Mode of Binding of the Cyclic Agonist Peptide TC14012 to CXCR7: Identification of Receptor and Compound Determinants

• Published in: Biochemistry (Easton) 2015-02, Vol.54 (7), p.1505-1515
• Main Authors: Montpas, Nicolas, Cabana, Jérôme, St-Onge, Geneviève, Gravel, Stéphanie, Morin, Geneviève, Kuroyanagi, Tomoko, Lavigne, Pierre, Fujii, Nobutaka, Oishi, Shinya, Heveker, Nikolaus
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Amino Acid Sequence; HEK293 Cells; Humans; Models, Molecular; Molecular Sequence Data; Oligopeptides - chemistry; Oligopeptides - pharmacology; Receptors, CXCR - agonists; Receptors, CXCR - chemistry; Receptors, CXCR - metabolism; Receptors, CXCR4 - antagonists & inhibitors
• ISSN: 0006-2960; 1520-4995
• DOI: 10.1021/bi501526s

The chemokine receptor CXCR7 is an atypical CXCL12 receptor that, as opposed to the classical CXCL12 receptor CXCR4, signals preferentially via the β-arrestin pathway and does not mediate chemotaxis. We previously reported that the cyclic peptide TC14012, a potent CXCR4 antagonist, also engaged CXCR7, albeit with lower potency. Surprisingly, the compound activated the CXCR7–arrestin pathway. The reason underlying the opposite effects of TC14012 on CXCR4 and CXCR7, and the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7, remained unclear. The mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR4 is known from cocrystallization of its analogue CVX15 with CXCR4. We here report the the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7 by combining the use of compound analogues, receptor mutants, and molecular modeling. We find that the mode of binding of TC14012 to CXCR7 is indeed similar to that of CVX15 to CXCR4, with compound positions Arg2 and Arg14 engaging CXCR7 key residues D1794.60 (on the tip of transmembrane domain 4) and D2756.58 (on the tip of transmembrane domain 6), respectively. Interestingly, the TC14012 parent compound T140 is not a CXCR7 agonist, because of conformational constraints in its pharmacophore, which in TC14012 are relieved through C-terminal amidation. However, an engineered salt bridge between the CXCR7 ECL2 substitution R197D and compound residue Arg1 permitted T140 agonism by repositioning the compound in the binding pocket. In conclusion, our results show that the opposite effect of TC14012 on CXCR4 and CXCR7 is not explained by different binding modes. Rather, engagement of the interface between transmembrane domains and extracellular loops readily triggers CXCR7, but not CXCR4, activation.