Selective inhibition of alpha1A-adrenergic receptor signaling by RGS2 association with the receptor third intracellular loop

RGS2 and female common diseases: a guard of women's health

Currently, women around the world are still suffering from various female common diseases with the high incidence, such as ovarian cancer, uterine fibroids and preeclampsia (PE), and some diseases are even with the high mortality rate. As a negative feedback regulator in G Protein-Coupled Receptor signaling (GPCR), the Regulator of G-protein Signaling (RGS) protein family participates in regulating kinds of cell biological functions by destabilizing the enzyme-substrate complex through the transformation of hydrolysis of G Guanosine Triphosphate (GTP). Recent work has indicated that, the Regulator of G-protein Signaling 2 (RGS2), a member belonging to the RGS protein family, is closely associated with the occurrence and development of certain female diseases, providing with the evidence that RGS2 functions in sustaining women's health. In this review paper, we summarize the current knowledge of RGS2 in female common diseases, and also tap and discuss its therapeutic potential by targeting multiple mechanisms.

α1-Adrenergic Receptors: Insights into Potential Therapeutic Opportunities for COVID-19, Heart Failure, and Alzheimer's Disease

α1-Adrenergic receptors (ARs) are members of the G-Protein Coupled Receptor superfamily and with other related receptors (β and α2), they are involved in regulating the sympathetic nervous system through binding and activation by norepinephrine and epinephrine. Traditionally, α1-AR antagonists were first used as anti-hypertensives, as α1-AR activation increases vasoconstriction, but they are not a first-line use at present. The current usage of α1-AR antagonists increases urinary flow in benign prostatic hyperplasia. α1-AR agonists are used in septic shock, but the increased blood pressure response limits use for other conditions. However, with the advent of genetic-based animal models of the subtypes, drug design of highly selective ligands, scientists have discovered potentially newer uses for both agonists and antagonists of the α1-AR. In this review, we highlight newer treatment potential for α1A-AR agonists (heart failure, ischemia, and Alzheimer's disease) and non-selective α1-AR antagonists (COVID-19/SARS, Parkinson's disease, and posttraumatic stress disorder). While the studies reviewed here are still preclinical in cell lines and rodent disease models or have undergone initial clinical trials, potential therapeutics discussed here should not be used for non-approved conditions.

The interaction, mechanism and function of GPR158-RGS7 cross-talk

GPR158 is an orphan G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that is broadly expressed in the brain and displays unique structural characteristics and signaling mechanisms. GPR158 is a binding partner for the regulator of G protein signaling 7 (RGS7) and augments its expression, subcellular localization, and catalytic activity. Recent cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) studies have revealed the structure of GPR158 alone and in complex with RGS7. The GPR158-RGS7 complex is shown to be regulated by chronic stress exposure and is a modulator of stress-induced depression. This review highlights the signaling mechanism and function of GPR158-RGS7 and provides a context for the unique formation of GPCR-RGS complexes.

Comparison of Experimental Approaches Used to Determine the Structure and Function of the Class D G Protein-Coupled Yeast α-Factor Receptor

The Saccharomyces cerevisiae α-factor mating pheromone receptor (Ste2p) has been studied as a model for the large medically important family of G protein-coupled receptors. Diverse yeast genetic screens and high-throughput mutagenesis of STE2 identified a large number of loss-of-function, constitutively-active, dominant-negative, and intragenic second-site suppressor mutants as well as mutations that specifically affect pheromone binding. Facile genetic manipulation of Ste2p also aided in targeted biochemical approaches, such as probing the aqueous accessibility of substituted cysteine residues in order to identify the boundaries of the seven transmembrane segments, and the use of cysteine disulfide crosslinking to identify sites of intramolecular contacts in the transmembrane helix bundle of Ste2p and sites of contacts between the monomers in a Ste2p dimer. Recent publication of a series of high-resolution cryo-EM structures of Ste2p in ligand-free, agonist-bound and antagonist-bound states now makes it possible to evaluate the results of these genetic and biochemical strategies, in comparison to three-dimensional structures showing activation-related conformational changes. The results indicate that the genetic and biochemical strategies were generally effective, and provide guidance as to how best to apply these experimental strategies to other proteins. These strategies continue to be useful in defining mechanisms of signal transduction in the context of the available structures and suggest aspects of receptor function beyond what can be discerned from the available structures.

Structure of the class C orphan GPCR GPR158 in complex with RGS7-Gβ5

GPR158, a class C orphan GPCR, functions in cognition, stress-induced mood control, and synaptic development. Among class C GPCRs, GPR158 is unique as it lacks a Venus flytrap-fold ligand-binding domain and terminates Gαi/o protein signaling through the RGS7-Gβ5 heterodimer. Here, we report the cryo-EM structures of GPR158 alone and in complex with one or two RGS7-Gβ5 heterodimers. GPR158 dimerizes through Per-Arnt-Sim-fold extracellular and transmembrane (TM) domains connected by an epidermal growth factor-like linker. The TM domain (TMD) reflects both inactive and active states of other class C GPCRs: a compact intracellular TMD, conformations of the two intracellular loops (ICLs) and the TMD interface formed by TM4/5. The ICL2, ICL3, TM3, and first helix of the cytoplasmic coiled-coil provide a platform for the DHEX domain of one RGS7 and the second helix recruits another RGS7. The unique features of the RGS7-binding site underlie the selectivity of GPR158 for RGS7.

Current Developments on the Role of α1-Adrenergic Receptors in Cognition, Cardioprotection, and Metabolism

The α₁-adrenergic receptors (ARs) are G-protein coupled receptors that bind the endogenous catecholamines, norepinephrine, and epinephrine. They play a key role in the regulation of the sympathetic nervous system along with β and α₂-AR family members. While all of the adrenergic receptors bind with similar affinity to the catecholamines, they can regulate different physiologies and pathophysiologies in the body because they couple to different G-proteins and signal transduction pathways, commonly in opposition to one another. While α₁-AR subtypes (α_1A, α_1B, α_1C) have long been known to be primary regulators of vascular smooth muscle contraction, blood pressure, and cardiac hypertrophy, their role in neurotransmission, improving cognition, protecting the heart during ischemia and failure, and regulating whole body and organ metabolism are not well known and are more recent developments. These advancements have been made possible through the development of transgenic and knockout mouse models and more selective ligands to advance their research. Here, we will review the recent literature to provide new insights into these physiological functions and possible use as a therapeutic target.

