TGF-β Antagonists: Same Knot, but Different Hold

In this issue of Structure, Nolan and colleagues present the structure of BMP antagonist, PRDC, which adopts a head-to-tail dimer with distinct structure and inhibitory mechanism compared to other dimeric antagonists of the TGF-β superfamily, such as noggin

Biological activity differences between TGF-β1 and TGF-β3 correlate with differences in the rigidity and arrangement of their component monomers

[Image: see text] TGF-β1, -β2, and -β3 are small, secreted signaling proteins. They share 71–80% sequence identity and signal through the same receptors, yet the isoform-specific null mice have distinctive phenotypes and are inviable. The replacement of the coding sequence of TGF-β1 with TGF-β3 and TGF-β3 with TGF-β1 led to only partial rescue of the mutant phenotypes, suggesting that intrinsic differences between them contribute to the requirement of each in vivo. Here, we investigated whether the previously reported differences in the flexibility of the interfacial helix and arrangement of monomers was responsible for the differences in activity by generating two chimeric proteins in which residues 54–75 in the homodimer interface were swapped. Structural analysis of these using NMR and functional analysis using a dermal fibroblast migration assay showed that swapping the interfacial region swapped both the conformational preferences and activity. Conformational and activity differences were also observed between TGF-β3 and a variant with four helix-stabilizing residues from TGF-β1, suggesting that the observed changes were due to increased helical stability and the altered conformation, as proposed. Surface plasmon resonance analysis showed that TGF-β1, TGF-β3, and variants bound the type II signaling receptor, TβRII, nearly identically, but had small differences in the dissociation rate constant for recruitment of the type I signaling receptor, TβRI. However, the latter did not correlate with conformational preference or activity. Hence, the difference in activity arises from differences in their conformations, not their manner of receptor binding, suggesting that a matrix protein that differentially binds them might determine their distinct activities

Structural basis for potency differences between GDF8 and GDF11.

BACKGROUND: Growth/differentiation factor 8 (GDF8) and GDF11 are two highly similar members of the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) family. While GDF8 has been recognized as a negative regulator of muscle growth and differentiation, there are conflicting studies on the function of GDF11 and whether GDF11 has beneficial effects on age-related dysfunction. To address whether GDF8 and GDF11 are functionally identical, we compared their signaling and structural properties. RESULTS: Here we show that, despite their high similarity, GDF11 is a more potent activator of SMAD2/3 and signals more effectively through the type I activin-like receptor kinase receptors ALK4/5/7 than GDF8. Resolution of the GDF11:FS288 complex, apo-GDF8, and apo-GDF11 crystal structures reveals unique properties of both ligands, specifically in the type I receptor binding site. Lastly, substitution of GDF11 residues into GDF8 confers enhanced activity to GDF8. CONCLUSIONS: These studies identify distinctive structural features of GDF11 that enhance its potency, relative to GDF8; however, the biological consequences of these differences remain to be determined

CD44 acts as a co-receptor for cell-specific enhancement of signaling and regulatory T cell induction by TGM1, a parasite TGF-β mimic

Long-lived parasites evade host immunity through highly evolved molecular strategies. The murine intestinal helminth, Heligmosomoides polygyrus, down-modulates the host immune system through release of an immunosuppressive TGF-β mimic, TGM1, which is a divergent member of the CCP (Sushi) protein family. TGM1 comprises 5 domains, of which domains 1-3 (D1/2/3) bind mammalian TGF-β receptors, acting on T cells to induce Foxp3+ regulatory T cells; however, the roles of domains 4 and 5 (D4/5) remain unknown. We noted that truncated TGM1, lacking D4/5, showed reduced potency. Combination of D1/2/3 and D4/5 as separate proteins did not alter potency, suggesting that a physical linkage is required and that these domains do not deliver an independent signal. Coprecipitation from cells treated with biotinylated D4/5, followed by mass spectrometry, identified the cell surface protein CD44 as a coreceptor for TGM1. Both full-length and D4/5 bound strongly to a range of primary cells and cell lines, to a greater degree than D1/2/3 alone, although some cell lines did not respond to TGM1. Ectopic expression of CD44 in nonresponding cells conferred responsiveness, while genetic depletion of CD44 abolished enhancement by D4/5 and ablated the ability of full-length TGM1 to bind to cell surfaces. Moreover, CD44-deficient T cells showed attenuated induction of Foxp3 by full-length TGM1, to levels similar to those induced by D1/2/3. Hence, a parasite protein known to bind two host cytokine receptor subunits has evolved a third receptor specificity, which serves to raise the avidity and cell type–specific potency of TGF-β signaling in mammalian cells

TGFβ + small extracellular vesicles from head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cells reprogram macrophages towards a pro‐angiogenic phenotype

Transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) is a major component of tumor-derived small extracellular vesicles (TEX) in cancer patients. Mechanisms utilized by TGFβ+ TEX to promote tumor growth and pro-tumor activities in the tumor microenvironment (TME) are largely unknown. TEX produced by head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cell lines carried TGFβ and angiogenesis-promoting proteins. TGFβ+ TEX stimulated macrophage chemotaxis without a notable M1/M2 phenotype shift and reprogrammed primary human macrophages to a pro-angiogenic phenotype characterized by the upregulation of pro-angiogenic factors and functions. In a murine basement membrane extract plug model, TGFβ+ TEX promoted macrophage infiltration and vascularization (p < 0.001), which was blocked by using the TGFβ ligand trap mRER (p < 0.001). TGFβ+ TEX injected into mice undergoing the 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxide (4-NQO)-driven oral carcinogenesis promoted tumor angiogenesis (p < 0.05), infiltration of M2-like macrophages in the TME (p < 0.05) and ultimately tumor progression (p < 0.05). Inhibition of TGFβ signaling in TEX with mRER ameliorated these pro-tumor activities. Silencing of TGFβ emerges as a critical step in suppressing pro-angiogenic functions of TEX in HNSCC