Molecular Defects of the Disease-Causing Human Arrestin-1 C147F Mutant

Functional Role of Arrestin-1 Residues Interacting with Unphosphorylated Rhodopsin Elements

Arrestin-1, or visual arrestin, exhibits an exquisite selectivity for light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) over its other functional forms. That selectivity is believed to be mediated by two well-established structural elements in the arrestin-1 molecule, the activation sensor detecting the active conformation of rhodopsin and the phosphorylation sensor responsive to the rhodopsin phosphorylation, which only active phosphorylated rhodopsin can engage simultaneously. However, in the crystal structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex there are arrestin-1 residues located close to rhodopsin, which do not belong to either sensor. Here we tested by site-directed mutagenesis the functional role of these residues in wild type arrestin-1 using a direct binding assay to P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). We found that many mutations either enhanced the binding only to Rh* or increased the binding to Rh* much more than to P-Rh*. The data suggest that the native residues in these positions act as binding suppressors, specifically inhibiting the arrestin-1 binding to Rh* and thereby increasing arrestin-1 selectivity for P-Rh*. This calls for the modification of a widely accepted model of the arrestin-receptor interactions.

The Role of Arrestin-1 Middle Loop in Rhodopsin Binding

Arrestins preferentially bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The middle loop, highly conserved in all arrestin subtypes, is localized in the central crest on the GPCR-binding side. Upon receptor binding, it directly interacts with bound GPCR and demonstrates the largest movement of any arrestin element in the structures of the complexes. Comprehensive mutagenesis of the middle loop of rhodopsin-specific arrestin-1 suggests that it primarily serves as a suppressor of binding to non-preferred forms of the receptor. Several mutations in the middle loop increase the binding to unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin severalfold, which makes them candidates for improving enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins. The data also suggest that enhanced forms of arrestin do not bind GPCRs exactly like the wild-type protein. Thus, the structures of the arrestin-receptor complexes, in all of which different enhanced arrestin mutants and reengineered receptors were used, must be interpreted with caution.

Scaffolding of Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Signaling by β-Arrestins

β-arrestins were initially identified to desensitize and internalize G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Receptor-bound β-arrestins also initiate a second wave of signaling by scaffolding mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling components, MAPK kinase kinase, MAPK kinase, and MAPK. In particular, β-arrestins facilitate ERK1/2 or JNK3 activation by scaffolding signal cascade components such as ERK1/2-MEK1-cRaf or JNK3-MKK4/7-ASK1. Understanding the precise molecular and structural mechanisms of β-arrestin-mediated MAPK scaffolding assembly would deepen our understanding of GPCR-mediated MAPK activation and provide clues for the selective regulation of the MAPK signaling cascade for therapeutic purposes. Over the last decade, numerous research groups have attempted to understand the molecular and structural mechanisms of β-arrestin-mediated MAPK scaffolding assembly. Although not providing the complete mechanism, these efforts suggest potential binding interfaces between β-arrestins and MAPK signaling components and the mechanism for MAPK signal amplification by β-arrestin-mediated scaffolding. This review summarizes recent developments of cellular and molecular works on the scaffolding mechanism of β-arrestin for MAPK signaling cascade.

Identification and Functional Characterization of a Novel Nonsense Variant in ARR3 in a Southern Chinese Family With High Myopia

ARR3 has been associated with X-linked, female-limited, high myopia. However, using exome sequencing (ES), we identified the first high myopia case with hemizygous ARR3-related mutation in a male patient in a Southern Chinese family. This novel truncated mutation (ARR3: c.569C>G, p.S190*) co-segregated with the disease phenotype in affected family members and demonstrated that high myopia caused by ARR3 is not X-linked, female-limited, where a complicated X-linked inheritance pattern may exist. Thus, our case expanded the variant spectrum in ARR3 and provided additional information for genetic counseling, prenatal testing, and diagnosis. Moreover, we characterized the nonsense-mediated decay of the ARR3 mutant mRNA and discussed the possible underlying pathogenic mechanisms.

Scaffolding mechanism of arrestin-2 in the cRaf/MEK1/ERK signaling cascade

Arrestins were initially identified for their role in homologous desensitization and internalization of G protein-coupled receptors. Receptor-bound arrestins also initiate signaling by interacting with other signaling proteins. Arrestins scaffold MAPK signaling cascades, MAPK kinase kinase (MAP3K), MAPK kinase (MAP2K), and MAPK. In particular, arrestins facilitate ERK1/2 activation by scaffolding ERK1/2 (MAPK), MEK1 (MAP2K), and Raf (MAPK3). However, the structural mechanism underlying this scaffolding remains unknown. Here, we investigated the mechanism of arrestin-2 scaffolding of cRaf, MEK1, and ERK2 using hydrogen/deuterium exchange-mass spectrometry, tryptophan-induced bimane fluorescence quenching, and NMR. We found that basal and active arrestin-2 interacted with cRaf, while only active arrestin-2 interacted with MEK1 and ERK2. The ATP binding status of MEK1 or ERK2 affected arrestin-2 binding; ATP-bound MEK1 interacted with arrestin-2, whereas only empty ERK2 bound arrestin-2. Analysis of the binding interfaces suggested that the relative positions of cRaf, MEK1, and ERK2 on arrestin-2 likely facilitate sequential phosphorylation in the signal transduction cascade.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin

The finger loop in the central crest of the receptor-binding site of arrestins engages the cavity between the transmembrane helices of activated G-protein-coupled receptors. Therefore, it was hypothesized to serve as the sensor that detects the activation state of the receptor. We performed comprehensive mutagenesis of the finger loop in bovine visual arrestin-1, generated mutant radiolabeled proteins by cell-free translation, and determined the effects of mutations on the in vitro binding of arrestin-1 to purified phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. This interaction is driven by two factors, rhodopsin activation and rhodopsin-attached phosphates. Therefore, the binding of arrestin-1 to light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin is low. To evaluate the role of the finger loop specifically in the recognition of the active receptor conformation, we tested the effects of these mutations in the context of truncated arrestin-1 that demonstrates much higher binding to unphosphorylated activated and phosphorylated inactive rhodopsin. The majority of finger loop residues proved important for arrestin-1 binding to light-activated rhodopsin, with six mutations affecting the binding exclusively to this form. Thus, the finger loop is the key element of arrestin-1 activation sensor. The data also suggest that arrestin-1 and its enhanced mutant bind various functional forms of rhodopsin differently.

Lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins does not serve as phosphate sensor

Arrestins demonstrate strong preference for phosphorylated over unphosphorylated receptors, but how arrestins "sense" receptor phosphorylation is unclear. A conserved lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins directly binds the phosphate in crystal structures of activated arrestin-1, -2, and -3. The lariat loop supplies two negative charges to the central polar core, which must be disrupted for arrestin activation and high-affinity receptor binding. Therefore, we hypothesized that receptor-attached phosphates pull the lariat loop via this lysine, thus removing the negative charges and destabilizing the polar core. We tested the role of this lysine by introducing charge elimination (Lys->Ala) and reversal (Lys->Glu) mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3. These mutations in arrestin-1 only moderately reduced phospho-rhodopsin binding and had no detectable effect on arrestin-2 and -3 binding to cognate non-visual receptors in cells. The mutations of Lys300 in bovine and homologous Lys301 in mouse arrestin-1 on the background of pre-activated mutants had variable effects on the binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin, while affecting the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin to a greater extent. Thus, conserved lysine in the lariat loop participates in receptor binding, but does not play a critical role in phosphate-induced arrestin activation.

Progressive sector retinitis pigmentosa due to c.440G>T mutation in SAG in an Australian family

BACKGROUND

Heterozygous c.440 G > T mutation in the S-antigen visual arrestin (SAG) gene has been described as a cause of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (adRP) in a series of patients of Hispanic origin. This study presents the early and late clinical features and disease progression rates in an Australian family with SAG adRP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational case series of four family members with adRP. They were examined clinically, with multi-modal retinal imaging and electroretinography (ERG) to ascertain phenotype. Disease progression rate was measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and fundus autofluorescence (FAF). A retinal dystrophy panel was used for the proband and cascade testing with targeted Sanger sequencing was conducted in other available family members.

RESULTS

The proband presented at 36 years of age with profoundly reduced full-field ERG responses despite a sector RP phenotype. This progressed to a classic RP pattern over several decades leaving a small residual island of central visual field. The horizontal span of the residual outer nuclear layer and the area of hyperautofluorescent ring contracted at a rate of 8-11% and 9-14% per year, respectively. DNA sequencing confirmed the segregation of SAG c.440 G > T mutation with disease.

CONCLUSION

SAG adRP presents with a reduced full-field ERG response consistent with a rod-cone dystrophy in mid-life despite a sector RP phenotype. Centripetal progression of the disease into the macula can be tracked by OCT and FAF imaging.

Targeting arrestin interactions with its partners for therapeutic purposes

Most vertebrates express four arrestin subtypes: two visual ones in photoreceptor cells and two non-visuals expressed ubiquitously. The latter two interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors, certain receptors of other types, and numerous non-receptor partners. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity and work by interacting with other proteins, often assembling multi-protein signaling complexes. Arrestin binding to every partner affects cell signaling, including pathways regulating cell survival, proliferation, and death. Thus, targeting individual arrestin interactions has therapeutic potential. This requires precise identification of protein-protein interaction sites of both participants and the choice of the side of each interaction which would be most advantageous to target. The interfaces involved in each interaction can be disrupted by small molecule therapeutics, as well as by carefully selected peptides of the other partner that do not participate in the interactions that should not be targeted.

Arrestin mutations: Some cause diseases, others promise cure

Arrestins play a key role in homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate several other vital signaling pathways in cells. Considering the critical roles of these proteins in cellular signaling, surprisingly few disease-causing mutations in human arrestins were described. Most of these are loss-of-function mutations of visual arrestin-1 that cause excessive rhodopsin signaling and hence night blindness. Only one dominant arrestin-1 mutation was discovered so far. It reduces the thermal stability of the protein, which likely results in photoreceptor death via unfolded protein response. In case of the two nonvisual arrestins, only polymorphisms were described, some of which appear to be associated with neurological disorders and altered response to certain treatments. Structure-function studies revealed several ways of enhancing arrestins' ability to quench GPCR signaling. These enhanced arrestins have potential as tools for gene therapy of disorders associated with excessive signaling of mutant GPCRs.