Modulation of G-protein-coupled receptor 55-mediated signaling by regulator of G-protein signaling 2

Activation of seven-transmembrane G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) mediates extracellular signals into intracellular responses. G-protein coupled receptor 55 (GPR55) is one of GPCRs and activated by endogenous cannabinoids. A family of regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) stimulates GTP hydrolysis of alpha subunit of G-protein (Gα) and inhibits GPCR/Gα-mediated signaling. RGS2 is member of R4 RGS family and mainly attenuates GPCR/Gα_q signaling. Although RGS2 is known to modulate some GPCR signaling, the specific effects of RGS2 on GPR55-mediated signaling are not fully understood at present. Previously, we reported some RGS proteins interact with protease-activated receptors, one of GPCRs, and modulate their functions. Here, we investigated whether GPR55 interacts with RGS2, employing bioluminescence resonance energy transfer and co-immunoprecipitation analyses. Interestingly, GPR55 interacted with RGS2 alone and also formed a ternary complex with RGS2 and either Gα_q or Gα₁₂. In the presence of GPR55 alone and together with Gα_q or Gα₁₂, RGS2 translocated from the cytoplasm to plasma membrane while RGS1 remained in the cytoplasm. GPR55 activation significantly induced ERK phosphorylation and intracellular calcium mobilization, which were markedly inhibited by RGS2 in HCT116 colon cancer cell line. Furthermore, GPR55-mediated cell proliferation and migration of HCT116 cells, was significantly attenuated by RGS2. Our collective findings highlight a novel physiological function of RGS2, supporting its utility as a therapeutic target to control GPR55-induced pathophysiology.

Emerging Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling 2 in (Patho)physiology

Since their discovery in the mid-1990s, regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins have emerged as key regulators of signaling through G protein-coupled receptors. Among the over 20 known RGS proteins, RGS2 has received increasing interest as a potential therapeutic drug target with broad clinical implications. RGS2 is a member of the R4 subfamily of RGS proteins and is unique in that it is selective for Gα _q Despite only having an RGS domain, responsible for the canonical GTPase activating protein activity, RGS2 can regulate additional processes, such as protein synthesis and adenylate cyclase activity, through protein-protein interactions. Here we provide an update of the current knowledge of RGS2 function as it relates to molecular mechanisms of regulation as well as its potential role in regulating a number of physiologic systems and pathologies, including cardiovascular disease and central nervous system disorders, as well as various forms of cancer. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins represent an exciting class of novel drug targets. RGS2, in particular, could have broad clinical importance. As more details are emerging on the regulation of RGS2 in various physiological systems, the potential utility of this small protein in therapeutic development is increasing.

Regulators of G-protein signaling, RGS2 and RGS4, inhibit protease-activated receptor 4-mediated signaling by forming a complex with the receptor and Gα in live cells

BACKGROUND

Protease-activated receptor 4 (PAR4) is a seven transmembrane G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) activated by endogenous proteases, such as thrombin. PAR4 is involved in various pathophysiologies including cancer, inflammation, pain, and thrombosis. Although regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) are known to modulate GPCR/Gα-mediated pathways, their specific effects on PAR4 are not fully understood at present. We previously reported that RGS proteins attenuate PAR1- and PAR2-mediated signaling through interactions with these receptors in conjunction with distinct Gα subunits.

METHODS

We employed a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer technique and confocal microscopy to examine potential interactions among PAR4, RGS, and Gα subunits. The inhibitory effects of RGS proteins on PAR4-mediated downstream signaling and cancer progression were additionally investigated by using several assays including ERK phosphorylation, calcium mobilization, RhoA activity, cancer cell proliferation, and related gene expression.

RESULTS

In live cells, RGS2 interacts with PAR4 in the presence of Gα_q while RGS4 binding to PAR4 occurs in the presence of Gα_q and Gα_12/13. Co-expression of PAR4 and Gα_q induced a shift in the subcellular localization of RGS2 and RGS4 from the cytoplasm to plasma membrane. Combined PAR4 and Gα_12/13 expression additionally promoted translocation of RGS4 from the cytoplasm to the membrane. Both RGS2 and RGS4 abolished PAR4-activated ERK phosphorylation, calcium mobilization and RhoA activity, as well as PAR4-mediated colon cancer cell proliferation and related gene expression.

CONCLUSIONS

RGS2 and RGS4 forms ternary complex with PAR4 in Gα-dependent manner and inhibits its downstream signaling. Our findings support a novel physiological function of RGS2 and RGS4 as inhibitors of PAR4-mediated signaling through selective PAR4/RGS/Gα coupling. Video Abstract.

Regulators of G protein signaling in cardiovascular function during pregnancy

G protein-coupled receptor signaling mechanisms are implicated in many aspects of cardiovascular control, and dysfunction of such signaling mechanisms is commonly associated with disease states. Investigators have identified a large number of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that variously contribute to the modulation of intracellular second-messenger signaling kinetics. These many RGS proteins each interact with a specific set of second-messenger cascades and receptor types and exhibit tissue-specific expression patterns. Increasing evidence supports the contribution of RGS proteins, or their loss, in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular dysfunctions. This review summarizes the current understanding of the functional contributions of RGS proteins, particularly within the B/R4 family, in cardiovascular disorders of pregnancy including gestational hypertension, uterine artery dysfunction, and preeclampsia.

Structural determinants at the M2 muscarinic receptor modulate the RGS4-GIRK response to pilocarpine by impairment of the receptor voltage sensitivity

Membrane potential controls the response of the M2 muscarinic receptor to its ligands. Membrane hyperpolarization increases response to the full agonist acetylcholine (ACh) while decreasing response to the partial agonist pilocarpine. We previously have demonstrated that the regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) 4 protein discriminates between the voltage-dependent responses of ACh and pilocarpine; however, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Here we show that RGS4 is involved in the voltage-dependent behavior of the M2 muscarinic receptor-mediated signaling in response to pilocarpine. Additionally we revealed structural determinants on the M2 muscarinic receptor underlying the voltage-dependent response. By electrophysiological recording in Xenopus oocytes expressing M2 muscarinic receptor and G-protein-gated inwardly rectifying K⁺ channels, we quantified voltage-dependent desensitization of pilocarpine-induced current in the presence or absence of RGS4. Hyperpolarization-induced desensitization of the current required for RGS4, also depended on pilocarpine concentration. Mutations of charged residues in the aspartic acid-arginine-tyrosine motif of the M2 muscarinic receptor, but not intracellular loop 3, significantly impaired the voltage-dependence of RGS4 function. Thus, our results demonstrated that voltage-dependence of RGS4 modulation is derived from the M2 muscarinic receptor. These results provide novel insights into how membrane potential impacts G-protein signaling by modulating GPCR communication with downstream effectors.

