![]() |
|
|
Vol. 54, Issue 3, 584-590, September 1998
Department of Biological Sciences, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, California 92623-9534 (K.M.K., J.E.D., H.A.K., D.W.G.) and the Department of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Department of Physiology, and the Program in Neuroscience, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 (J.W.R.)
| |
Summary |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A high degree of homology between the four Gs-coupled
prostaglandin (PG) receptors [EP2, EP4,
prostacyclin (IP), PGD2 (DP)] and the four
Gq/Gi-coupled receptors [EP1,
EP3, PGF2
(FP), thromboxane A2
(TP)] suggests that prostaglandin receptors evolved functionally from
an ancestral EP receptor before the development of distinct binding
epitopes. If so, ligand selectivity should be determined by a limited
number of amino acids. EP2 receptor transmembrane domain
residues that are similar to those in the EP4 receptor but
differ from those in the IP receptor were mutated to the
corresponding IP receptor residue. Activation of the mutant receptors
by PGE2 (EP2 ligand), iloprost (stable
prostacyclin analog), and PGE1 (EP2/IP ligand)
was determined using a cAMP-dependent reporter gene assay. A
Leu304-to-tyrosine substitution in the seventh transmembrane
domain enhanced iloprost potency approximately 100-fold. A glycine
substitution at Ser120 in the third transmembrane domain had no effect
on drug potency but improved the response of the Tyr304 mutant. The
potency of the natural prostaglandins PGF2
and
PGD2 was not enhanced by the mutations. In contrast, the potency of all prostaglandins was reduced 10- to 100-fold when
arginine 302, which is thought to be a counterion for the prostaglandin
carboxylic acid, was mutated. Thus, a single amino acid change resulted
in a selective gain of function for iloprost, which is consistent with
the proposed phylogeny of the prostaglandin receptors.
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The
molecular identification of eight G protein-coupled membrane receptors
that mediate the actions of the five primary prostaglandins has helped
to explain the myriad of biological effects of these arachidonic acid
metabolites. In particular, PGE2 affects
almost every tissue in the body (often in opposing ways), including
smooth muscle contraction and relaxation and pro-inflammatory and
anti-inflammatory actions. Four subtypes of the
PGE2 receptor, termed EP1,
EP2, EP3, and
EP4, have been cloned (Pierce et al.,
1995
) and shown to couple to different signaling systems. The
EP1 receptor couples preferentially to
Gq, the EP2 and
EP4 receptors couple to Gs, and the six EP3 receptor carboxyl tail splice
variants couple to Gi. Thus, these four receptors
respond quite differently to the same physiological ligand.
Surprisingly, when the deduced amino acid sequences for the four EP
receptors are aligned and compared, they demonstrate an unexpected
degree of divergence. Alignments of all the prostaglandin receptors
showed that the EP2 receptor is more similar to
the IP receptor and the DP receptor than to the other three EP
receptors. Phylogenetic analysis (Regan et al., 1994
; Toh
et al., 1995
) of receptor sequences led to the conclusion
that the prostaglandin receptors evolved from a precursor EP receptor
into two subfamilies that differ with respect to their G protein
coupling (Fig. 1A). Receptors that
preferentially interact with the major endogenous prostaglandins other
than PGE2 must have evolved following the functional division of the EP receptors. Thus, the IP and DP receptors evolved from the EP2 receptor, and the FP
and TP receptors evolved from the EP3 or
EP1 receptor. If this hypothesis is correct, a relatively small number of amino acids may determine the selective interactions of the prostaglandins with their receptors.
|
The EP2 and the IP receptors represent an ideal receptor pair for studying the determinants of ligand selectivity. Their seven TMs are more than 60% identical at the amino acid level and they share some common ligands, such as PGE1. However, PGE2 is more than 1000-fold selective for the EP2 receptor, and the stable prostacyclin analog iloprost is more than 1000-fold selective for the IP receptor. We identified approximately 15 residues that were similar in the EP2 and EP4 receptor but differed in the IP receptor. To determine whether these amino acid residues were responsible for the preferential activities of PGE2 and iloprost, the EP2 receptor sequence was changed at these positions to the corresponding IP receptor amino acid (Fig. 1B) by site-directed mutagenesis and the effect on activation by PGE2 and iloprost determined in a reporter gene assay. PGE1, a ligand at both the EP2 and IP receptors, was used to confirm that the mutant receptors were functionally expressed.
