding of peptidic and nonpeptidic ligands to the opioid receptor. The structural requirement for the receptors' selectivity toward different ligands is discussed. The receptor domains involved in the activation and subsequent cellular regulation of the receptors' activities as determined by mutational analysis will also be discussed. Finally, the validity of the conclusions based on single amino acid mutations is examined.     

The chemokine and chemokine receptor superfamilies and their molecular evolution

The human chemokine superfamily currently includes at least 46 ligands, which bind to 18 functionally signaling G-protein-coupled receptors and two decoy or scavenger receptors. The chemokine ligands probably comprise one of the first completely known molecular superfamilies. The genomic organization of the chemokine ligand genes and a comparison of their sequences between species shows that tandem gene duplication has taken place independently in the mouse and human lineages of some chemokine families. This means that care needs to be taken when extrapolating experimental results on some chemokines from mouse to human.     

The chemokine and chemokine receptor superfamilies and their molecular evolution

The human chemokine superfamily currently includes at least 46 ligands, which bind to 18 functionally signaling G-protein-coupled receptors and two decoy or scavenger receptors. The chemokine ligands probably comprise one of the first completely known molecular superfamilies. The genomic organization of the chemokine ligand genes and a comparison of their sequences between species shows that tandem gene duplication has taken place independently in the mouse and human lineages of some chemokine families. This means that care needs to be taken when extrapolating experimental results on some chemokines from mouse to human.     

Evolutionary Analysis of the ErbB Receptor and Ligand Families

We have compared all available deduced protein sequences of the ErbB family of receptors and their ligands. Analysis of the aligned sequences of the receptors indicates that there are some differences in the receptors that are specific to invertebrates. In addition, comparison of the vertebrate ErbB receptors suggest that a gene duplication event generated two ancestral receptors, the ErbB3/ErbB4 precursor and the ErbB1/ErbB2 precursor. Subsequent gene duplications of these precursors generated the four receptors present in mammals. Analysis of the sequences for the known ligands of the ErbB receptors suggests that the vertebrate ligands segregate into the ErbB1 ligands and the ErbB3/ErbB4 ligands, paralleling the evolution of the receptors; however, it is difficult to ascertain any correlation between the invertebrate and the vertebrate ligands. Even though ErbB3 is kinase-impaired, there is significant conservation of the kinase domain within the vertebrate lineage (human, rat, and F. rubripes), suggesting some function for this domain other than kinase activity, such as mediating protein–protein interactions that are involved in receptor dimerization and/or activation of the kinase domain of the heterodimerization partner. To date, no ligand for ErbB2 has been identified, and comparison of the extracellular domains of ErbB2 reveals two regions that are not conserved across the mammalian species. These two regions of divergence align with sequences in ErbB1 that have been shown to be proximal to the amino-terminus and to the carboxyl-terminal region, respectively, of bound EGF. Further, one of these regions contains an insertion, relative to the other members of the mammalian ErbB family, which might affect the ligand binding site and provide a structural basis for this receptor's apparent inability to bind ligand independently. Received: 8 September 1999 / Accepted: 17 January 2000     

Angiopoietin-1 and -2 coiled coil domains mediate distinct homo-oligomerization patterns, but fibrinogen-like domains mediate ligand activity.

Activity of endothelial Tie2 receptor tyrosine kinase is modulated by two naturally occurring, secreted ligands, angiopoietin-1 and -2, which have opposing effects on its phosphorylation. Receptor tyrosine kinase activation requires receptor dimerization/multimerization, which, for many receptors, is mediated by homo-oligomeric ligands binding to and bridging receptor molecules. We show here that angiopoietin-1 and -2 form distinct arrays of disulfide-linked homo-oligomeric complexes. Their mobilities on nonreducing gels suggest that angiopoietin-2 exists predominantly as a homodimer but also forms higher order multimers. In contrast, angiopoietin-1 forms some homotrimers, but predominantly exists in higher order multimers. These two structurally related, 60% homologous ligands are predominantly composed of an amino-terminal coiled coil domain and a carboxyl-terminal fibrinogen-like domain. We show that their distinct oligomerization patterns are determined by their coiled coil domains and, furthermore, that their coiled coil domains, but not their fibrinogen-like domains, are sufficient to mediate formation of disulfide-linked homo-oligomers. In contrast, the differential effects of these ligands on endothelial Tie2 phosphorylation is mediated by their fibrinogen-like domains. We conclude from these studies that the coiled coil and fibrinogen-like domains of the angiopoietins have distinct functions with the coiled coil domain mediating ligand homo-oligomerization and the fibrinogen-like domain mediating ligand activity.     

