Family resemblances? Ligand binding and activation of family A and B G-protein-coupled receptors

In April 2007, the Biochemical Society held a meeting to compare and contrast ligand binding and activation of Family A and B GPCRs (G-protein-coupled receptors). Being the largest class, Family A GPCRs usually receive the most attention, although a previous Biochemical Society meeting has focused on Family B GPCRs. The aim of the present meeting was to bring researchers of both families together in order to identify commonalities between the two. The present article introduces the proceedings of the meeting, briefly commenting on the focus of each of the following articles. ©The Authors.

A key role for transmembrane prolines in calcitonin receptor-like receptor agonist binding and signalling:implications for family B G-protein-coupled receptors

Calcitonin receptor like-receptor is a family B G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR). It requires receptor activity modifying protein (RAMP) 1 to give a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor. Little is known of how members of this receptor family function. Proline residues often form important kinks in alpha-helices. Therefore, all proline residues within the transmembrane helices of the receptor (Pro241, Pro244 in helix 4, Pro275 in helix 5, Pro321 and Pro331 in helix 6) were mutated to alanine. Pro241 Pro275, and Pro321 are highly conserved throughout all family B GPCRs. The binding of CGRP and its ability to stimulate cAMP production were investigated in mutant and wild-type receptors after transient transfection into COS-7 cells with RAMP1. The P321A mutation significantly decreased the pEC(50) for CGRP and reduced its affinity but did not change cell-surface expression. Antagonist binding [CGRP(8-37) and 1-piperidinecarboxamide N-[2-[[5amino-1-[[4-(4-pyridinyl)-1-piperazinyl]carbonyl]pentyl]amino]-1-[(3 5-dibromo-4-hydroxyphenyl)methyl]-2-oxoethyl]-4-(1,4-dihydro-2-oxo-3(2H)-quina zolinyl) (BIBN4096BS)] was little altered by the mutation. Adrenomedullin-mediated signaling was disrupted when P321A was coexpressed with RAMP1, RAMP2, or RAMP3. The P331A mutant produced a moderate reduction in CGRP binding and receptor activation. Mutation of the other residues had no effect on receptor function. Thus, Pro321 and Pro331 are required for agonist binding and receptor activation. Modeling suggested that Pro321 induces a bend in helix 6, bringing its C terminus near that of helix 3, as seen in many family A GPCRs. This is abolished in P321A. P321A-I325P predicted to restore this conformation, showed wild-type activation. Modeling can also rationalize the effects of transmembrane proline mutants previously reported for another family B GPCR, the VPAC(1) receptor.

Heterodimers and family-B GPCRs:RAMPs, CGRP and adrenomedullin

RAMPs (receptor activity-modifying proteins) are single-pass transmembrane proteins that associate with certain family-B GPCRs (G-protein-coupled receptors). Specifically for the CT (calcitonin) receptor-like receptor and the CT receptor, this results in profound changes in ligand binding and receptor pharmacology, allowing the generation of six distinct receptors with preferences for CGRP (CT gene-related peptide) adrenomedullin, amylin and CT. There are three RAMPs: RAMP1-RAMP3. The N-terminus appears to be the main determinant of receptor pharmacology whereas the transmembrane domain contributes to association of the RAMP with the GPCR. The N-terminus of all members of the RAMP family probably contains two disulphide bonds; a potential third disulphide is found in RAMP1 and RAMP3. The N-terminus appears to be in close proximity to the ligand and plays a key role in its binding, either directly or indirectly. BIBN4096BS, a CGRP antagonist, targets RAMP1 and this gives the compound very high selectivity for the human CGRP(1) receptor.