A single amino acid change in TM7 enables iloprost to activate the
EP2 receptor. This mutant receptor is activated
by both PGE2 and iloprost, but not by
PGD2 or PGF2
. This
represents the first report of a single amino acid change in a
prostaglandin receptor resulting in a gain of function for
prostaglandin ligands and is consistent with the proposed phylogeny of
the prostaglandin receptors.
| |
Experimental Procedures |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Materials. Iloprost and [3H]acetyl Coenzyme A were purchased from Amersham Life Sciences (Arlington Heights, IL). All other prostaglandin compounds were purchased from Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, MI). LipofectAMINE, Opti-MEM, and other tissue culture media and serum were purchased from Life Technologies (Gaithersburg, MD). Stripped fetal bovine serum was obtained from Gemini Products (Calabasas, CA). Acetyl coenzyme A, chloramphenicol, and DNase I were purchased from Sigma Chemical (St. Louis, MO).
Site-directed mutagenesis.
Missense mutations were
introduced by the Kunkel method (Kunkel, 1985
) using a Muta-Gene kit
purchased from BioRad (Richmond, CA). The human
EP2 receptor cDNA (Regan et al., 1994
)
was placed in pcDNA3 (InVitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) for all mutagenesis and
expression studies. Oligonucleotides were purchased from Genosys (The
Woodlands, TX) or synthesized in-house on an Oligo1000 oligonucleotide
synthesizer (Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA). Mutations were
verified by DNA sequence analysis using a Sequenase kit (Amersham Life Sciences, Arlington Heights, IL). The double mutant
EP2 S120G L304Y was constructed from two single
mutants by using the internal ApaI restriction site and
standard protocols.
Expression of EP2 cDNAs in cell culture.
CV-1
cells were transiently transfected with plasmids carrying the wild-type
or mutant EP2 cDNA using lipofectamine. The
CRE-CAT reporter plasmid TESblgIICRE(+)
NHSE was obtained
from Dr. Pamela Mellon of The Salk Institute (La Jolla, CA). This
construct contains an 18-base-pair CRE from the promoter of the
subunit gene for the human glycoprotein hormone linked to the herpes
simplex virus thymidine kinase promoter, which drives bacterial
CAT gene expression (Delegeane et al., 1987
). Thus, CAT
enzyme activity is dependent on and proportional to cAMP levels in the
cells. Fifty thousand cells were plated in wells of a 24-well plate and
transfected with 125 ng of receptor plasmid, 250 ng of reporter
plasmid, and 6 µg of lipofectamine per well. Cells were fed with
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 20% stripped fetal
bovine serum at approximately 5 hr. Cells were dosed with drug
approximately 24 hr after feeding, and assayed for CAT activity
approximately 18 hr after dosing.
CAT assay.
Medium was removed by aspiration and the cells
washed twice with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (1× = 0.02% KCl,
0.02% KH2PO4, 0.8% NaCl, 0.216%
Na2HPO4·7H2O) without
calcium or magnesium. Lysis buffer (50 µl) containing 1% Triton
X-100, 1 mM Tris·HCl, pH 7.8, and 2 mM EDTA,
pH 8.0, and 0.4 mg/ml DNase I was added and cells lysed on ice with
periodic shaking for 45 min. Reaction mix (50 µl) containing 40 µM [3H]acetyl coenzyme A, 60 µM acetyl coenzyme A, 30 µM HCl, 2 mM chloramphenicol, 200 mM Tris·HCl, pH 7.8, and 4 mM EDTA, pH 8.0, was added to the lysate and the
mixture incubated for 90 min at 37°. The reaction was stopped with
100 µl of 7 M urea and the entire volume (200 µl)
transferred to scintillation vials. One milliliter of scintillant
(0.8% 2,5-diphenyloxazole in toluene) was added and the vials shaken
to mix the phases. The phases were allowed to separate for 15 min
before reading in a scintillation counter, to allow the
[3H]acetylated chloramphenicol product to
partition into the nonpolar phase (Nielsen et al., 1989
).
