Health and disease are directly related to the RTK-RAS-MAPK signalling cascade. After more than three decades of intensive research, understanding its spatiotemporal features is afflicted with major conceptual shortcomings. Here we consider how the compilation of a vast array of accessory proteins may resolve some parts of the puzzles in this field, as they safeguard the strength, efficiency and specificity of signal transduction. Targeting such modulators, rather than the constituent components of the RTK-RAS-MAPK signalling cascade may attenuate rather than inhibit disease-relevant signalling pathways.

Stress-activated MAP kinase-interacting protein 1 (SIN1) is a central member of the mTORC2 complex that contains an N-terminal domain (NTD), a conserved region in the middle (CRIM), a RAS-binding domain (RBD), and a pleckstrin homology domain. Recent studies provided valuable structural and functional insights into the interactions of SIN1 and the RAS-binding domain of RAS proteins. However, the mechanism for a reciprocal interaction of the RBD-PH tandem with RAS proteins and the membrane as an upstream event to spatiotemporal mTORC2 regulation is not clear. The biochemical assays in this study led to the following results: 1) all classical RAS paralogs, including HRAS, KRAS4A, KRAS4B, and NRAS, can bind to SIN1-RBD in biophysical and SIN1 full length (FL) in cell biology experiments; 2) the SIN1-PH domain modulates interactions with various types of membrane phosphoinositides and constantly maintains a pool of SIN1 at the membrane; and 3) a KRAS4A-dependent decrease in membrane binding of the SIN1-RBD-PH tandem was observed, suggesting for the first time a mechanistic influence of KRAS4A on SIN1 membrane association. Our study strengthens the current mechanistic understanding of SIN1-RAS interaction and suggests membrane interaction as a key event in the control of mTORC2-dependent and mTORC2-independent SIN1 function.

The IQ motif-containing GTPase-activating protein (IQGAP) family composes of three highly-related and evolutionarily conserved paralogs (IQGAP1, IQGAP2 and IQGAP3), which fine tune as scaffolding proteins numerous fundamental cellular processes. IQGAP1 is described as an effector of CDC42, although its effector function yet re-mains unclear. Biophysical, biochemical and molecular dynamic simulation studies have proposed that IQGAP RASGAP-related domains (GRDs) bind to the switch regions and the insert helix of CDC42 in a GTP-dependent manner. Our kinetic and equilibrium studies have shown that IQGAP1 GRD binds, in contrast to its C-terminal 794 amino acids (called C794), CDC42 in a nucleotide-independent manner indicating a binding outside the switch regions. To resolve this discrepancy and move beyond the one-sided view of GRD, we carried out affinity measurements and a systematic mutational analysis of the interfacing residues between GRD and CDC42 based on the crystal structure of the IQGAP2 GRD-CDC42Q61L GTP complex. We determined a 100-fold lower affinity of the GRD1 of IQGAP1 and of GRD2 of IQGAP2 for CDC42 mGppNHp in comparison to C794/C795 proteins. Moreover, partial and major mutation of CDC42 switch regions substantially affected C794/C795 binding but only a little GRD1 and remarkably not at all the GRD2 binding. However, we clearly showed that GRD2 contributes to the overall affinity of C795 by using a 11 amino acid mutated GRD variant. Furthermore, the GRD1 binding to the CDC42 was abolished using specific point mutations within the insert helix of CDC42 clearly supporting the notion that CDC42 binding site(s) of IQGAP GRD lies outside the switch regions among others in the insert helix. Collectively, this study provides further evidence for a mechanistic framework model that is based on a multi-step binding process, in which IQGAP GRD might act as a ‘scaffolding domain’ by binding CDC42 irrespective of its nucleotide-bound forms, followed by other IQGAP domains downstream of GRD that act as an effector domain and is in charge for a GTP-dependent interaction with CDC42.