Functional and biophysical analysis of the C-terminus of the CGRP-receptor; a family B GPCR

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) typically have a functionally important C-terminus which, in the largest subfamily (family A), includes a membrane-parallel eighth helix. Mutations of this region are associated with several diseases. There are few C-terminal studies on the family B GPCRs and no data supporting the existence of a similar eighth helix in this second major subfamily, which has little or no sequence homology to family A GPCRs. Here we show that the C-terminus of a family B GPCR (CLR) has a disparate region from N400 to C436 required for CGRP-mediated internalization, and a proximal region of twelve residues (from G388 to W399), in a similar position to the family A eighth helix, required for receptor localization at the cell surface. A combination of circular and linear dichroism, fluorescence and modified waterLOGSY NMR spectroscopy (SALMON) demonstrated that a peptide mimetic of this domain readily forms a membrane-parallel helix anchored to the liposome by an interfacial tryptophan residue. The study reveals two key functions held within the C-terminus of a family B GPCR and presents support for an eighth helical region with striking topological similarity to the nonhomologous family A receptor. This helix structure appears to be found in most other family B GPCRs.

The role of the extracellular loops of the CGRP receptor, a family B GPCR

The CGRP (calcitonin gene-related peptide) receptor is a family B GPCR (G-protein-coupled receptor). It consists of a GPCR, CLR (calcitonin receptor-like receptor) and an accessory protein, RAMP1 (receptor activity-modifying protein 1). RAMP1 is needed for CGRP binding and also cell-surface expression of CLR. There have been few systematic studies of the ECLs (extracellular loops) of family B GPCRs. However, they are likely to be especially important for the interaction of the N-termini of the peptide agonists that are the natural agonists for these receptors. We have carried out alanine scans on all three ECLs of CLR, as well as their associated juxtamembrane regions. Residues within all three loops influence CGRP binding and receptor activation. Mutation of Ala203 and Ala206 on ECL1 to leucine increased the affinity of CGRP. Residues at the top of TM (transmembrane) helices 2 and 3 influenced CGRP binding and receptor activation. L351A and E357A in TM6/ECL3 reduced receptor expression and may be needed for CLR association with RAMP1. ECL2 seems especially important for CLR function; of the 16 residues so far examined in this loop, eight residues reduce the potency of CGRP at stimulating cAMP production when mutated to alanine.

Secretin family (Class B) G protein-coupled receptors - from molecular to clinical perspectives

Family B G protein-coupled receptors represent an important but under-researched group of receptors. This edition of the British Journal of Pharmacology considers the roles and pharmacology of a number of these receptors. Whilst common themes emerge, it is clear that more work is needed to understand the details of each receptor in order to properly exploit them therapeutically.

Calcitonin and calcitonin receptor-like receptors:common themes with family B GPCRs?

The calcitonin receptor (CTR) and calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CLR) are two of the 15 human family B (or Secretin-like) GPCRs. CTR and CLR are of considerable biological interest as their pharmacology is moulded by interactions with receptor activity-modifying proteins. They also have therapeutic relevance for many conditions, such as osteoporosis, diabetes, obesity, lymphatic insufficiency, migraine and cardiovascular disease. In light of recent advances in understanding ligand docking and receptor activation in both the family as a whole and in CLR and CTR specifically, this review reflects how applicable general family B GPCR themes are to these two idiosyncratic receptors. We review the main functional domains of the receptors; the N-terminal extracellular domain, the juxtamembrane domain and ligand interface, the transmembrane domain and the intracellular C-terminal domain. Structural and functional findings from the CLR and CTR along with other family B GPCRs are critically appraised to gain insight into how these domains may function. The ability for CTR and CLR to interact with receptor activity-modifying proteins adds another level of sophistication to these receptor systems but means careful consideration is needed when trying to apply generic GPCR principles. This review encapsulates current thinking in the realm of family B GPCR research by highlighting both conflicting and recurring themes and how such findings relate to two unusual but important receptors, CTR and CLR.