Samples were assayed in triplicate and average dpm values were
obtained.
Data analysis.
Because PGE1 is the
common ligand for EP2 and IP receptors, all
values were expressed as a percentage of the maximum
PGE1 value. The basal value for each
dose-response curve was subtracted from all dpm values. The highest
PGE1 value for each receptor on each assay day
was considered 100%. Dose-response curves were generated using
KaleidaGraph (Abelbeck/Synergy Software, Reading, PA) by least-squares
fits to this equation: response = maximum response + (minimum
response
maximum response)/[1 + (concentration of
ligand/EC50)]. The data are reported as
mean ± standard error of three to 12 independent experiments.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To identify key residues for ligand discrimination, mutants were screened for CAT activity in a CRE-CAT reporter gene assay, using 0.1, 10, and 100 nM concentrations of PGE1, PGE2, and iloprost (data not shown). Because PGE1 activity should not be affected by mutations that alter ligand selectivity between the EP2 and IP receptors, it was used to assess the functionality of the mutant receptors. Mutants that were not activated by PGE1 were assumed to be inappropriately expressed or improperly assembled and were not pursued further. The majority of mutants were unremarkable, in that they retained the ability to signal in response to PGE1 and PGE2 and did not gain the ability to signal in response to iloprost (Table 1). Active mutants were assayed for CAT activity over a complete range of doses from 1 nM to 10 µM.
|
EP2 activity.
The EP2
receptor demonstrated function, as determined by CAT activity, in
response to PGE1 and PGE2
(Fig. 2A). EC50
values of 34.0 ± 11.0 nM for
PGE1 and 25.5 ± 6.6 nM for
PGE2 are in the range of previously published
values for the EP2 receptor (Regan et
al., 1994
; Woodward et al., 1995
; Nishigaki et
al., 1996
). The EP2 receptor responds to
iloprost (Fig. 2A), carbacyclin (Fig. 3),
PGD2, and PGF2
(Fig. 2E)
only at micromolar concentrations, as previously reported.
|
|
Residue 304 is a key determinant of selective ligand interaction. The mutant receptor EP2 L304Y was activated in response to PGE1, PGE2, and iloprost (Fig. 2B). The EC50 values are 99.9 ± 29.5 nM for PGE1, 33.3 ± 11.2 nM for PGE2, and 128.9 ± 38.3 nM for iloprost. The potency of iloprost is increased at least 50-fold because of the mutation at position 304.
Computer modeling (data not shown) suggested that residue 120 in TM3 participates in interactions with residue 304 in TM7. For this reason, mutant EP2 S120G and the double mutant EP2 S120G L304Y were generated and analyzed. Mutant EP2 S120G retains the ability to respond to PGE1 and PGE2 (EC50 values of 47.4 ± 21.1 nM and 33.0 ± 11.7 nM, respectively) without responding to iloprost except at micromolar concentrations (Fig. 2C). It seems to respond much as does the wild-type EP2 receptor, which suggests that TM3 is not directly involved in defining ligand specificity. The double mutant, EP2 S120G L304Y, responds much as does the single mutant EP2 L304Y (Fig. 2D). It retains the ability to signal in response to PGE1 and PGE2 (EC50 values of 36.0 ± 10.0 nM and 37.9 ± 12.3 nM, respectively), and has gained the ability to respond to iloprost (EC50 of 142.1 ± 43.4 nM) and carbacyclin (Fig. 3; EC50 of 1705.0 ± 734.1 nM). No response to PGD2 or PGF2
is seen at submicromolar concentrations
(Fig. 2F). Interestingly, the overall signal magnitude, as a percent of
basal, of the double mutant EP2 S120G L304Y is
consistently superior to that of the single mutant
EP2 L304Y, suggesting that residue 120 in TM3
interacts in some way with residue 304, perhaps by stabilizing the
receptor (Fig. 4).