The evolution of regulators of G protein signalling proteins as drug targets - 20 years in the making: IUPHAR Review 21

Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins are celebrating the 20th anniversary of their discovery. The unveiling of this new family of negative regulators of G protein signalling in the mid-1990s solved a persistent conundrum in the G protein signalling field, in which the rate of deactivation of signalling cascades in vivo could not be replicated in exogenous systems. Since then, there has been tremendous advancement in the knowledge of RGS protein structure, function, regulation and their role as novel drug targets. RGS proteins play an important modulatory role through their GTPase-activating protein (GAP) activity at active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. They also possess many non-canonical functions not related to G protein signalling. Here, an update on the status of RGS proteins as drug targets is provided, highlighting advances that have led to the inclusion of RGS proteins in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY database of drug targets.

RGS2 modulates the activity and internalization of dopamine D2 receptors in neuroblastoma N2A cells

Dysregulated expression and function of dopamine D2 receptors (D2Rs) are implicated in drug addiction, Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia. In the current study, we examined whether D2Rs are modulated by regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2), a member of the RGS family that regulates G protein signaling via acceleration of GTPase activity. Using neuroblastoma 2a (N2A) cells, we found that RGS2 was immunoprecipitated by aluminum fluoride-activated Gαi2 proteins. RGS2 siRNA knockdown enhanced membrane [(35)S] GTPγS binding to activated Gαi/o proteins, augmented inhibition of cAMP accumulation and increased ERK phosphorylation in the presence of a D2/D3R agonist quinpirole when compared to scrambled siRNA treatment. These data suggest that RGS2 is a negative modulator of D2R-mediated Gαi/o signaling. Moreover, RGS2 knockdown slightly increased constitutive D2R internalization and markedly abolished quinpirole-induced D2R internalization assessed by immunocytochemistry. RGS2 knockdown did not compromise agonist-induced β-arrestin membrane recruitment; however, it prevents β-arrestin dissociation from the membrane after prolonged quinpirole treatment during which time β-arrestin moved away from the membrane in control cells. Additionally, confocal microscopy analysis of β-arrestin post-endocytic fate revealed that quinpirole treatment caused β-arrestin to translocate to the early and the recycling endosome in a time-dependent manner in control cells whereas translocation of β-arrestin to these endosomes did not occur in RGS2 knockdown cells. The impaired β-arrestin translocation likely contributed to the abolishment of quinpirole-stimulated D2R internalization in RGS2 knockdown cells. Thus, RGS2 is integral for β-arrestin-mediated D2R internalization. The current study revealed a novel regulation of D2R signaling and internalization by RGS2 proteins.

Structure of the Regulator of G Protein Signaling 8 (RGS8)-Gαq Complex: MOLECULAR BASIS FOR Gα SELECTIVITY

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins interact with activated Gα subunits via their RGS domains and accelerate the hydrolysis of GTP. Although the R4 subfamily of RGS proteins generally accepts both Gαi/o and Gαq/11 subunits as substrates, the R7 and R12 subfamilies select against Gαq/11. In contrast, only one RGS protein, RGS2, is known to be selective for Gαq/11. The molecular basis for this selectivity is not clear. Previously, the crystal structure of RGS2 in complex with Gαq revealed a non-canonical interaction that could be due to interfacial differences imposed by RGS2, the Gα subunit, or both. To resolve this ambiguity, the 2.6 Å crystal structure of RGS8, an R4 subfamily member, was determined in complex with Gαq. RGS8 adopts the same pose on Gαq as it does when bound to Gαi3, indicating that the non-canonical interaction of RGS2 with Gαq is due to unique features of RGS2. Based on the RGS8-Gαq structure, residues in RGS8 that contact a unique α-helical domain loop of Gαq were converted to those typically found in R12 subfamily members, and the reverse substitutions were introduced into RGS10, an R12 subfamily member. Although these substitutions perturbed their ability to stimulate GTP hydrolysis, they did not reverse selectivity. Instead, selectivity for Gαq seems more likely determined by whether strong contacts can be maintained between α6 of the RGS domain and Switch III of Gαq, regions of high sequence and conformational diversity in both protein families.

Modulation of receptor dynamics by the regulator of G protein signaling Sst2

G protein–coupled receptor signaling is negatively regulated by both receptor internalization and regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein–stimulated inactivation of the G protein. The RGS protein can also positively regulate receptor signaling by binding to the receptor, thereby reducing receptor internalization.

G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is fundamental to physiological processes such as vision, the immune response, and wound healing. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, GPCRs detect and respond to gradients of pheromone during mating. After pheromone stimulation, the GPCR Ste2 is removed from the cell membrane, and new receptors are delivered to the growing edge. The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein Sst2 acts by accelerating GTP hydrolysis and facilitating pathway desensitization. Sst2 is also known to interact with the receptor Ste2. Here we show that Sst2 is required for proper receptor recovery at the growing edge of pheromone-stimulated cells. Mathematical modeling suggested pheromone-induced synthesis of Sst2 together with its interaction with the receptor function to reestablish a receptor pool at the site of polarized growth. To validate the model, we used targeted genetic perturbations to selectively disrupt key properties of Sst2 and its induction by pheromone. Together our results reveal that a regulator of G protein signaling can also regulate the G protein–coupled receptor. Whereas Sst2 negatively regulates G protein signaling, it acts in a positive manner to promote receptor retention at the growing edge.

