DOCSLIB.ORG

Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins in Synaptic Signaling and Plasticity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins in Synaptic Signaling and Plasticity 1521-0111/89/2/273–286$25.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1124/mol.115.102210 MOLECULAR PHARMACOLOGY Mol Pharmacol 89:273–286, February 2016 Copyright ª 2016 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics MINIREVIEW Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins in Synaptic Signaling and Plasticity Kyle J. Gerber, Katherine E. Squires, and John R. Hepler Programs in Molecular and Systems Pharmacology (K.J.G., K.E.S., J.R.H.) and Neuroscience (J.R.H.), Department of Downloaded from Pharmacology (K.J.G., K.E.S., J.R.H.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia Received October 26, 2015; accepted December 10, 2015 ABSTRACT The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) family of proteins synaptic transmission, and synaptic plasticity, which are neces- molpharm.aspetjournals.org serves critical roles in G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and sary for central nervous system physiology and behavior. heterotrimeric G protein signal transduction. RGS proteins are Accumulating evidence has revealed key roles for specific RGS best understood as negative regulators of GPCR/G protein proteins in multiple signaling pathways at neuronal synapses, signaling. They achieve this by acting as GTPase activating regulating both pre- and postsynaptic signaling events and proteins (GAPs) for Ga subunits and accelerating the turnoff of G synaptic plasticity. Here, we review and highlight the current protein signaling. Many RGS proteins also bind additional knowledge of specific RGS proteins (RGS2, RGS4, RGS7, signaling partners that either regulate their functions or enable RGS9-2, and RGS14) that have been clearly demonstrated to them to regulate other important signaling events. At neuronal serve critical roles in modulating synaptic signaling and plasticity synapses, GPCRs, G proteins, and RGS proteins work in throughout the brain, and we consider their potential as future coordination to regulate key aspects of neurotransmitter release, therapeutic targets. at ASPET Journals on September 27, 2021 Introduction termination of downstream signaling by both the Ga and Gbg subunits (De Vries et al., 2000; Ross and Wilkie, 2000; G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are necessary for Hollinger and Hepler, 2002; Willars, 2006). RGS proteins functional neurotransmission throughout the central nervous are a structurally diverse family of signaling proteins with system, controlling neurophysiological processes ranging from many identified signaling partners distinct from Ga and movement to mood (Lagerström and Schiöth, 2008; Betke GPCRs. In this regard, considerable evidence shows that et al., 2012; Rojas and Dingledine, 2013). Receptor activation many RGS proteins have cell signaling roles in addition to of heterotrimeric G proteins (Gabg) results in release of Ga- their shared established roles as GAPs for Ga subunits GTP and Gbg that stimulate downstream effectors and second (Burchett, 2000; Abramow-Newerly et al., 2006; Sethakorn messenger pathways to mediate intracellular physiology et al., 2010). (Bourne et al., 1990; Simon et al., 1991; Hepler and Gilman, GPCR signaling regulates key aspects of both pre- and 1992; Hamm, 1998). GPCR and linked G protein signaling is postsynaptic neurotransmission, leading to changes in synap- tightly controlled by the family of regulator of G protein tic plasticity, including long-term potentiation (LTP), long- signaling (RGS) proteins. RGS proteins act as GTPase acti- term depression (LTD), reversal of LTP (depotentiation), and vating proteins (GAPs) on the a subunits of the Ga and Ga i q presynaptic vesicle release potential. Various metabotropic subfamilies of heterotrimeric G proteins, greatly enhancing GPCRs either positively or negatively regulate presynaptic the intrinsic GTPase activity of the Ga subunit to facilitate the neurotransmitter release (Tedford and Zamponi, 2006; Betke et al., 2012). On postsynaptic membranes, GPCRs and G Work in the Hepler Laboratory on this topic is supported by the National protein signaling pathways regulate neuronal excitability, Institutes of Health grants [Grants R01NS37112 and 1R21NS087488] to J.R.H.; modulating fast-acting neurotransmission mediated by additionally, both K.J.G. and K.E.S. were supported by National Institutes of Health training grants [Grant T32 GM008602]. ligand-gated ion channels, including glutamate (Liu et al., dx.doi.org/10.1124/mol.115.102210. 