|
Arginine 302 is a key residue for prostaglandin activity.
The
conserved arginine residue in TM7 has been proposed to be the
counterion for binding of the carboxyl group of prostaglandin compounds. Previous studies have demonstrated that alterations of this
residue in EP3 and TP prostaglandin receptors
alters ligand binding and signaling (Funk et al., 1993
;
Huang and Tai, 1995
; Negishi et al., 1995
; Audoly and
Breyer, 1997
; Chang et al., 1997
). To confirm the
significance of this residue in receptor-ligand interactions for the
Gs-coupled branch of the prostaglandin receptor family, this arginine has been substituted with a neutral residue (R302Q) and a negatively charged residue (R302E) to evaluate the change
in function of these mutants.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The proposed prostaglandin receptor phylogeny (Regan et
al. 1994
; Toh et al. 1995
) led us to hypothesize that
only a few amino acids determine the selective interactions of the
prostaglandins with their receptors. The approximately 100-fold
increase in the activity of an IP receptor-selective agonist with a
single amino-acid substitution confirms this hypothesis and is
consistent with the proposed phylogeny.
The phylogenetic analysis highlighted candidate amino acids for gain of
function mutations that could be rapidly screened with our functional
assay (Fig. 1B). This approach avoided the difficulties of interpreting
loss of functional or binding activity, which can result from defective
receptor synthesis and assembly rather than a change in ligand-receptor
interactions. Only one recent study that swapped regions of the IP and
DP receptors identified a gain of function, although this was not
specific for a single type of prostaglandin (Kobayashi et
al., 1997
). A nonspecific enhancement of activity could result
from a general change in the activation kinetics of the receptors.
The role of residue 304 in ligand activation is specific to
prostacyclin receptor agonists. The EP2 L304Y and
EP2 S120G L304Y mutants acquire the ability to
respond to the IP ligand iloprost, but not to the DP ligand
PGD2 or the FP ligand PGF2
(Fig. 2F). Thus, the specific gain of function seen in the
EP2 L304Y and EP2 S120G
L304Y mutants is likely caused by an alteration in the vicinity of TM7,
at a site that specifically interacts with iloprost.
It seems likely that residue 304 is sensitive to structural alteration
of the
side chain. Prostacyclin and its stable analog, iloprost,
have a constrained configuration because of an additional ring that is
not present in PGE2. PGE1,
which activates both EP2 and IP receptors, has a
much more flexible
chain and presumably can adopt a configuration
that enables interaction with either receptor. The iloprost
chain,
which differs from prostacyclin and PGE2, does
not seem to interact with residue 304 because carbacyclin, another
prostacyclin analog that has an
chain identical to prostacyclin and
PGE2 and a constrained
chain, also gains
function with the EP2 S120G L304Y mutant (Fig.
3). It is interesting to note that the potency of carbacyclin relative
to iloprost for the mutant is similar to its relative potency in
binding to the IP receptor (Boie et al., 1994
). The data are
thus consistent with the L304Y substitution's enhancing the
ability of the prostacyclin
chain to interact with the
EP2 receptor. One explanation for the result is
that the hydroxyl moiety of tyrosine provides a new contact point for
prostacyclin and its analogs, compensating for one that prostaglandins
with a less constrained
side chain possess.