Mu opioid receptor activation enhances regulator of G protein signaling 4 association with the mu opioid receptor/G protein complex in a GTP-dependent manner

The interaction of Regulator of G protein Signaling 4 (RGS4) with the rat mu opioid receptor (MOR)/G protein complex was investigated. Solubilized MOR from rat brain membranes was immunoprecipitated in the presence of RGS4 with antibodies against the N-terminus of MOR (anti-MOR10-70 ). Activation of MOR with [D-Ala(2) , N-Me-Phe(4) , Gly(5) -ol] enkephalin (DAMGO) during immunoprecipitation caused a 150% increase in Goα and a 50% increase in RGS4 in the pellet. When 10 μM GTP was included with DAMGO, there was an additional 72% increase in RGS4 co-immunoprecipitating with MOR (p = 0.003). Guanosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTPγS) increased the amount of co-precipitating RGS4 by 93% (compared to DAMGO alone, p = 0.008), and the inclusion of GTPγS caused the ratio of MOR to RGS4 to be 1 : 1 (31 fmoles : 28 fmoles, respectively). GTPγS also increased the association of endogenous RGS4 with MOR. In His6 RGS4/Ni(2+) -NTA agarose pull down experiments, 0.3 μM GTPγS tripled the binding of Goα to His6 RGS4, whereas the addition of 100 μM GDP blocked this effect. Importantly, activation of solubilized MOR with DAMGO in the presence of 100 μM GDP and 0.3 μM GTPγS increased Goα binding to His6 RGS4/Ni(2+) -NTA agarose (p = 0.001). Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) shorten the time that G proteins are active. Activation of the mu opioid receptor (MOR) causes GTP to bind to and to activate Go (αoβγ). RGS4 then binds to the activated αo-GTP/MOR complex and accelerates the intrinsic GTPase of αo. After αo dissociates from MOR, RGS4 remains bound to the C-terminal region of MOR.

Regulator of G Protein Signaling 2: A Versatile Regulator of Vascular Function

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins of the B/R4 family are widely expressed in the cardiovascular system where their role in fine-tuning G protein signaling is critical to maintaining homeostasis. Among members of this family, RGS2 and RGS5 have been shown to play key roles in cardiac and smooth muscle function by tightly regulating signaling pathways that are activated through Gq/11 and Gi/o classes of heterotrimeric G proteins. This chapter reviews accumulating evidence supporting a key role for RGS2 in vascular function and the implication of changes in RGS2 function and/or expression in the pathogenesis of blood pressure disorders, particularly hypertension. With such understanding, RGS2 and the signaling pathways it controls may emerge as novel targets for developing next-generation antihypertensive drugs/agents.

The RGS2 (-391, C>G) genetic variation correlates to antihypertensive drug responses in Chinese patients with essential hypertension

OBJECTIVE

Regulators of G-protein signaling protein 2 (RGS2) play an irreplaceable role in the control of normal blood pressure (BP). One RGS2 (-391, C>G) genetic variation markedly changes its mRNA expression levels. This study explored the relationship between this genetic variation and the responses to antihypertensive drugs in Chinese patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

Genetic variations of RGS2 were successfully identified in 367 specimens using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) assays. All patients were treated with conventional doses of antihypertensives after a 2-week run-in period and followed-up according to our protocol. A general linear model multivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for the data analysis.

RESULTS

A significant difference in the mean systolic BP change was observed between RGS2 (-391, C>G) CC/CG (n = 82) and GG (n = 38) genotype carriers (-13.6 vs. -19.9 mmHg, P = 0.043) who were treated with candesartan, irbesartan or imidapril at the end of 6 weeks. In addition, the patients' BP responses to α,β-adrenergic receptor blockers exhibited an age-specific association with the RGS2 (-391, C>G) genetic variation at the end of 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The RGS2 (-391, C>G) genetic polymorphism may serve as a biomarker to predict a patient's response to antihypertensive drug therapy, but future studies need to confirm this.

RGS2 and RGS4 proteins: New modulators of the κ-opioid receptor signaling

Previous studies have shown that RGS4 associates with the C-termini of μ- and δ-opioid receptors in living cells and plays a key role in Gi/Go protein coupling selectivity and signalling of these receptors [12,20]. To deduce whether similar effects also occur for the κ-opioid receptor (κ-ΟR) and define the ability of members of the Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS) of the B/R4 subfamily to interact with κ-ΟR subdomains we generated glutathione S-transferase fusion peptides encompassing the carboxyl-termini of κ-OR (κ-CT). Results from pull down experiments indicated that RGS2 and RGS4 directly interact within different domains of the κ-CT. Co-precipitation studies in living cells indicated that RGS2 and RGS4 associate with κ-ΟR constitutively and upon receptor activation and confer selectivity for coupling with a specific subset of G proteins. Expression of both members, RGS2 and/or RGS4, in 293F cells attenuated κ-agonist mediated-adenylyl cyclase inhibition and extracellular signal regulated kinase (ERK1,2) phosphorylation with a different amplitude in their modulatory effect in κ-ΟR signaling. Our findings demonstrate that RGS2 and RGS4 are new interacting partners that play key roles in G protein coupling to negatively regulate κ-ΟR signaling.

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2) and RGS4 form distinct G protein-dependent complexes with protease activated-receptor 1 (PAR1) in live cells

Protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1) is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) that is activated by natural proteases to regulate many physiological actions. We previously reported that PAR1 couples to G_i, G_q and G₁₂ to activate linked signaling pathways. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins serve as GTPase activating proteins to inhibit GPCR/G protein signaling. Some RGS proteins interact directly with certain GPCRs to modulate their signals, though cellular mechanisms dictating selective RGS/GPCR coupling are poorly understood. Here, using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET), we tested whether RGS2 and RGS4 bind to PAR1 in live COS-7 cells to regulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling. We report that PAR1 selectively interacts with either RGS2 or RGS4 in a G protein-dependent manner. Very little BRET activity is observed between PAR1-Venus (PAR1-Ven) and either RGS2-Luciferase (RGS2-Luc) or RGS4-Luc in the absence of Gα. However, in the presence of specific Gα subunits, BRET activity was markedly enhanced between PAR1-RGS2 by Gα_q/11, and PAR1-RGS4 by Gα_o, but not by other Gα subunits. Gα_q/11-YFP/RGS2-Luc BRET activity is promoted by PAR1 and is markedly enhanced by agonist (TFLLR) stimulation. However, PAR1-Ven/RGS-Luc BRET activity was blocked by a PAR1 mutant (R205A) that eliminates PAR1-G_q/11 coupling. The purified intracellular third loop of PAR1 binds directly to purified His-RGS2 or His-RGS4. In cells, RGS2 and RGS4 inhibited PAR1/Gα-mediated calcium and MAPK/ERK signaling, respectively, but not RhoA signaling. Our findings indicate that RGS2 and RGS4 interact directly with PAR1 in Gα-dependent manner to modulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling, and highlight a cellular mechanism for selective GPCR/G protein/RGS coupling.