2006; Chalifoux and Carter, 2010; Rojas and Dingledine, 2013) ABBREVIATIONS: CaV, voltage-gated calcium; DEP, disheveled, Egl-10, and pleckstrin; D2DR, D2 dopamine receptor; eCB, endocannabinoid; ERK, extracellular signal-regulated kinase; GABA, g-aminobutyric acid; GABABR, g-aminobutyric acid B receptor; GAP, GTPase activating protein; GIRK, G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potassium; GPR, G protein regulatory; GPCR, G protein-coupled receptor; Gb5, G protein b5; KO, knockout; LTD, long-term depression; LTP, long-term potentiation; MOR, m-opioid receptor; NMDA, N-methyl-D-aspartate; PD, Parkinson’s disease; PPF, paired pulse facilitation; RGS, regulator of G protein signaling; R7BP, R7-binding protein; VTA, ventral tegmental area. 273 274 Gerber et al. and g-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors (Bormann, 1988). and nucleus accumbens) of rats following amphetamine ad- Following GPCR activation of Ga, released Gbg directly binds ministration (Taymans et al., 2002). In a model more closely to and activates G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potas- related to synaptic plasticity, high-frequency stimulation, sium (GIRK) channels. GIRK channels hyperpolarize the which is commonly used to induce hippocampal LTP, has neuron and dampen the overall capacity of the postsynaptic been shown to strongly induce the expression of RGS2 mRNA signaling to potentiate (Dascal, 1997), a process known as within the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus (Ingi et al., depotentiation, or the reversal of LTP. As such, GIRK chan- 1998). Furthermore, stable expression of RGS2 with no nels are required for depotentiation and many RGS proteins induction protocol has been found throughout the brain in regulate the rate at which GPCR-coupled GIRK channels close the same regions in which its expression is induced: the hip- following agonist removal (Doupnik et al., 1997; Saitoh et al., pocampus, cortex, striatum, ventral tegmental area (VTA), 1997, 2001; Ulens et al., 2000). Presynaptically, active Gbg and amygdala (Grafstein-Dunn et al., 2001; Ingi and Aoki, subunits can inhibit voltage-gated calcium (CaV) channels 2002; Taymans et al., 2002). necessary for calcium-dependent neurotransmitter release Due to its high expression throughout the brain and its following an action potential (Bormann, 1988; Zamponi and unique role as an immediate early gene, functions for RGS2 Currie, 2013). In this case, RGS proteins can antagonize the in neurologic diseases and disorders have been extensively effects of Gbg on N- and P/Q-type CaV channels (CaV2.2 and studied. Multiple reports have shown a role for this RGS Downloaded from CaV2.1), facilitating neurotransmitter release (Kammermeier protein in modulating anxiety, with polymorphisms in RGS2 and Ikeda, 1999; Jeong and Ikeda, 2000; Mark et al., 2000). associated with generalized anxiety disorder (Smoller et al., Additionally, canonical heterotrimeric G protein signaling 2008; Koenen et al., 2009; Hohoff et al., 2015), panic disorder through Ga subunits has been shown to affect plasticity via (Koenen et al., 2009; Otowa et al., 2011; Hohoff et al., 2015), modulation of postsynaptic glutamate receptors (Liu et al., post-traumatic stress disorder (Amstadter et al., 2009), as 2006; Chalifoux and Carter, 2010) and multiple other signal- well as suicide (Cui et al., 2008) in humans. Studies in mice ing pathways necessary for synaptic plasticity. have also shown an association between RGS2 and anxiety molpharm.aspetjournals.org Our current understanding of roles for RGS proteins