Program in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
J Cell Biol. 2018 Jan 2;217(1):397-412. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201701169. Epub 2017 Nov 9.
Why do integrins differ in basal activity, and how does affinity for soluble ligand correlate with cellular adhesiveness? We show that basal conformational equilibrium set points for integrin αβ are cell type specific and differ from integrin αβ when the two integrins are coexpressed on the same cell. Although αβ is easier to activate, its high-affinity state binds vascular cell adhesion molecule and fibronectin 100- to 1,000-fold more weakly than αβ binds fibronectin. Furthermore, the difference in affinity between the high- and low-affinity states is more compressed in αβ (600- to 800-fold) than in αβ (4,000- to 6,000-fold). αβ basal conformational equilibria differ among three cell types, define affinity for soluble ligand and readiness for priming, and may reflect differences in interactions with intracellular adaptors but do not predict cellular adhesiveness for immobilized ligand. The measurements here provide a necessary framework for understanding integrin activation in intact cells, including activation of integrin adhesiveness by application of tensile force by the cytoskeleton, across ligand-integrin-adaptor complexes.
整合素的基础活性为何存在差异,以及其对可溶性配体的亲和力与细胞黏附性之间有何关联?我们发现,整合素 αβ 的基础构象平衡设定点具有细胞类型特异性,并且当这两种整合素在同一细胞上共表达时,与整合素 αβ 的设定点不同。虽然 αβ 更容易被激活,但它的高亲和力状态与血管细胞黏附分子和纤连蛋白的结合能力比 αβ 与纤连蛋白的结合能力弱 100 至 1000 倍。此外,在 αβ 中,高亲和力状态和低亲和力状态之间的亲和力差异更为压缩(600 至 800 倍),而在 αβ 中则更为压缩(4000 至 6000 倍)。αβ 的基础构象平衡在三种细胞类型中存在差异,决定了对可溶性配体的亲和力和准备状态,可能反映了与细胞内衔接蛋白相互作用的差异,但不能预测固定化配体的细胞黏附性。此处的测量结果为理解完整细胞中的整合素激活提供了必要的框架,包括细胞骨架施加张力时整合素黏附性的激活,以及跨越配体-整合素-衔接蛋白复合物。