Structural features of the G-protein/GPCR interactions

BACKGROUND

The details of the functional interaction between G proteins and the G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) have long been subjected to extensive investigations with structural and functional assays and a large number of computational studies.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

The nature and sites of interaction in the G-protein/GPCR complexes, and the specificities of these interactions selecting coupling partners among the large number of families of GPCRs and G protein forms, are still poorly defined.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

Many of the contact sites between the two proteins in specific complexes have been identified, but the three dimensional molecular architecture of a receptor-Gα interface is only known for one pair. Consequently, many fundamental questions regarding this macromolecular assembly and its mechanism remain unanswered.

GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE

In the context of current structural data we review the structural details of the interfaces and recognition sites in complexes of sub-family A GPCRs with cognate G-proteins, with special emphasis on the consequences of activation on GPCR structure, the prevalence of preassembled GPCR/G-protein complexes, the key structural determinants for selective coupling and the possible involvement of GPCR oligomerization in this process.

A physiologically required G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) interaction that compartmentalizes RGS activity

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can interact with regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins. However, the effects of such interactions on signal transduction and their physiological relevance have been largely undetermined. Ligand-bound GPCRs initiate by promoting exchange of GDP for GTP on the Gα subunit of heterotrimeric G proteins. Signaling is terminated by hydrolysis of GTP to GDP through intrinsic GTPase activity of the Gα subunit, a reaction catalyzed by RGS proteins. Using yeast as a tool to study GPCR signaling in isolation, we define an interaction between the cognate GPCR (Mam2) and RGS (Rgs1), mapping the interaction domains. This reaction tethers Rgs1 at the plasma membrane and is essential for physiological signaling response. In vivo quantitative data inform the development of a kinetic model of the GTPase cycle, which extends previous attempts by including GPCR-RGS interactions. In vivo and in silico data confirm that GPCR-RGS interactions can impose an additional layer of regulation through mediating RGS subcellular localization to compartmentalize RGS activity within a cell, thus highlighting their importance as potential targets to modulate GPCR signaling pathways.

Structural and functional analysis of the regulator of G protein signaling 2-gαq complex

The heterotrimeric G protein Gαq is a key regulator of blood pressure, and excess Gαq signaling leads to hypertension. A specific inhibitor of Gαq is the GTPase activating protein (GAP) known as regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2). The molecular basis for how Gαq/11 subunits serve as substrates for RGS proteins and how RGS2 mandates its selectivity for Gαq is poorly understood. In crystal structures of the RGS2-Gαq complex, RGS2 docks to Gαq in a different orientation from that observed in RGS-Gαi/o complexes. Despite its unique pose, RGS2 maintains canonical interactions with the switch regions of Gαq in part because its α6 helix adopts a distinct conformation. We show that RGS2 forms extensive interactions with the α-helical domain of Gαq that contribute to binding affinity and GAP potency. RGS subfamilies that do not serve as GAPs for Gαq are unlikely to form analogous stabilizing interactions.

Relationship between Rgs2 gene expression level and anxiety and depression-like behaviour in a mutant mouse model: serotonergic involvement

RGS2 is a member of a family of proteins that negatively modulate G-protein coupled receptor transmission. Variations in the RGS2 gene were found to be associated in humans with anxious and depressive phenotypes. We sought to study the relationship of Rgs2 expression level to depression and anxiety-like behavioural features, sociability and brain 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptor expression. We studied male mice carrying a mutation that causes lower Rgs2 gene expression, employing mice heterozygous (Het) or homozygous (Hom) for this mutation, or wild-type (WT). Mice were subjected to behavioural tests reflecting depressive-like behaviour [forced swim test (FST), novelty suppressed feeding test (NSFT)], elevated plus maze (EPM) for evaluation of anxiety levels and the three-chamber sociability test. The possible involvement of raphe nucleus 5-HT1A receptors in these behavioural features was examined by 8-OH-DPAT-induced hypothermia. Expression levels of 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptors in the cortex, raphe nucleus and hypothalamus were compared among mice of the different Rgs2 genotype groups. NSFT results demonstrated that Hom mice showed more depressive-like features than Rgs2 Het and WT mice. A trend for such a relationship was also suggested by the FST results. EPM and sociability test results showed Hom and Het mice to be more anxious and less sociable than WT mice. In addition Hom and Het mice were characterized by lower basal body temperature and demonstrated less 8-OH-DPAT-induced hypothermia than WT mice. Finally, Hom and Het mice had significantly lower 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptor expression levels in the raphe than WT mice. Our findings demonstrate a relationship between Rgs2 gene expression level and a propensity for anxious and depressive-like behaviour and reduced social interaction that may involve changes in serotonergic receptor expression.

Protein-protein interactions at the adrenergic receptors

The adrenergic receptors are among the best characterized G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and knowledge on this receptor family has provided several important paradigms about GPCR function and regulation. One of the most recent paradigms initially supported by studies on adrenergic receptors is that both βarrestins and G protein-coupled receptors themselves can act as scaffolds binding a variety of proteins and this can result in growing complexity of the receptor-mediated cellular effects. In this review we will briefly summarize the main features of βarrestin binding to the adrenergic receptor subtypes and we will review more in detail the main proteins found to selectively interact with distinct AR subtype. At the end, we will review the main findings on oligomerization of the AR subtypes.

Regulation of GPCR activity, trafficking and localization by GPCR-interacting proteins

GPCRs represent the largest family of integral membrane proteins and were first identified as receptor proteins that couple via heterotrimeric G-proteins to regulate a vast variety of effector proteins to modulate cellular function. It is now recognized that GPCRs interact with a myriad of proteins that not only function to attenuate their signalling but also function to couple these receptors to heterotrimeric G-protein-independent signalling pathways. In addition, intracellular and transmembrane proteins associate with GPCRs and regulate their processing in the endoplasmic reticulum, trafficking to the cell surface, compartmentalization to plasma membrane microdomains, endocytosis and trafficking between intracellular membrane compartments. The present review will overview the functional consequence of β-arrestin, receptor activity-modifying proteins (RAMPS), regulators of G-protein signalling (RGS), GPCR-associated sorting proteins (GASPs), Homer, small GTPases, PSD95/Disc Large/Zona Occludens (PDZ), spinophilin, protein phosphatases, calmodulin, optineurin and Src homology 3 (SH3) containing protein interactions with GPCRs.