in (Oliveira-Dos-Santos et al., 2000; Yalcin et al., 2004; Lifschytz physiology and behavior has been greatly aided by the devel- et al., 2012; Okimoto et al., 2012) with decreased RGS2 opment and use of RGS-insensitive Ga subunits (DiBello expression causing anxiety (Oliveira-Dos-Santos et al., 2000; et al., 1998; Fu et al., 2004; Kaur et al., 2011), allowing Lifschytz et al., 2012) and depression-like (Lifschytz et al., examination of neurophysiology under conditions that mimic 2012) phenotypes. To better treat these diseases associated functional uncoupling of Ga-RGS. Studies with these mutants with RGS2, it is necessary to understand how RGS2 modu- have revealed key roles for RGS proteins in multiple signaling lates synaptic plasticity and signaling. pathways in neurons, as well as pre- and postsynaptic signal- Functions for RGS2 in synaptic signaling and plasticity ing and plasticity specifically (Chen and Lambert, 2000; have been examined largely within the hippocampus and at ASPET Journals on September 27, 2021 Goldenstein et al., 2009; Talbot et al., 2010). By examining VTA. Within the hippocampus, RGS2 regulates short-term the role of RGS proteins in synaptic signaling, we can better synaptic plasticity. High concentrations of RGS2 within the understand the function of GPCR and G protein signaling in neuron appear to facilitate paired pulse depression, while low synaptic plasticity as well as diseases associated with RGS expression of RGS2 leads to paired pulse facilitation (PPF). In protein dysfunction. Here, we highlight and review our other words, probability of neurotransmitter release
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Emerging Roles for 3 Utrs in Neurons
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review 0 Emerging Roles for 3 UTRs in Neurons Bongmin Bae and Pedro Miura * Department of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 8 April 2020; Accepted: 9 May 2020; Published: 12 May 2020 Abstract: The 30 untranslated regions (30 UTRs) of mRNAs serve as hubs for post-transcriptional control as the targets of microRNAs (miRNAs) and RNA-binding proteins (RBPs). Sequences in 30 UTRs confer alterations in mRNA stability, direct mRNA localization to subcellular regions, and impart translational control. Thousands of mRNAs are localized to subcellular compartments in neurons—including axons, dendrites, and synapses—where they are thought to undergo local translation. Despite an established role for 30 UTR sequences in imparting mRNA localization in neurons, the specific RNA sequences and structural features at play remain poorly understood. The nervous system selectively expresses longer 30 UTR isoforms via alternative polyadenylation (APA). The regulation of APA in neurons and the neuronal functions of longer 30 UTR mRNA isoforms are starting to be uncovered. Surprising roles for 30 UTRs are emerging beyond the regulation of protein synthesis and include roles as RBP delivery scaffolds and regulators of alternative splicing. Evidence is also emerging that 30 UTRs can be cleaved, leading to stable, isolated 30 UTR fragments which are of unknown function. Mutations in 30 UTRs are implicated in several neurological disorders—more studies are needed to uncover how these mutations impact gene regulation and what is their relationship to disease severity. Keywords: 30 UTR; alternative polyadenylation; local translation; RNA-binding protein; RNA-sequencing; post-transcriptional regulation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Material