The heteromeric 5-HT3A/B receptor:the effect of 5-HT3B subunits on receptor structure and ligand recognition

The 5-HT3 receptors are members of the cys-loop family of ligand-gated ion channels. Two functional subtypes are known, the homomeric 5HT3A and the heteromeric 5HT3A/B receptors, which exhibit distinct biophysical characteristics but are difficult to differentiate pharmacologically. Atomic force microscopy has been used to determine the stoichiometry and architecture of the heteromeric 5HT3A/B receptor. Each subunit was engineered to express a unique C-terminal epitope tag, together with six sequential histidine residues to facilitate nickel affinity purification. The 5-HT3 receptors, ectopically expressed in HEK293 cells, were solubilised, purified and decorated with antibodies to the subunit specific epitope tags. Imaging of individual receptors by atomic force microscopy revealed a pentameric arrangement of subunits in the order BBABA, reading anti-clockwise when viewed from the extracellular face. Homology models for the heteromeric receptor were then constructed using both the electron microscopic structure of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, from Torpedo marmorata, and the X-ray crystallographic structure of the soluble acetylcholine binding protein, from Lymnaea stagnalis, as templates. These homology models were used, together with equivalent models constructed for the homomeric receptor, to interpret mutagenesis experiments designed to explore the minimal recognition differences of both the natural agonist, 5-HT, and the competitive antagonist, granisetron, for the two human receptor subtypes. The results of this work revealed that the 5-HT3B subunit residues within the ligand binding site, for both the agonist and antagonist, are accommodating to conservative mutations. They are consistent with the view that the 5-HT3A subunit provides the principal and the 5-HT38 subunit the complementary recognition interactions at the binding interface.

Impact of peanut allergy on quality of life, stress and anxiety in the family

Background: Peanut allergy (PA) is known to impact on quality of life (QoL) of the sufferer, but little research has focused on all family members. We therefore sought to establish the impact of PA on QoL and reported anxiety of children with clinically confirmed PA, their parents and older siblings. Methods: Forty-six families, who had a child with PA, completed QoL (PedsQLTM or WHOQOL-BREF), anxiety (SCAS or STAI) and perceived stress (PSS) scales. PA children completed a PA specific QoL questionnaire (Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2003;14:378). Parents and sibling also completed QoL proxy questionnaires for the PA child (PedsQLTM, Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2003;14:378). Results: Mothers rated their own psychological (P < 0.01) and physical (P < 0.05) QoL significantly worse than fathers rated theirs, and had higher scores than fathers for anxiety (P < 0.05) and stress (P < 0.001). Children with PA had significantly poorer physical health-related QoL (P < 0.05), QoL within school (P < 0.01) and general QoL (P < 0.05) than their siblings did, and greater separation anxiety (P < 0.05). The majority of differences were between girls with PA and female siblings. Mothers felt that there was a greater impact on QoL for their PA child, compared with that reported by siblings, fathers or the PA children themselves (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Mothers report that they have significantly poorer QoL and suffer more anxiety and stress than fathers do; this inter-parental difference may be an important feature of family stress caused by PA. Siblings have a similar view of how QoL affects the PA child as the PA child does, while mothers may possibly overestimate this impact.

Unraveling the role of forgiveness in family relationships

Testing the idea that the process of forgiveness is intrinsically different across diverse relationships, this study examined the role of forgiveness in different family relationships. In 2 laboratory sessions 1 year apart, 114 families (each including 2 parents and 1 child) completed a new measure of family forgiveness and many individual-level, relationship-level, and family-level variables that have been previously linked with forgiveness. After validating the measure of family forgiveness in cross-sectional analyses, investigators performed longitudinal analyses to examine the role of forgiveness in each family relationship over the 1-year interval. Results indicated many important positive consequences of forgiveness on individual traits, aspects of each family relationship, and general family environment. However, there were also important asymmetries in associates of forgiveness across parent-child and parent-parent relationships, demonstrating the relationship-bound nature of forgiveness.

