Structural basis of TRPC4 regulation by calmodulin and pharmacological agents

  1. Deivanayagabarathy Vinayagam
  2. Dennis Quentin
  3. Jing Yu-Strzelczyk
  4. Oleg Sitsel
  5. Felipe Merino
  6. Markus Stabrin
  7. Oliver Hofnagel
  8. Maolin Yu
  9. Mark W Ledeboer
  10. Georg Nagel
  11. Goran Malojcic
  12. Stefan Raunser  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Germany
  2. Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Germany
  3. Max Planck Institute for Molecular Physiology, Germany
  4. Goldfinch Bio Inc, United States

Abstract

Canonical transient receptor potential channels (TRPC) are involved in receptor-operated and/or store-operated Ca2+ signaling. Inhibition of TRPCs by small molecules was shown to be promising in treating renal diseases. In cells, the channels are regulated by calmodulin. Molecular details of both calmodulin and drug binding have remained elusive so far. Here we report structures of TRPC4 in complex with three pyridazinone-based inhibitors and calmodulin. The structures reveal that all the inhibitors bind to the same cavity of the voltage-sensing-like domain and allow us to describe how structural changes from the ligand binding site can be transmitted to the central ion-conducting pore of TRPC4. Calmodulin binds to the rib helix of TRPC4, which results in the ordering of a previously disordered region, fixing the channel in its closed conformation. This represents a novel calmodulin-induced regulatory mechanism of canonical TRP channels.

Data availability

The atomic coordinates and cryo-EM maps for TRPC4DR in complex with inhibitors, calmodulin and for TRPC4DR in LMNG are available at the Protein Data Bank (PDB) and Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB) databases, under the accession numbers PBD 7B0S and EMD-11970 (TRPC4-GFB8438), PBD 7B16 and EMD-11979 (TRPC4-GFB9289); PBD 7B05 and EMD-11957 (TRPC4-GFB8749); PBD 7B1G and EMD-11985 (TRPC4-Calmodulin) and PBD 7B0J and EMD-11968 (TRPC4-apo in LMNG).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Deivanayagabarathy Vinayagam

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Dennis Quentin

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Jing Yu-Strzelczyk

    Department of Neurophysiology, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Oleg Sitsel

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4496-7489
  5. Felipe Merino

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4166-8747
  6. Markus Stabrin

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0191-6419
  7. Oliver Hofnagel

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Maolin Yu

    Research Department, Goldfinch Bio Inc, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    Maolin Yu, The author is or was a shareholder of Goldfinch Bio..
  9. Mark W Ledeboer

    Research Department, Goldfinch Bio Inc, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    Mark W Ledeboer, The author is or was a shareholder of Goldfinch Bio..
  10. Georg Nagel

    Department of Biology, Institute for Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Biocenter, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Goran Malojcic

    Research Department, Goldfinch Bio Inc, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    Goran Malojcic, The author is or was a shareholder of Goldfinch Bio..
  12. Stefan Raunser

    Department of Structural Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Dortmund, Germany
    For correspondence
    stefan.raunser@mpi-dortmund.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9373-3016

Funding

Max-Planck-Gesellschaft

  • Stefan Raunser

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (TR240)

  • Georg Nagel

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2020, Vinayagam et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,014
    views
  • 487
    downloads
  • 51
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Deivanayagabarathy Vinayagam
  2. Dennis Quentin
  3. Jing Yu-Strzelczyk
  4. Oleg Sitsel
  5. Felipe Merino
  6. Markus Stabrin
  7. Oliver Hofnagel
  8. Maolin Yu
  9. Mark W Ledeboer
  10. Georg Nagel
  11. Goran Malojcic
  12. Stefan Raunser
(2020)
Structural basis of TRPC4 regulation by calmodulin and pharmacological agents
eLife 9:e60603.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60603

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60603

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yi-Hsuan Lin, Tae Hun Kim ... Hue Sun Chan
    Research Article

    Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) involving intrinsically disordered protein regions (IDRs) is a major physical mechanism for biological membraneless compartmentalization. The multifaceted electrostatic effects in these biomolecular condensates are exemplified here by experimental and theoretical investigations of the different salt- and ATP-dependent LLPSs of an IDR of messenger RNA-regulating protein Caprin1 and its phosphorylated variant pY-Caprin1, exhibiting, for example, reentrant behaviors in some instances but not others. Experimental data are rationalized by physical modeling using analytical theory, molecular dynamics, and polymer field-theoretic simulations, indicating that interchain ion bridges enhance LLPS of polyelectrolytes such as Caprin1 and the high valency of ATP-magnesium is a significant factor for its colocalization with the condensed phases, as similar trends are observed for other IDRs. The electrostatic nature of these features complements ATP’s involvement in π-related interactions and as an amphiphilic hydrotrope, underscoring a general role of biomolecular condensates in modulating ion concentrations and its functional ramifications.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Cristina Paissoni, Sarita Puri ... Carlo Camilloni
    Research Article

    Both immunoglobulin light-chain (LC) amyloidosis (AL) and multiple myeloma (MM) share the overproduction of a clonal LC. However, while LCs in MM remain soluble in circulation, AL LCs misfold into toxic-soluble species and amyloid fibrils that accumulate in organs, leading to distinct clinical manifestations. The significant sequence variability of LCs has hindered the understanding of the mechanisms driving LC aggregation. Nevertheless, emerging biochemical properties, including dimer stability, conformational dynamics, and proteolysis susceptibility, distinguish AL LCs from those in MM under native conditions. This study aimed to identify a2 conformational fingerprint distinguishing AL from MM LCs. Using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) under native conditions, we analyzed four AL and two MM LCs. We observed that AL LCs exhibited a slightly larger radius of gyration and greater deviations from X-ray crystallography-determined or predicted structures, reflecting enhanced conformational dynamics. SAXS data, integrated with molecular dynamics simulations, revealed a conformational ensemble where LCs adopt multiple states, with variable and constant domains either bent or straight. AL LCs displayed a distinct, low-populated, straight conformation (termed H state), which maximized solvent accessibility at the interface between constant and variable domains. Hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry experimentally validated this H state. These findings reconcile diverse experimental observations and provide a precise structural target for future drug design efforts.