    Supplemental Table B ARGs in alphabetical order Symbol Title 3 months 6 months 9 months 12 months 23 months ANOVA Direction Category 38597 septin 2 1557 ± 44 1555 ± 44 1579 ± 56 1655 ± 26 1691 ± 31 0.05219 up Intermediate 0610031j06rik kidney predominant protein NCU-G1 491 ± 6 504 ± 14 503 ± 11 527 ± 13 534 ± 12 0.04747 up Early Adult 1G5 vesicle-associated calmodulin-binding protein 662 ± 23 675 ± 17 629 ± 16 617 ± 20 583 ± 26 0.03129 down Intermediate A2m alpha-2-macroglobulin 262 ± 7 272 ± 8 244 ± 6 290 ± 7 353 ± 16 0.00000 up Midlife Aadat aminoadipate aminotransferase (synonym Kat2) 180 ± 5 201 ± 12 223 ± 7 244 ± 14 275 ± 7 0.00000 up Early Adult Abca2 ATP-binding cassette, sub-family A (ABC1), member 2 958 ± 28 1052 ± 58 1086 ± 36 1071 ± 44 1141 ± 41 0.05371 up Early Adult Abcb1a ATP-binding cassette, sub-family B (MDR/TAP), member 1A 136 ± 8 147 ± 6 147 ± 13 155 ± 9 185 ± 13 0.01272 up Midlife Acadl acetyl-Coenzyme A dehydrogenase, long-chain 423 ± 7 456 ± 11 478 ± 14 486 ± 13 512 ± 11 0.00003 up Early Adult Acadvl acyl-Coenzyme A dehydrogenase, very long chain 426 ± 14 414 ± 10 404 ± 13 411 ± 15 461 ± 10 0.01017 up Late Accn1 amiloride-sensitive cation channel 1, neuronal (degenerin) 242 ± 10 250 ± 9 237 ± 11 247 ± 14 212 ± 8 0.04972 down Late Actb actin, beta 12965 ± 310 13382 ± 170 13145 ± 273 13739 ± 303 14187 ± 269 0.01195 up Midlife Acvrinp1 activin receptor interacting protein 1 304 ± 18 285 ± 21 274 ± 13 297 ± 21 341 ± 14 0.03610 up Late Adk adenosine kinase 1828 ± 43 1920 ± 38 1922 ± 22 2048 ± 30 1949 ± 44 0.00797 up Early
    [Show full text]
  • Gene PMID WBS Locus ABR 26603386 AASDH 26603386
    Supplementary material J Med Genet Gene PMID WBS Locus ABR 26603386 AASDH 26603386 ABCA1 21304579 ABCA13 26603386 ABCA3 25501393 ABCA7 25501393 ABCC1 25501393 ABCC3 25501393 ABCG1 25501393 ABHD10 21304579 ABHD11 25501393 yes ABHD2 25501393 ABHD5 21304579 ABLIM1 21304579;26603386 ACOT12 25501393 ACSF2,CHAD 26603386 ACSL4 21304579 ACSM3 26603386 ACTA2 25501393 ACTN1 26603386 ACTN3 26603386;25501393;25501393 ACTN4 21304579 ACTR1B 21304579 ACVR2A 21304579 ACY3 19897463 ACYP1 21304579 ADA 25501393 ADAM12 21304579 ADAM19 25501393 ADAM32 26603386 ADAMTS1 25501393 ADAMTS10 25501393 ADAMTS12 26603386 ADAMTS17 26603386 ADAMTS6 21304579 ADAMTS7 25501393 ADAMTSL1 21304579 ADAMTSL4 25501393 ADAMTSL5 25501393 ADCY3 25501393 ADK 21304579 ADRBK2 25501393 AEBP1 25501393 AES 25501393 AFAP1,LOC84740 26603386 AFAP1L2 26603386 AFG3L1 21304579 AGAP1 26603386 AGAP9 21304579 Codina-Sola M, et al. J Med Genet 2019; 56:801–808. doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2019-106080 Supplementary material J Med Genet AGBL5 21304579 AGPAT3 19897463;25501393 AGRN 25501393 AGXT2L2 25501393 AHCY 25501393 AHDC1 26603386 AHNAK 26603386 AHRR 26603386 AIDA 25501393 AIFM2 21304579 AIG1 21304579 AIP 21304579 AK5 21304579 AKAP1 25501393 AKAP6 21304579 AKNA 21304579 AKR1E2 26603386 AKR7A2 21304579 AKR7A3 26603386 AKR7L 26603386 AKT3 21304579 ALDH18A1 25501393;25501393 ALDH1A3 21304579 ALDH1B1 21304579 ALDH6A1 21304579 ALDOC 21304579 ALG10B 26603386 ALG13 21304579 ALKBH7 25501393 ALPK2 21304579 AMPH 21304579 ANG 21304579 ANGPTL2,RALGPS1 26603386 ANGPTL6 26603386 ANK2 21304579 ANKMY1 26603386 ANKMY2
    [Show full text]
  • A Computational Approach for Defining a Signature of Β-Cell Golgi Stress in Diabetes Mellitus
    Page 1 of 781 Diabetes A Computational Approach for Defining a Signature of β-Cell Golgi Stress in Diabetes Mellitus Robert N. Bone1,6,7, Olufunmilola Oyebamiji2, Sayali Talware2, Sharmila Selvaraj2, Preethi Krishnan3,6, Farooq Syed1,6,7, Huanmei Wu2, Carmella Evans-Molina 1,3,4,5,6,7,8* Departments of 1Pediatrics, 3Medicine, 4Anatomy, Cell Biology & Physiology, 5Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, the 6Center for Diabetes & Metabolic Diseases, and the 7Herman B. Wells Center for Pediatric Research, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202; 2Department of BioHealth Informatics, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN, 46202; 8Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN 46202. *Corresponding Author(s): Carmella Evans-Molina, MD, PhD ([email protected]) Indiana University School of Medicine, 635 Barnhill Drive, MS 2031A, Indianapolis, IN 46202, Telephone: (317) 274-4145, Fax (317) 274-4107 Running Title: Golgi Stress Response in Diabetes Word Count: 4358 Number of Figures: 6 Keywords: Golgi apparatus stress, Islets, β cell, Type 1 diabetes, Type 2 diabetes 1 Diabetes Publish Ahead of Print, published online August 20, 2020 Diabetes Page 2 of 781 ABSTRACT The Golgi apparatus (GA) is an important site of insulin processing and granule maturation, but whether GA organelle dysfunction and GA stress are present in the diabetic β-cell has not been tested. We utilized an informatics-based approach to develop a transcriptional signature of β-cell GA stress using existing RNA sequencing and microarray datasets generated using human islets from donors with diabetes and islets where type 1(T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) had been modeled ex vivo. To narrow our results to GA-specific genes, we applied a filter set of 1,030 genes accepted as GA associated.