GP130/OSMR is the only LIF/IL-6 family receptor complex to promote osteoblast differentiation of calvaria progenitors

Leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) and its receptor (LIFR) are "twins" of Oncostatin M (OSM) and OSMR, respectively, likely having arisen through gene duplications. We compared their effects in a bone nodule-forming model of in vitro osteogenesis, rat calvaria (RC) cell cultures. Using a dominant-negative LIF mutant (hLIF-05), we showed that in RC cell cultures mouse OSM (mOSM) activates exclusively glycoprotein 130 (gp130)/OSMR. In treatments starting at early nodule formation stage, LIF, mOSM, IL-11, and IL-6 + sIL-6R inhibit bone nodule formation, that is, osteoprogenitor differentiation. Treatment with mOSM, and no other cytokine of the family, in early cultures (day 1-3 or 1-4) increases bone colony numbers. hLIF-05 also dose dependently stimulates bone nodule formation, confirming the inhibitory action of gp130/LIFR on osteogenesis. In pulse treatments at successive stages of bone nodule formation and maturation, LIF blocks osteocalcin (OCN) expression by differentiated osteoblasts, but has no effect on bonesialoprotein (BSP) expression. Mouse OSM inhibits OCN and BSP expression in preconfluent cultures with no or progressively reduced effects at later stages, reflecting the disruption of early nodules, possibly due to the strong apoptotic action of mOSM in RC cell cultures. In summary, LIFR and OSMR display differential effects on differentiation and phenotypic expression of osteogenic cells, most likely through different signal transduction pathways. In particular, gp130/OSMR is the only receptor complex of the family to stimulate osteoprogenitor differentiation in the RC cell culture model. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Localisation of members of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family and their receptors in human atherosclerotic arteries

Background: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) mediates endothelial cell mitogenesis and enhances vascular permeability. The existence of single or multiple VEGF isoforms and receptors suggests that these proteins may have overlapping but distinct functions, which may be reflected in their cell expression and distribution. Methods: The localisation of VEGFs A–C and their receptors (VEGFRs 1–3, respectively) in 30 fresh human atherosclerotic arteries, 15 normal uterine arteries, and 15 saphenous veins using immunohistochemistry and western blotting. Results: Saphenous veins showed no staining for VEGF-B or VEGFR-2. Smooth muscle cells (SMCs) showed the strongest staining for VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGFR-1, and VEGFR-2 in all specimens. Conversely, VEGFR-3 and VEGF-C were predominately localised to the endothelial vasa vasorum in normal arteries, whereas medial SMCs showed the strongest staining in atherosclerotic arteries. Western blotting showed variations in VEGF protein localisation, with lower amounts of VEGF-B and VEGF-C in saphenous veins, compared with arterial tissue. Amounts of VEGF-C were lower than those of VEGF-A and VEGF-B in all specimens. Conclusion: This study provides direct evidence of the presence of VEGF proteins and receptors in human physiology and pathology, with variations in both the amounts of VEGF proteins expressed and their cellular distribution in normal arteries compared with atherosclerotic arteries. The presence of VEGFs A–C and their receptors in normal arterial tissue implies that VEGF functions may extend beyond endothelial cell proliferation. Reduced VEGFR-2 staining in atherosclerotic arteries may have implications for the atherosclerosis process and the development of vascular disease and its complications.

Encoding order and developmental dyslexia:a family of skills predicting different orthographic components

We investigated order encoding in developmental dyslexia using a task that presented nonalphanumeric visual characters either simultaneously or sequentially—to tap spatial and temporal order encoding, respectively—and asked participants to reproduce their order. Dyslexic participants performed poorly in the sequential condition, but normally in the simultaneous condition, except for positions most susceptible to interference. These results are novel in demonstrating a selective difficulty with temporal order encoding in a dyslexic group. We also tested the associations between our order reconstruction tasks and: (a) lexical learning and phonological tasks; and (b) different reading and spelling tasks. Correlations were extensive when the whole group of participants was considered together. When dyslexics and controls were considered separately, different patterns of association emerged between orthographic tasks on the one side and tasks tapping order encoding, phonological processing, and written learning on the other. These results indicate that different skills support different aspects of orthographic processing and are impaired to different degrees in individuals with dyslexia. Therefore, developmental dyslexia is not caused by a single impairment, but by a family of deficits loosely related to difficulties with order. Understanding the contribution of these different deficits will be crucial to deepen our understanding of this disorder.