Tracy Marie Handel

Chemokine receptors are G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) that drive cell migration through interactions with chemokines. Even in the absence of ligand, chemokine receptors spend a portion of their time in active conformational states, rendering them constitutively active. Here, we identified and characterized two mutations in the third intracellular loop of atypical chemokine receptor 3 (ACKR3) that inhibited or promoted its constitutive activity as assessed by ligand-independent β-arrestin recruitment and receptor internalization. Single-molecule fluorescence resonance energy transfer experiments showed that these effects on activity corresponded to changes in the conformational equilibrium of the receptor, which also affected the kinetics of chemokine binding. The potencies of chemokines and small-molecule agonists for β-arrestin recruitment were differentially affected by the mutations, showing that the effects of an altered receptor conformational equilibrium on receptor activation were ligand dependent. Together, our findings reveal an inside-out allosteric mechanism for ACKR3 in which intracellular, conformation-altering mutants affect the ability of extracellular ligands to bind to and activate the receptor.

Immune-suppressive tumor microenvironments (TMEs) limit the impact of checkpoint blockade in many cancers by restricting the infiltration and activation of CD8 ⁺ T, CD4 ⁺ T, and NK cells. Utilizing murine models of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, we demonstrated that intratumoral (IT) delivery of CXCL10 drives tumor elimination and inhibits recurrence not only by recruiting these cells but by enhancing their antitumoral functions and stunting angiogenesis. CD8 ⁺ T cells also display enhanced activation, tumor-antigen specificity, and decreased T cell exhaustion. Despite administration of CXCL10 into tumors, CD8 ⁺ and CD4 ⁺ T cells show enhanced presence and proliferation in tumor-draining lymph nodes (TdLNs), consistent with T cell priming and trafficking between tumors and TdLNs. Together, the data suggest that CXCL10 promotes a mutually reinforcing feedback loop that reprograms the TME toward an immunologically responsive antitumoral state. Combining IT-CXCL10 and anti-PD-1 further increased tumor clearance, indicating that CXCL10-driven reprogramming of the TME lowers barriers to effective checkpoint blockade.

The atypical receptor ACKR3 works together with the canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 to drive cell migration along gradients of their shared agonist CXCL12. CXCR4 promotes chemotaxis by activating canonical G protein pathways and recruiting β-arrestins. ACKR3 indirectly regulates CXCR4-mediated chemotaxis by scavenging CXCL12. Unlike canonical chemokine receptors, ACKR3 does not couple to G proteins and instead is 100% biased towards β-arrestins. CXCR4 activation by CXCL12 is exquisitely sensitive to subtle changes in both receptor and ligand. By contrast, ACKR3 is activation-prone: it recruits β-arrestins in response to many ligands and is much less sensitive to mutations, suggesting distinct activation mechanisms compared to CXCR4. To explore the basis of these differences, we compared the dynamics of ACKR3 and CXCR4 complexes with chemokines using molecular dynamic (MD) simulations. Ten-microsecond atomistic MD simulations revealed that CXCR4 adopts a stable active state when bound to WT CXCL12 but transitions to an inactive state when in complex with the antagonist variant, [P2G]CXCL12. By comparison, ACKR3 exhibits a variable transmembrane (TM) 6 state distribution and persistently “active” TM7 when complexed with either WT CXCL12 or [P2G]CXCL12, the latter retaining substantial agonistic activity at ACKR3. We further identified ligand-mediated residue interaction networks in the TM core that regulate TM6 and TM7 activation in CXCR4 but are absent or disrupted in ACKR3, resulting in less constrained receptor dynamics. These findings were validated by BRET-based assays with CXCL12 and ACKR3 mutants. Together, the data suggests that the unique conformational dynamics of ACKR3 govern its activation propensity, its ligand promiscuity, and its atypical effector coupling.

Migration of leukocytes in the context of immune homeostasis or inflammatory diseases is regulated by activation of chemokine receptors by chemokine ligands. To elucidate how these interactions give rise to cell migration, we mapped the chemokine-stimulated signal transduction network in monocytic THP-1 cells. Global phosphoproteomics revealed 630 time-resolved changes in phosphorylated proteins downstream of the chemokine receptor CCR2. We used the “PHONEMeS” network modeling algorithm to generate the most parsimonious signal transduction network consistent with the observed protein phosphorylation data. The CCR2 signaling network is highly divergent, acting via multiple branches to regulate proteins required for cell migration. We validated this model using kinase inhibitors targeting different branches of the network and successfully blocked chemokine-stimulated cell migration. Thus, chemotaxis is an emergent property resulting from an integrated cellular response to divergent signaling pathways. This paradigm suggests that physiological regulation or pharmacological blockade of chemokine-driven inflammation could potentially be achieved by inhibiting any of the divergent pathways within the network.