    [Show full text]
  • Predicting Coupling Probabilities of G-Protein Coupled Receptors Gurdeep Singh1,2,†, Asuka Inoue3,*,†, J
    Published online 30 May 2019 Nucleic Acids Research, 2019, Vol. 47, Web Server issue W395–W401 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz392 PRECOG: PREdicting COupling probabilities of G-protein coupled receptors Gurdeep Singh1,2,†, Asuka Inoue3,*,†, J. Silvio Gutkind4, Robert B. Russell1,2,* and Francesco Raimondi1,2,* 1CellNetworks, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 267, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany, 2Biochemie Zentrum Heidelberg (BZH), Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 328, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany, 3Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578, Japan and 4Department of Pharmacology and Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA Received February 10, 2019; Revised April 13, 2019; Editorial Decision April 24, 2019; Accepted May 01, 2019 ABSTRACT great use in tinkering with signalling pathways in living sys- tems (5). G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) control multi- Ligand binding to GPCRs induces conformational ple physiological states by transducing a multitude changes that lead to binding and activation of G-proteins of extracellular stimuli into the cell via coupling to situated on the inner cell membrane. Most of mammalian intra-cellular heterotrimeric G-proteins. Deciphering GPCRs couple with more than one G-protein giving each which G-proteins couple to each of the hundreds receptor a distinct coupling profile (6) and thus specific of GPCRs present in a typical eukaryotic organism downstream cellular responses. Determining these coupling is therefore critical to understand signalling. Here, profiles is critical to understand GPCR biology and phar- we present PRECOG (precog.russelllab.org): a web- macology. Despite decades of research and hundreds of ob- server for predicting GPCR coupling, which allows served interactions, coupling information is still missing for users to: (i) predict coupling probabilities for GPCRs many receptors and sequence determinants of coupling- specificity are still largely unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • Ck1δ Over-Expressing Mice Display ADHD-Like Behaviors, Frontostriatal Neuronal Abnormalities and Altered Expressions of ADHD-Candidate Genes
    Molecular Psychiatry (2020) 25:3322–3336 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0233-z ARTICLE CK1δ over-expressing mice display ADHD-like behaviors, frontostriatal neuronal abnormalities and altered expressions of ADHD-candidate genes 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Mingming Zhou ● Jodi Gresack ● Jia Cheng ● Kunihiro Uryu ● Lars Brichta ● Paul Greengard ● Marc Flajolet Received: 8 November 2017 / Revised: 4 July 2018 / Accepted: 18 July 2018 / Published online: 19 October 2018 © Springer Nature Limited 2018 Abstract The cognitive mechanisms underlying attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a highly heritable disorder with an array of candidate genes and unclear genetic architecture, remain poorly understood. We previously demonstrated that mice overexpressing CK1δ (CK1δ OE) in the forebrain show hyperactivity and ADHD-like pharmacological responses to D- amphetamine. Here, we demonstrate that CK1δ OE mice exhibit impaired visual attention and a lack of D-amphetamine- induced place preference, indicating a disruption of the dopamine-dependent reward pathway. We also demonstrate the presence of abnormalities in the frontostriatal circuitry, differences in synaptic ultra-structures by electron microscopy, as 