A finer tuning of G-protein signaling through regulated control of RGS proteins

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are GTPase-activating proteins (GAP) for various Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. Through this mechanism, RGS proteins regulate the magnitude and duration of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling and are often referred to as fine tuners of G-protein signaling. Increasing evidence suggests that RGS proteins themselves are regulated through multiple mechanisms, which may provide an even finer tuning of G-protein signaling and crosstalk between G-protein-coupled receptors and other signaling pathways. This review summarizes the current data on the control of RGS function through regulated expression, intracellular localization, and covalent modification of RGS proteins, as related to cell function and the pathogenesis of diseases.

PDGF-dependent regulation of regulator of G protein signaling-5 expression and vascular smooth muscle cell functionality

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, and notably members of the RGS-R4 subfamily, control vasocontractility by accelerating the inactivation of Gα-dependent signaling. RGS5 is the most highly and differently expressed RGS-R4 subfamily member in arterial smooth muscle. Expression of RGS5 first appears in pericytes during development of the afferent vascular tree, suggesting that RGS5 is a good candidate for a regulator of arterial contractility and, perhaps, for determining the mass of the smooth muscle coats required to regulate blood flow in the branches of the arterial tree. Consistent with this hypothesis, using cultured vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs), we demonstrate RGS5 overexpression inhibits G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-mediated hypertrophic responses. The next objective was to determine which physiological agonists directly control RGS5 expression in VSMCs. GPCR agonists failed to directly regulate RGS5 mRNA expression; however, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) acutely represses expression. Downregulation of RGS5 results in the induction of migration and the activation of the GPCR-mediated signaling pathways. This stimulation leads to the activation of mitogen-activated protein kinases directly downstream of receptor stimulation, and ultimately VSMC hypertrophy. These results demonstrate that RGS5 expression is a critical mediator of both VSMC contraction and potentially, arterial remodeling.

Cardiac and neuroprotection regulated by α(1)-adrenergic receptor subtypes

Sympathetic nervous system regulation by the α(1)-adrenergic receptor (AR) subtypes (α(1A), α(1B), α(1D)) is complex, whereby chronic activity can be either detrimental or protective for both heart and brain function. This review will summarize the evidence that this dual regulation can be mediated through the different α(1)-AR subtypes in the context of cardiac hypertrophy, heart failure, apoptosis, ischemic preconditioning, neurogenesis, locomotion, neurodegeneration, cognition, neuroplasticity, depression, anxiety, epilepsy, and mental illness.

Potent and selective inhibition of angiotensin AT1 receptor signaling by RGS2: roles of its N-terminal domain

Emerging evidence indicates that R4/B subfamily RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) proteins play roles in functional regulation in the cardiovascular system. In this study, we compared effects of three R4/B subfamily proteins, RGS2, RGS4 and RGS5 on angiotensin AT1 receptor signaling, and investigated roles of the N-terminus of RGS2. In HEK293T cells expressing AT1 receptor stably, intracellular Ca(2+) responses induced by angiotensin II were much more strongly attenuated by RGS2 than by RGS4 and RGS5. N-terminally deleted RGS2 proteins lost this potent inhibitory effect. Replacement of the N-terminal residues 1-71 of RGS2 with the corresponding residues (1-51) of RGS5 decreased significantly the inhibitory effect. On the other hand, replacement of the residues 1-51 of RGS5 with the residues 1-71 of RGS2 increased the inhibitory effect dramatically. Furthermore, we investigated functional contribution of N-terminal subdomains of RGS2, namely, an N-terminal region (residues 16-55) with an amphipathic α helix domain (the subdomain N1), a probable non-specific membrane-targeting subdomain, and another region (residues 56-71) between the α helix and the RGS box (the subdomain N2), a probable GPCR-recognizing subdomain. RGS2 chimera proteins with the residues 1-33 or 34-52 of RGS5 showed weak inhibitory activity, and either of RGS5 chimera proteins with residues 1-55 or 56-71 of RGS2 showed strong inhibitory effects on AT1 receptor signaling. The present study indicates the essential roles of both N-terminal subdomains for the potent inhibitory activity of RGS2 on AT1 receptor signaling.

RGS2 is a primary terminator of β₂-adrenergic receptor-mediated G(i) signaling

Two major β-adrenergic receptor (βAR) subtypes, β(1)AR and β(2)AR, are expressed in mammalian heart with β(1)AR coupling to G(s) and β(2)AR dually coupling to G(s) and G(i) proteins. In many types of chronic heart failure, myocardial contractile response to both β(1)AR and β(2)AR stimulation is severely impaired. The dysfunction of βAR signaling in failing hearts is largely attributable to an increase in G(i) signaling, because disruption of the G(i) signaling restores myocardial contractile response to β(1)AR as well as β(2)AR stimulation. However, the mechanism terminating the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling remains elusive, while it has been shown activation of the G(i) signaling is dependent on agonist stimulation and subsequent PKA-mediated phosphorylation of the receptor. Here we demonstrate that regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2) is a primary terminator of the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling. Specifically, prolonged absence of agonist stimulation for 24h impairs the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling, resulting in enhanced β(2)AR- but not β(1)AR-mediated contractile response in cultured adult mouse cardiomyocytes. Increased β(2)AR contractile response is accompanied by a selective upregulation of RGS2 in the absence of alterations in other major cardiac RGS proteins (RGS3-5) or G(s), G(i) or βAR subtypes. Administration of a βAR agonist, isoproterenol (ISO, 1.0 nM), prevents RGS2 upregulation and restores the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling in cultured cells. Furthermore, RGS2 ablation, similar to βAR agonist stimulation, sustains the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling in cultured cells, whereas adenoviral overexpression of RGS2 suppresses agonist-activated β(2)AR-G(i) signaling in cardiomyocytes and HEK293 cells. These findings not only define RGS2 as a novel negative regulator of the β(2)AR-G(i) signaling but also provide a potential novel target for the treatment of chronic heart failure.

Expression of G protein-coupled receptors and related proteins in HEK293, AtT20, BV2, and N18 cell lines as revealed by microarray analysis

BACKGROUND

G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are one of the most widely studied gene superfamilies. Thousands of GPCR research studies have utilized heterologous expression systems such as human embryonic kidney cells (HEK293). Though often treated as 'blank slates', these cell lines nevertheless endogenously express GPCRs and related signaling proteins. The outcome of a given GPCR study can be profoundly influenced by this largely unknown complement of receptors and/or signaling proteins. Little easily accessible information exists that describes the expression profiles of the GPCRs in cell lines. What is accessible is often limited in scope - of the hundreds of GPCRs and related proteins, one is unlikely to find information on expression of more than a dozen proteins in a given cell line. Microarray technology has allowed rapid analysis of mRNA levels of thousands of candidate genes, but though often publicly available, the results can be difficult to efficiently access or even to interpret.