Other contact points are necessary for the discrimination of
prostaglandin ligands. The iloprost potency at the IP receptor is
approximately 100-fold greater than its potency at
EP2 L304Y. There must also be amino acids
responsible for reducing the potency of PGE2 at
the IP and other non-EP receptors. The region of the binding pocket
that enables the selective interactions of PGE2, as well as PGD2 and
PGF2
, may be distinct from TM7 and is likely
involved in interactions with the cyclopentane ring. A recent study
with chimeric IP/DP receptor constructs suggested a role for TM3 of the
DP receptor in cyclopentane ring interactions (Kobayashi et
al., 1997
). These authors also suggested that TM6 or TM7 is
responsible for
chain recognition, which is consistent with our
results. In another study, mutagenesis of a conserved hydroxy amino
acid in TM6 of the EP3 receptor seemed to alter the selectivity of that receptor (Negishi et al., 1995
). The
approach we used here can be applied to other receptor pairs (the
EP2 and DP receptors for instance) to identify
significant determinants of cyclopentane ring interactions. A
comparison of EP2 and EP4 receptors might also determine why PGE2 is
approximately 10-fold less potent at the EP2
receptor than at other EP receptors.
Residue 120 in TM3 probably influences ligand activity by interacting with residue 304. The EP2 S120G mutation alone has wild-type pharmacology, which indicates that this residue is not involved in defining a ligand interaction site (Fig. 2C). However, EP2 L304Y exhibits a loss of signal magnitude that is rescued by the double mutant, EP2 S120G L304Y, which indicates that the TM3-TM7 interactions are important for optimal receptor function (Fig. 4). The elevated basal activity of the single mutants may reflect reduced stability of the receptor in the inactive state, which is stabilized by G protein coupling or the double mutant. Further evidence that these two amino acids interact is the fact that the changes at these positions between EP2 and IP receptors are complementary in side chain length and polarity.
Arg302, which is located in TM7 and corresponds with arginine residues
that have been implicated in binding of the prostaglandin carboxylic
acid moiety, is predicted on the basis of modeling to be situated at
the opposite end of the binding pocket from TM3 and TM6. As expected
for an amino acid that is conserved in all prostaglandin receptors,
mutagenesis of this residue resulted in a nonselective reduction of
agonist activity (Fig. 5). The retention of signal transduction,
however minor, with the Arg302 mutants EP2 R302Q
and EP2 R302E is intriguing. The result is
consistent with PG ligands having many receptor contact points, as
previously discussed. Mutagenesis of the corresponding residue in other
prostaglandin receptors has resulted in a range of responses from total
loss of binding or signaling to retention of some signaling. In some studies (Funk et al., 1993
; Huang and Tai, 1995
) binding
alone was evaluated, which may underestimate any residual function
present in the TP and EP3 mutants. In one case,
functional studies using the synthetic EP3 analog
sulprostone supplemented binding studies and demonstrated that mutation
of the conserved arginine in the EP3 receptor
resulted in complete loss of function (Audoly and Breyer, 1997
).
However, other studies have demonstrated retention of some
EP3 function when PGE2 but
not sulprostone is the agonist (Negishi et al., 1995
; Chang
et al., 1997
).
There are only a few previous examples of a single amino acid change
altering the selectivity of a receptor for endogenous ligands. In the
somatostatin receptor subtype 5, substitution of Phe265 in TM6 with
tyrosine increased the affinity of the 14-amino-acid form of
somatostatin, so that it was comparable with its affinity for
somatostatin receptor subtypes 1-4 (Ozenberger and Hadcock, 1995
).
Mutation of Tyr129 in TM2 of endothelin receptor A to histidine, the
corresponding amino acid in endothelin receptor B, enhanced endothelin-3 binding so that its affinity was similar to that of
endothelin receptor B (Krystek et al., 1994
; Lee et
al., 1994
). These receptors, as well as the
EP2, should support study of the evolution
of ligand-receptor pairs. One would predict that the emergence of the
particular amino acid changes that are described and novel endogenous
ligands occurred at similar stages of evolution.