Chemokine receptor trio: CXCR3, CXCR4 and CXCR7 crosstalk via CXCL11 and CXCL12

Although chemokines are well established to function in immunity and endothelial cell activation and proliferation, a rapidly growing literature suggests that CXC Chemokine receptors CXCR3, CXCR4 and CXCR7 are critical in the development and progression of solid tumors. The effect of these chemokine receptors in tumorigenesis is mediated via interactions with shared ligands I-TAC (CXCL11) and SDF-1 (CXCL12). Over the last decade, CXCR4 has been extensively reported to be overexpressed in most human solid tumors and has earned considerable attention toward elucidating its role in cancer metastasis. To enrich the existing armamentarium of anti-cancerous agents, many inhibitors of CXCL12–CXCR4 axis have emerged as additional or alternative agents for neo-adjuvant treatments and even many of them are in preclinical and clinical stages of their development. However, the discovery of CXCR7 as another receptor for CXCL12 with rather high binding affinity and recent reports about its involvement in cancer progression, has questioned the potential of “selective blockade” of CXCR4 as cancer chemotherapeutics. Interestingly, CXCR7 can also bind another chemokine CXCL11, which is an established ligand for CXCR3. Recent reports have documented that CXCR3 and their ligands are overexpressed in different solid tumors and regulate tumor growth and metastasis. Therefore, it is important to consider the interactions and crosstalk between these three chemokine receptors and their ligand mediated signaling cascades for the development of effective anti-cancer therapies. Emerging evidence also indicates that these receptors are differentially expressed in tumor endothelial cells as well as in cancer stem cells, suggesting their direct role in regulating tumor angiogenesis and metastasis. In this review, we will focus on the signals mediated by this receptor trio via their shared ligands and their role in tumor growth and progression.     

Identification of CC chemokine receptor 7 residues important for receptor activation

The binding pocket of family A GPCRs that bind small biogenic amines is well characterized. In this study we identify residues on CC chemokine receptor 7 (CCR-7) that are involved in agonist-mediated receptor activation but not in high affinity ligand binding. The mutations also affect the ability of the ligands to induce chemotaxis. Two of the residues, Lys3.33(137) and Gln5.42(227), are consistent with the binding pocket described for biogenic amines, while Lys3.26(130) and Asn7.32(305), are found at, or close to, the cell surface. Our observations are in agreement with findings from other peptide and chemokine receptors, which indicate that receptors that bind larger ligands contain contact sites closer to the cell surface in addition to the conventional transmembrane binding pocket. These findings also support the theory that chemokine receptors require different sets of interactions for high affinity ligand binding and receptor activation.     

Shaping the gradient by nonchemotactic chemokine receptors

Chemokines are a class of inflammatory mediators which main function is to direct leukocyte migration through the binding to G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). In addition to these functional, signal-transducing chemokine receptors other types of receptors belonging to the chemokine GPCR family were identified. They are called atypical or decoy chemokine receptors because they bind and degrade chemokines but do not transduce signals or activate cell migration. Here there is the summary of two recent papers that identified other nonchemotactic chemokine receptors: the Duffy antigen receptor for chemokines (DARC) that mediates trancytosis of chemokines from tissue to vascular lumen promoting chemokine-mediated leukocyte transmigration and chemokine (CC motif) receptor-like 2 (CCRL2) that neither internalizes its ligands nor transduces signals but presents bound ligands to functional signaling receptors improving their activity. Collectively these nonchemotactic chemokine receptors do not directly induce cell migration, but appear nonetheless to play a nonredundant role in leukocyte recruitment by shaping the chemoattractant gradient, either by removing, transporting or concentrating their cognate ligands.Key words: Chemokine, chemokine receptor, leukocyte recruitment, chemotaxis, transcytosis     

Biased Agonism as a Mechanism for Differential Signaling by Chemokine Receptors

Chemokines display considerable promiscuity with multiple ligands and receptors shared in common, a phenomenon that is thought to underlie their biochemical “redundancy.” Their receptors are part of a larger seven-transmembrane receptor superfamily, commonly referred to as G protein-coupled receptors, which have been demonstrated to be able to signal with different efficacies to their multiple downstream signaling pathways, a phenomenon referred to as biased agonism. Biased agonism has been primarily reported as a phenomenon of synthetic ligands, and the biologic prevalence and importance of such signaling are unclear. Here, to assess the presence of biased agonism that may underlie differential signaling by chemokines targeting the same receptor, we performed a detailed pharmacologic analysis of a set of chemokine receptors with multiple endogenous ligands using assays for G protein signaling, β-arrestin recruitment, and receptor internalization. We found that chemokines targeting the same receptor can display marked differences in their efficacies for G protein- or β-arrestin-mediated signaling or receptor internalization. This ligand bias correlates with changes in leukocyte migration, consistent with different mechanisms underlying the signaling downstream of these receptors induced by their ligands. These findings demonstrate that biased agonism is a common and likely evolutionarily conserved biological mechanism for generating qualitatively distinct patterns of signaling via the same receptor in response to different endogenous ligands.     

Functional divergence of glycoprotein hormone receptors

Two lamprey glycoprotein hormone receptors (lGpH-R I and II) highly similar with gnathostome GpH-Rs were cloned from sea lamprey testes and thyroid, respectively. Vertebrate glycoprotein protein receptors have a large extracellular domain (ED) containing a leu rich domain (LRD) linked to a rhodopsin-like transmembrane domain (TMD) through a highly divergent linker region (signal specificity domain, SSD or 'hinge' region) and a third major segment, the intracellular domain. To determine the potential roles of the different domains in the activation of the receptor following ligand-receptor binding, functional assays were performed on lGpH-R I/rat luteinizing hormone (LH)-R domain swapped chimeric receptors. These results show that the functional roles of the lamprey glycoprotein-receptor I (lGpH-R I) domains are conserved compared with its Gnathostome homologs. The ability of different glycoprotein hormones to activate chimeric lamprey/rat receptors suggests that the selectivity of the GpH-Rs in respect to their ligands is not controlled exclusively by a single domain but is the result of specific interactions between domains. We hypothesize that these interactions were refined during millions of years of co-evolution of the receptors with their cognate ligands under particular intramolecular, intermolecular and physiological constraints.