RESULTS

To bridge this gap, we have used microarrays to measure the mRNA levels of a comprehensive profile of non-chemosensory GPCRs and over a hundred GPCR signaling related gene products in four cell lines frequently used for GPCR research: HEK293, AtT20, BV2, and N18.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides researchers an easily accessible mRNA profile of the endogenous signaling repertoire that these four cell lines possess. This will assist in choosing the most appropriate cell line for studying GPCRs and related signaling proteins. It also provides a better understanding of the potential interactions between GPCRs and those signaling proteins.

The α1-adrenergic receptors: diversity of signaling networks and regulation

The α₁-adrenergic receptor (AR) subtypes (α_1a, α_1b, and α_1d) mediate several physiological effects of epinephrineand norepinephrine. Despite several studies in recombinant systems and insightfrom genetically modified mice, our understanding of the physiological relevance and specificity of the α₁-AR subtypes is still limited. Constitutive activity and receptor oligomerization have emerged as potential features regulating receptor function. Another recent paradigm is that βarrestins and G protein-coupled receptors themselves can act as scaffolds binding a variety of proteins and this can result in growing complexity of the receptor-mediated cellular effects. The aim of this review is to summarize our current knowledge on some recently identified functional paradigms and signaling networks that might help to elucidate the functional diversity of the α₁-AR subtypes in various organs.

Molecular organization and dynamics of the melatonin MT₁ receptor/RGS20/G(i) protein complex reveal asymmetry of receptor dimers for RGS and G(i) coupling

Functional asymmetry of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) dimers has been reported for an increasing number of cases, but the molecular architecture of signalling units associated to these dimers remains unclear. Here, we characterized the molecular complex of the melatonin MT₁ receptor, which directly and constitutively couples to G(i) proteins and the regulator of G-protein signalling (RGS) 20. The molecular organization of the ternary MT₁/G(i)/RGS20 complex was monitored in its basal and activated state by bioluminescence resonance energy transfer between probes inserted at multiple sites of the complex. On the basis of the reported crystal structures of G(i) and the RGS domain, we propose a model wherein one G(i) and one RGS20 protein bind to separate protomers of MT₁ dimers in a pre-associated complex that rearranges upon agonist activation. This model was further validated with MT₁/MT₂ heterodimers. Collectively, our data extend the concept of asymmetry within GPCR dimers, reinforce the notion of receptor specificity for RGS proteins and highlight the advantage of GPCRs organized as dimers in which each protomer fulfils its specific task by binding to different GPCR-interacting proteins.

RNA interference screen for RGS protein specificity at muscarinic and protease-activated receptors reveals bidirectional modulation of signaling

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are considered key modulators of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-mediated signal transduction. These proteins act directly on Galpha subunits in vitro to increase their intrinsic rate of GTP hydrolysis; this activity is central to the prevailing view of RGS proteins as negative regulators of agonist-initiated GPCR signaling. However, the specificities of action of particular RGS proteins toward specific GPCRs in an integrated cellular context remain unclear. Here, we developed a medium-throughput assay to address this question in a wholly endogenous context using RNA interference. We performed medium-throughput calcium mobilization assays of agonist-stimulated muscarinic acetylcholine and protease-activated receptors in human embryonic kidney 293 (HEK293) cells transfected with individual members of a "pooled duplex" short interfering RNA library targeting all conventional human RGS transcripts. Only knockdown of RGS11 increased both carbachol-mediated calcium mobilization and inositol phosphate accumulation. Surprisingly, we found that knockdown of RGS8 and RGS9, but not other conventional RGS proteins, significantly decreased carbachol-mediated calcium mobilization, whereas only RGS8 knockdown decreased protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR-1)-mediated calcium mobilization. Loss of responsiveness toward carbachol and PAR-1 agonist peptide upon RGS8 knockdown appears due, at least in part, to a loss in respective receptor cell surface expression, although this is not the case for RGS9 knockdown. Our data suggest a cellular role for RGS8 in the stable surface expression of M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor and PAR-1, as well as a specific and opposing set of functions for RGS9 and RGS11 in modulating carbachol responsiveness similar to that seen in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Deregulation of RGS2 in cardiovascular diseases

Alteration of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is a salient feature of hypertension and the associated heart diseases. Recent studies have revealed a large family of Regulators of G-protein Signaling (RGS) proteins as important endogenous regulators of GPCR signaling. RGS2 selectively regulates Galphaq/11 signaling, an essential cause of hypertension and cardiac hypertrophy. Both clinical and animal studies have shown that deregulation of RGS2 leads to exacerbated Galphaq/11 signaling. There is an inverse correlation between RGS2 expression and blood pressure, as well as a selective down-regulation of RGS2 in various models of cardiac hypertrophy. The causal relationship has been established in animal studies. RGS2 knockout mice exhibit not only hypertension phenotype but also accelerated cardiac hypertrophy and heart failure in response to pressure-overload. Further in vitro studies have shown that RGS2 knockdown with RNA interference exacerbates, whilst RGS2 over-expression completely abolishes the Galphaq/11-induced hypertrophy. These findings indicate that deregulation of RGS2 plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases, marking RGS2 as a potential therapeutic target or biomarker of hypertension or hypertensive heart diseases.

Fine-tuning of GPCR activity by receptor-interacting proteins

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate physiological responses to various ligands, such as hormones, neurotransmitters and sensory stimuli. The signalling and trafficking properties of GPCRs are often highly malleable depending on the cellular context. Such fine-tuning of GPCR function can be attributed in many cases to receptor-interacting proteins that are differentially expressed in distinct cell types. In some cases these GPCR-interacting partners directly mediate receptor signalling, whereas in other cases they act mainly as scaffolds to modulate G protein-mediated signalling. Furthermore, GPCR-interacting proteins can have a big impact on the regulation of GPCR trafficking, localization and/or pharmacological properties.