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: well as electrophysiological perturbations of both glutamatergic and GABAergic transmission, as observed by altered frequency and amplitude of mEPSCs and mIPSCs. Furthermore, gene expression profiling by next-generation sequencing alone, or in combination with bacTRAP technology to study specifically Drd1a versus Drd2 medium spiny neurons, revealed that developmental CK1δ OE alters transcriptional homeostasis in the striatum, including specific alterations in Drd1a versus Drd2 neurons. These results led us to perform a fine molecular characterization of targeted gene networks and pathway analysis. Importantly, a large fraction of 92 genes identified by GWAS studies as associated with ADHD in humans are significantly altered in our mouse model.
    [Show full text]
  • G-Protein ␤␥-Complex Is Crucial for Efficient Signal Amplification in Vision
    The Journal of Neuroscience, June 1, 2011 • 31(22):8067–8077 • 8067 Cellular/Molecular G-Protein ␤␥-Complex Is Crucial for Efficient Signal Amplification in Vision Alexander V. Kolesnikov,1 Loryn Rikimaru,2 Anne K. Hennig,1 Peter D. Lukasiewicz,1 Steven J. Fliesler,4,5,6,7 Victor I. Govardovskii,8 Vladimir J. Kefalov,1 and Oleg G. Kisselev2,3 1Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, Departments of 2Ophthalmology and 3Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri 63104, 4Research Service, Veterans Administration Western New York Healthcare System, and Departments of 5Ophthalmology (Ross Eye Institute) and 6Biochemistry, University at Buffalo/The State University of New York (SUNY), and 7SUNY Eye Institute, Buffalo, New York 14215, and 8Sechenov Institute for Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg 194223, Russia A fundamental question of cell signaling biology is how faint external signals produce robust physiological responses. One universal mechanism relies on signal amplification via intracellular cascades mediated by heterotrimeric G-proteins. This high amplification system allows retinal rod photoreceptors to detect single photons of light. Although much is now known about the role of the ␣-subunit of the rod-specific G-protein transducin in phototransduction, the physiological function of the auxiliary ␤␥-complex in this process remains a mystery. Here, we show that elimination of the transducin ␥-subunit drastically reduces signal amplification in intact mouse rods. The consequence is a striking decline in rod visual sensitivity and severe impairment of nocturnal vision. Our findings demonstrate that transducin ␤␥-complex controls signal amplification of the rod phototransduction cascade and is critical for the ability of rod photoreceptors to function in low light conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Driver Strength Index Highlights Important Cancer Genes in TCGA Pancanatlas Patients
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.01.21261447; this version posted August 5, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . Novel Driver Strength Index highlights important cancer genes in TCGA PanCanAtlas patients Aleksey V. Belikov*, Danila V. Otnyukov, Alexey D. Vyatkin and Sergey V. Leonov Laboratory of Innovative Medicine, School of Biological and Medical Physics, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 141701 Dolgoprudny, Moscow Region, Russia *Corresponding author: [email protected] NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. 1 medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.01.21261447; this version posted August 5, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . Abstract Elucidating crucial driver genes is paramount for understanding the cancer origins and mechanisms of progression, as well as selecting targets for molecular therapy. Cancer genes are usually ranked by the frequency of mutation, which, however, does not necessarily reflect their driver strength. Here we hypothesize that driver strength is higher for genes that are preferentially mutated in patients with few driver mutations overall, because these few mutations should be strong enough to initiate cancer.
