Highlights d Paracrine glucagon actions are required for maintenance of normal insulin secretion d Glucagon signaling in islets involves activation of glucagon and GLP-1 receptors d Beta cell GLP-1 receptors are activated by local glucagon in a paracrine manner

Biased signaling or functional selectivity occurs when a 7TM-receptor preferentially activates one of several available pathways. It can be divided into three distinct forms: ligand bias, receptor bias, and tissue or cell bias, where it is mediated by different ligands (on the same receptor), different receptors (with the same ligand), or different tissues or cells (for the same ligand–receptor pair). Most often biased signaling is differentiated into G protein-dependent and β-arrestin-dependent signaling. Yet, it may also cover signaling differences within these groups. Moreover, it may not be absolute, i.e., full versus no activation. Here we discuss biased signaling in the chemokine system, including the structural basis for biased signaling in chemokine receptors, as well as in class A 7TM receptors in general. This includes overall helical movements and the contributions of micro-switches based on recently published 7TM crystals and molecular dynamics studies. All three forms of biased signaling are abundant in the chemokine system. This challenges our understanding of “classic” redundancy inevitably ascribed to this system, where multiple chemokines bind to the same receptor and where a single chemokine may bind to several receptors – in both cases with the same functional outcome. The ubiquitous biased signaling confers a hitherto unknown specificity to the chemokine system with a complex interaction pattern that is better described as promiscuous with context-defined roles and different functional outcomes in a ligand-, receptor-, or cell/tissue-defined manner. As the low number of successful drug development plans implies, there are great difficulties in targeting chemokine receptors; in particular with regard to receptor antagonists as anti-inflammatory drugs. Un-defined and putative non-selective targeting of the complete cellular signaling system could be the underlying cause of lack of success. Therefore, biased ligands could be the solution.

ObjectiveBile acids (BAs) facilitate fat absorption and may play a role in glucose and metabolism regulation, stimulating the secretion of gut hormones. The relative importance and mechanisms involved in BA-stimulated secretion of appetite and metabolism regulating hormones from the gut and pancreas is not well described and was the purpose of this study.MethodsThe effects of bile acids on the secretion of gut and pancreatic hormones was studied in rats and compared to the most well described nutritional secretagogue: glucose. The molecular mechanisms that underlie the secretion was studied by isolated perfused rat and mouse small intestine and pancreas preparations and supported by immunohistochemistry, expression analysis, and pharmacological studies.ResultsBile acids robustly stimulate secretion of not only the incretin hormones, glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), but also glucagon and insulin in vivo, to levels comparable to those resulting from glucose stimulation. The mechanisms of GLP-1, neurotensin, and peptide YY (PYY) secretion was secondary to intestinal absorption and depended on activation of basolateral membrane Takeda G-protein receptor 5 (TGR5) receptors on the L-cells in the following order of potency: Lithocholic acid (LCA) >Deoxycholicacid (DCA)>Chenodeoxycholicacid (CDCA)> Cholic acid (CA). Thus BAs did not stimulate secretion of GLP-1 and PYY from perfused small intestine in TGR5 KO mice but stimulated robust responses in wild type littermates. TGR5 is not expressed on α-cells or β-cells, and BAs had no direct effects on glucagon or insulin secretion from the perfused pancreas.ConclusionBAs should be considered not only as fat emulsifiers but also as important regulators of appetite- and metabolism-regulating hormones by activation of basolateral intestinal TGR5.

The CCR7 ligands CCL19 and CCL21 are increasingly recognized as functionally different (biased). Using mature human dendritic cells (DCs), we show that CCL19 is more potent than CCL21 in inducing 3D chemotaxis. Intriguingly, CCL21 induces prolonged and more efficient ERK1/2 activation compared with CCL19 and a C-terminal truncated (tailless) CCL21 in DCs. In contrast, tailless-CCL21 displays increased potency in DC chemotaxis compared with native CCL21. Using a CCL21-specific antibody, we show that CCL21, but not tailless-CCL21, accumulates at the cell surface. In addition, removal of sialic acid from the cell surface by neuraminidase treatment impairs ERK1/2 activation by CCL21, but not by CCL19 or tailless-CCL21. Using standard laboratory cell lines, we observe low potency of both CCL21 and tailless-CCL21 in G protein activation and β-arrestin recruitment compared with CCL19, indicating that the tail itself does not improve receptor interaction. Chemokines interact with their receptors in a stepwise manner with ultimate docking of their N-terminus into the main binding pocket. Employing site-directed mutagenesis we identify residues in this pocket of selective CCL21 importance. We also identify a molecular switch in the top of TM7 important for keeping CCR7 in an inactive conformation (Tyr312), as introduction of the chemokine receptor-conserved Glu (or Ala) induces high constitutive activity. Summarized, we show that the interaction of the tail of CCL21 with polysialic acid is needed for strong ERK signaling, whereas it impairs CCL21-mediated chemotaxis and has no impact on receptor docking consistent with the current model of chemokine:receptor interaction. This indicates that future selective pharmacological targeting of CCL19 versus CCL21 should focus on a differential targeting of the main receptor pocket, while selective targeting of tailless-CCL21 versus CCL21 and CCL19 requires targeting of the glycosaminoglycan (GAG) interaction.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer is feasible and the results suggest that a major part of the patients can be spared adjuvant chemotherapy. Validation in a randomized trial is warranted.