Regulators of G protein signaling proteins as central components of G protein-coupled receptor signaling complexes

The regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins bind directly to G protein alpha (Gα) subunits to regulate the signaling functions of Gα and their linked G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Recent studies indicate that RGS proteins also interact with GPCRs, not just G proteins, to form preferred functional pairs. Interactions between GPCRs and RGS proteins may be direct or indirect (via a linker protein) and are dictated by the receptors, rather than the linked G proteins. Emerging models suggest that GPCRs serve as platforms for assembling an overlapping and distinct constellation of signaling proteins that perform receptor-specific signaling tasks. Compelling evidence now indicates that RGS proteins are central components of these GPCR signaling complexes. This review will outline recent discoveries of GPCR/RGS pairs as well as new data in support of the idea that GPCRs serve as platforms for the formation of multiprotein signaling complexes.

Regulators of G protein signaling in neuropsychiatric disorders

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) comprise a diverse group of about 40 proteins which determine signaling amplitude and duration via modulation of receptor/G protein or receptor/effector coupling. Several members of the RGS family are expressed in the brain, where they have precise roles in regulation of important physiological processes. The unique functions of each RGS can be attributed to its structure, distinct pattern of expression, and regulation, and its preferential interactions with receptors, Galpha subunits and other signaling proteins. Evidence suggests dysfunction of RGS proteins is related to several neuropathological conditions. Moreover, clinical and preclinical work reveals that the efficacy and/or side effects of treatments are highly influenced by RGS activity. This article summarizes findings on RGS proteins in vulnerability to several neuropsychiatric disorders, the mechanism via which RGS proteins control neuronal responses and their potential use as drug targets.

Structure, function, and localization of Gβ5-RGS complexes

Members of the R7 subfamily of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins (RGS6, 7, 9, and 11) exist as heterodimers with the G protein beta subunit Gβ5. These protein complexes are only found in neurons and are defined by the presence of three domains: DEP/DHEX, Gβ5/GGL, and RGS. This article summarizes published work in the following areas: (1) the functional significance of structural organization of Gβ5-R7 complexes, (2) regional distribution of Gβ5-R7 in the nervous system and regulation of R7 family expression, (3) subcellular localization of Gβ5-R7 complexes, and (4) novel binding partners of Gβ5-R7 proteins. The review points out some contradictions between observations made by different research groups and highlights the importance of using alternative experimental approaches to obtain conclusive information about Gβ5-R7 function in vivo.

Regulators of G protein signalling proteins in the human myometrium

The contractile state of the human myometrium is controlled by extracellular signals that promote relaxation or contraction. Many of these signals function through G protein-coupled receptors at the cell surface, stimulating heterotrimeric G proteins and leading to changes in the activity of effector proteins responsible for bringing about the response. G proteins can interact with multiple receptors and many different effectors and are key players in the response. Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins are GTPase activating proteins for heterotrimeric G proteins and help terminate the signal. Little is known about the function of RGS proteins in human myometrium and we have therefore analysed transcript levels for RGS proteins at various stages of pregnancy (non-pregnant, preterm, term non-labouring, term labouring). RGS2 and RGS5 were the most abundantly expressed isolates in each of the patient groups. The levels of RGS4 and RGS16 (and to a lesser extent RGS2 and RGS14) increased in term labouring samples relative to the other groups. Yeast two-hybrid analysis and co-immunoprecipitation in myometrial cells revealed that both RGS2 and RGS5 interact directly with the cytoplasmic tail of the oxytocin receptor, suggesting they might help regulate signalling through this receptor.

Regulator of G protein signaling 4 confers selectivity to specific G proteins to modulate mu- and delta-opioid receptor signaling

In vitro studies have shown that the Regulator of G protein Signaling 4 (RGS4) interacts with the C-termini of mu- and delta-opioid receptors (mu-OR, delta-OR) (Georgoussi et al., 2006, Cell. Signal.18, 771-782). Herein we demonstrate that RGS4 associates with these receptors in living cells and forms selective complexes with Gi/Go proteins in a receptor dependent manner. This interaction occurs within the predicted fourth intracellular loop of mu, delta-ORs as part of a signaling complex consisting of the opioid receptor, activated Galpha and RGS4. RGS4 is recruited to the plasma membrane upon opioid receptor stimulation. Expression of RGS4 in HEK293 cells attenuated agonist-mediated extracellular signal regulated kinase (ERK1,2) phosphorylation for both receptors and accelerated agonist-induced internalization of the delta-OR. RGS4 lacking its N-terminal domain failed to interact with both opioid receptors and to modulate opioid receptor signaling. Our findings demonstrate that RGS4 plays a key role in G protein coupling selectivity and signaling of the mu- and delta-OmicronRs.

Small molecule protein-protein interaction inhibitors as CNS therapeutic agents: current progress and future hurdles

Protein-protein interactions are a crucial element in cellular function. The wealth of information currently available on intracellular-signaling pathways has led many to appreciate the untapped pool of potential drug targets that reside downstream of the commonly targeted receptors. Over the last two decades, there has been significant interest in developing therapeutics and chemical probes that inhibit specific protein-protein interactions. Although it has been a challenge to develop small molecules that are capable of occluding the large, often relatively featureless protein-protein interaction interface, there are increasing numbers of examples of small molecules that function in this manner with reasonable potency. This article will highlight the current progress in the development of small molecule protein-protein interaction inhibitors that have applications in the treatment or study of central nervous system function and disease. In particular, we will focus upon recent work towards developing small molecule inhibitors of amyloid-beta and alpha-synuclein aggregation, inhibitors of critical components of G-protein-signaling pathways, and PDZ domain inhibitors.

Evidence for a direct and functional interaction between the regulators of G protein signaling-2 and phosphorylated C terminus of cholecystokinin-2 receptor

Signaling of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is regulated by different mechanisms. One of these involves regulators of G protein signaling (RGS), which are diverse and multifunctional proteins that bind to active Galpha subunits of G proteins and act as GTPase-activating proteins. Little is known about the molecular mechanisms that govern the selective use of RGS proteins in living cells. We first demonstrated that CCK2R-mediated inositol phosphate production, known to be G(q)-dependent, is more sensitive to RGS2 than to RGS4 and is insensitive to RGS8. Both basal and agonist-stimulated activities of the CCK2R are regulated by RGS2. By combining biochemical, functional, and in silico structural approaches, we demonstrate that a direct and functional interaction occurs between RGS2 and agonist-stimulated cholecystokinin receptor-2 (CCK2R) and identified the precise residues involved: phosphorylated Ser434 and Thr439 located in the C-terminal tail of CCK2R and Lys62, Lys63, and Gln67, located in the N-terminal domain of RGS2. These findings confirm previous reports that RGS proteins can interact with GPCRs to modulate their signaling and provide a molecular basis for RGS2 recognition by the CCK2R.