    [Show full text]
  • Antigen-Specific Memory CD4 T Cells Coordinated Changes in DNA
    Downloaded from http://www.jimmunol.org/ by guest on September 24, 2021 is online at: average * The Journal of Immunology The Journal of Immunology published online 18 March 2013 from submission to initial decision 4 weeks from acceptance to publication http://www.jimmunol.org/content/early/2013/03/17/jimmun ol.1202267 Coordinated Changes in DNA Methylation in Antigen-Specific Memory CD4 T Cells Shin-ichi Hashimoto, Katsumi Ogoshi, Atsushi Sasaki, Jun Abe, Wei Qu, Yoichiro Nakatani, Budrul Ahsan, Kenshiro Oshima, Francis H. W. Shand, Akio Ametani, Yutaka Suzuki, Shuichi Kaneko, Takashi Wada, Masahira Hattori, Sumio Sugano, Shinichi Morishita and Kouji Matsushima J Immunol Submit online. Every submission reviewed by practicing scientists ? is published twice each month by Author Choice option Receive free email-alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up at: http://jimmunol.org/alerts http://jimmunol.org/subscription Submit copyright permission requests at: http://www.aai.org/About/Publications/JI/copyright.html Freely available online through http://www.jimmunol.org/content/suppl/2013/03/18/jimmunol.120226 7.DC1 Information about subscribing to The JI No Triage! Fast Publication! Rapid Reviews! 30 days* Why • • • Material Permissions Email Alerts Subscription Author Choice Supplementary The Journal of Immunology The American Association of Immunologists, Inc., 1451 Rockville Pike, Suite 650, Rockville, MD 20852 Copyright © 2013 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved. Print ISSN: 0022-1767 Online ISSN: 1550-6606. This information is current as of September 24, 2021. Published March 18, 2013, doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1202267 The Journal of Immunology Coordinated Changes in DNA Methylation in Antigen-Specific Memory CD4 T Cells Shin-ichi Hashimoto,*,†,‡ Katsumi Ogoshi,* Atsushi Sasaki,† Jun Abe,* Wei Qu,† Yoichiro Nakatani,† Budrul Ahsan,x Kenshiro Oshima,† Francis H.