The G protein-coupled chemokine receptor CCR9 plays a major role in inflammatory bowel disease and is implicated in cancer. Despite its therapeutic relevance, the mechanism by which CCR9 is activated by its endogenous chemokine CCL25 remains poorly understood. Here, we combine structural modeling with multimodal pharmacological analysis of CCR9 mutants to map the CCR9–CCL25 interface and delineate key determinants of binding, G protein versus arrestin signaling, and constitutive activity. We show that unlike other chemokines which drive receptor activation through their N-termini, CCL25 activates CCR9 via a distinct region, its 30s loop. Supporting this non-canonical mechanism, CCR9 signaling tolerates alanine mutations in the CCL25 N-terminus but is strongly affected by 30s loop modifications. Engineered N-terminally modified CCL25 analogs remain full agonists, consistent with signaling determinants lying outside the N-terminus. This non-canonical activation signature provides insights for CCR9 drug discovery and may inform structure-based design for other chemokine receptors.

The distinct functional roles of chemokines CCL27 and CCL28 in epithelial immunity of skin and mucosal tissues, respectively, are coordinated by their shared receptor, CCR10 and the CCL28-specific receptor, CCR3. In this study, we conducted structure-function studies focused on the N-termini of these two chemokines to identify determinants of receptor activation, internalization and binding specificity. Deletion of two N-terminal residues of CCL27 resulted in a CCR10 antagonist, highlighting the critical roles of these residues in driving receptor pharmacology. Extension with a Phe produced a superagonist by occupying an available subpocket in the receptor binding site. Swapping the N-terminus of CCL28 onto the CCL27 globular domain (NT28-CCL27) also resulted in a superagonist of CCR10, but the opposite swap (NT27-CCL28) showed equivalent or reduced activity compared to WT CCL28, indicating that the CCL28 N-terminus is a stronger driver of CCR10 signaling. The effect of these and other mutations were rationalized by AlphaFold models of the CCR10 complexes. AlphaFold modeling also revealed that the reduced size of the binding pocket, and more basic nature of the N-terminus and extracellular loops of CCR3 compared to CCR10, contribute to its specificity for CCL28 while CCR10 accommodates both ligands. The overall basic nature of CCL28 also contributes to its high affinity for glycosaminoglycans, which is likely important for its retention in mucosal tissues. These data illustrate the modular compositions of these chemokines that has evolved to achieve overlapping but non-redundant functions, and the exploitation of this modular nature to produce engineered chemokines for probing or targeting CCR10 in disease contexts.

Unique phosphorylation 'barcodes' installed in different regions of an active seven-transmembrane receptor by different G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) have been proposed to promote distinct cellular outcomes¹, but it is unclear whether or how arrestins differentially engage these barcodes. Here, to address this, we developed an antigen-binding fragment (Fab7) that recognizes both active arrestin2 (β-arrestin1) and arrestin3 (β-arrestin2) without interacting with bound receptor polypeptides. We used Fab7 to determine the structures of both arrestins in complex with atypical chemokine receptor 3 (ACKR3) phosphorylated in different regions of its C-terminal tail by either GRK2 or GRK5 (ref. ²). The GRK2-phosphorylated ACKR3 resulted in more heterogeneous 'tail-mode' assemblies, whereas phosphorylation by GRK5 resulted in more rigid 'ACKR3-adjacent' assemblies. Unexpectedly, the finger loops of both arrestins engaged the micelle surface rather than the receptor intracellular pocket, with arrestin3 being more dynamic, partly because of its lack of a membrane-anchoring motif. Thus, both the region of the barcode and the arrestin isoform involved can alter the structure and dynamics of GPCR-arrestin complexes, providing a possible mechanistic basis for unique downstream cellular effects, such as the efficiency of chemokine scavenging and the robustness of arrestin binding in ACKR3.

The immune-suppressive nature of the tumor microenvironment (TME) has limited the impact of immune checkpoint blockade in many cancers, often by restricting the infiltration and activation of anti-tumoral CD8+ T, CD4+ T, and NK cells. Here, we utilized murine models of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and demonstrated that intratumoral (IT) delivery of CXCL10 drives tumor elimination and inhibits recurrence. CD8+ T cells recruited to tumors display enhanced activation, increased tumor antigen specificity, and decreased markers of T cell exhaustion, indicating that CXCL10 not only directs cell migration, but also enhances T cell effector functions. Despite delivery of CXCL10 into tumors, CD8+ and CD4+ T cells also show enhanced presence and proliferation in tumor-draining lymph nodes (TdLNs), consistent with antigen presentation and trafficking of these cells between tumors and TdLNs. CXCL10 also stunts lymph- and hem-angiogenesis within the TME, which likely contributes to its antitumoral effects. Finally, enhanced tumor clearance was observed by combining IT CXCL10 and anti-PD-1. Together, these findings provide the rationale for the clinical evaluation of CXCL10 as a strategy to enhance the efficacy of immunotherapy. Summary CXCL10 suppresses tumor growth and promotes immune memory by recruiting and activating T and NK cells into the tumor microenvironment, promoting tumor-specific antigen recognition and effector functions, slowing T cell exhaustion, and inhibiting angiogenesis. CXCL10 directly and indirectly mobilizes an immune cell network that together supports an anti-tumoral microenvironment.

The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.