In summary, a single residue in TM7 of the EP2 receptor that is changed in the IP receptor determines the activity of stable prostacyclin analogs. This result is consistent with a model of prostaglandins interacting with their receptors at a universal contact point (TM7 arginine) and at other residues, probably in a pocket formed by TM7, TM6, and TM3 that enables ligand discrimination. The significant role of a single amino acid in the selectivity of the EP2 receptor is consistent with the hypothesis that the IP receptor evolved from the EP2 receptor. In effect, the mutant receptor represents a molecular "missing link" in the evolution of the IP receptor from the EP2 receptor.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We are grateful to Cynthia Manlapaz for her assistance with assays and to David F. Woodward, Katherine Stern, and Todd S. Gac for assistance in reviewing and preparing the manuscript
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Received January 15, 1998; Accepted June 5, 1998
Send reprint requests to: Dr. Daniel W. Gil, Biological Sciences, RD-2C, Allergan, Inc., 2525 Dupont Drive, Irvine, CA 92612. E-mail: gil_daniel{at}allergan.com
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
PG, prostaglandin;
EP2, PGE2 receptor subtype 2;
EP4, PGE2
receptor subtype 4;
IP, prostacyclin receptor;
DP, PGD2 receptor;
EP1, PGE2 receptor
subtype 1;
EP3, PGE2 receptor subtype 3;
TP, thromboxane A2 receptor;
FP, PGF2
receptor;
TM, transmembrane domain;
CRE, cAMP response element;
CAT, chloramphenicol acetyl transferase.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-subunit gene: dependence on cyclic AMP-inducible elements.
Mol Cell Biol
7:
3994-4002
-carboxylic acid of agonist and arginine residue of seventh transmembrane domain.
J Biol Chem
270:
16122-16127This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. Li, K. P. Mouillesseaux, D. Montoya, D. Cruz, N. Gharavi, M. Dun, L. Koroniak, and J. A. Berliner Identification of Prostaglandin E2 Receptor Subtype 2 As a Receptor Activated by OxPAPC Circ. Res., March 17, 2006; 98(5): 642 - 650. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Stitham, A. Stojanovic, B. L. Merenick, K. A. O'Hara, and J. Hwa The Unique Ligand-binding Pocket for the Human Prostacyclin Receptor. SITE-DIRECTED MUTAGENESIS AND MOLECULAR MODELING J. Biol. Chem., January 31, 2003; 278(6): 4250 - 4257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Stoll, S. Liesener, T. Hohlfeld, K. Schror, P. L. Fuchs, and H.-D. Holtje Pharmacophore Definition and Three-Dimensional Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Study on Structurally Diverse Prostacyclin Receptor Agonists Mol. Pharmacol., November 1, 2002; 62(5): 1103 - 1111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Hatae, M. Wada, C. Yokoyama, M. Shimonishi, and T. Tanabe Prostacyclin-dependent Apoptosis Mediated by PPARdelta J. Biol. Chem., November 30, 2001; 276(49): 46260 - 46267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Breyer and R. M. Breyer Prostaglandin E receptors and the kidney Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, July 1, 2000; 279(1): F12 - F23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Narumiya, Y. Sugimoto, and F. Ushikubi Prostanoid Receptors: Structures, Properties, and Functions Physiol Rev, October 1, 1999; 79(4): 1193 - 1226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. A. Stillman, M. D. Breyer, and R. M. Breyer Importance of the Extracellular Domain for Prostaglandin EP2 Receptor Function Mol. Pharmacol., September 1, 1999; 56(3): 545 - 551. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
T. Kobayashi, F. Ushikubi, and S. Narumiya Amino Acid Residues Conferring Ligand Binding Properties of Prostaglandin I and Prostaglandin D Receptors. IDENTIFICATION BY SITE-DIRECTED MUTAGENESIS J. Biol. Chem., August 4, 2000; 275(32): 24294 - 24303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||