    [Show full text]
  • Therapeutic Strategies in Fragile X Syndrome: Dysregulated Mglur Signaling and Beyond
    Neuropsychopharmacology REVIEWS (2012) 37, 178–195 & 2012 American College of Neuropsychopharmacology All rights reserved 0893-133X/12 ............................................................................................................................................................... REVIEW 178 www.neuropsychopharmacology.org Therapeutic Strategies in Fragile X Syndrome: Dysregulated mGluR Signaling and Beyond 1 ,2 ,1,3 Christina Gross , Elizabeth M Berry-Kravis* and Gary J Bassell* 1 2 Department of Cell Biology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA; Departments of Pediatrics, Neurology, 3 and Biochemistry, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA; Department of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is an inherited neurodevelopmental disease caused by loss of function of the fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP). In the absence of FMRP, signaling through group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors is elevated and insensitive to stimulation, which may underlie many of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of FXS. Treatment of FXS animal models with negative allosteric modulators of these receptors and preliminary clinical trials in human patients support the hypothesis that metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling is a valuable therapeutic target in FXS. However, recent research has also shown that FMRP may regulate diverse aspects of neuronal signaling downstream of several cell surface receptors, suggesting a possible new route to more direct disease-targeted therapies. Here, we summarize promising recent advances in basic research identifying and testing novel therapeutic strategies in FXS models, and evaluate their potential therapeutic benefits. We provide an overview of recent and ongoing clinical trials motivated by some of these findings, and discuss the challenges for both basic science and clinical applications in the continued development of effective disease mechanism-targeted therapies for FXS.
    [Show full text]
  • Transducin ␤-Subunit Can Interact with Multiple G-Protein ␥-Subunits to Enable Light Detection by Rod Photoreceptors
    New Research Sensory and Motor Systems Transducin ␤-Subunit Can Interact with Multiple G-Protein ␥-Subunits to Enable Light Detection by Rod Photoreceptors Paige M. Dexter,1 Ekaterina S. Lobanova,2 Stella Finkelstein,2 William J. Spencer,1 Nikolai P. Skiba,2 and Vadim Y. Arshavsky1,2 DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0144-18.2018 1Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina 27710 and 2Albert Eye Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710 Visual Overview The heterotrimeric G-protein transducin mediates visual signaling in vertebrate photoreceptor cells. Many aspects of the function of transducin were learned from knock-out mice lacking its individual subunits. Of particular interest is ␥ ␥ the knockout of its rod-specific -subunit (G 1). Two stud- ies using independently generated mice documented that this knockout results in a considerable Ͼ60-fold reduction in the light sensitivity of affected rods, but provided dif- ␣ ␣ ferent interpretations of how the remaining -subunit (G t) ␤ ␥ mediates phototransduction without its cognate G 1 1- subunit partner. One study found that the light sensitivity ␣ reduction matched a corresponding reduction in G t con- tent in the light-sensing rod outer segments and proposed ␣ ␤ that G t activation is supported by remaining G 1 asso- ciating with other G␥ subunits naturally expressed in pho- toreceptors. In contrast, the second study reported the same light sensitivity loss but a much lower, only approx- ␣ imately sixfold, reduction of G t and proposed that the light responses of these rods do not require G␤␥ at all. To resolve this controversy and elucidate the mechanism ␥ driving visual signaling in G 1 knock-out rods, we analyzed both mouse lines side by side.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulators of G-Protein Signaling and Their G Substrates
    0031-6997/11/6303-728–749$25.00 PHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEWS Vol. 63, No. 3 Copyright © 2011 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 3038/3698761 Pharmacol Rev 63:728–749, 2011 Printed in U.S.A. ASSOCIATE EDITOR: ARTHUR CHRISTOPOULOS Regulators of G-Protein Signaling and Their G␣ Substrates: Promises and Challenges in Their Use as Drug Discovery Targets Adam J. Kimple, Dustin E. Bosch, Patrick M. Gigue`re, and David P. Siderovski Department of Pharmacology, UNC Neuroscience Center, and Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina Abstract ................................................................................ 728 I. Introduction............................................................................. 729 A. Biological and pharmaceutical importance of G-protein coupled receptor signaling .......... 729 B. The classic guanine nucleotide cycle of heterotrimeric G-protein subunits .................. 729 C. Structural determinants of G-protein subunit function ................................... 730 1. G␣ subunit........................................................................ 730 2. G␤␥ dimer ........................................................................ 730 3. Structural basis for intrinsic GTP hydrolysis activity by G␣ subunits ................... 730 4. Structural features of Regulators of G-protein Signaling—the G␣ GTPase-accelerating proteins..........................................................................
    [Show full text]