No Access

Scaffold Proteins and their Roles in Human Diseases

Somsubhro Mukherjee

Mechanobiology Institute, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore

E-mail Address: som.mukherjee@nus.edu.sg

Corresponding authors.

Search for more papers by this author

and

Boon Chuan Low

Mechanobiology Institute, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore

Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore

University Scholars Programme, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore

E-mail Address: dbslowbc@nus.edu.sg

Corresponding authors.

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S2591722620400025Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

Scaffold proteins are critical regulators of important cell signaling pathways. Though scaffolds are not stringently defined in meaning, they are known to interact with numerous components of a signaling pathway, binding and bridging them into distinct and functional complexes. They control signal transduction and assist the localization of pathway components (organized in complexes) to definite regions of the cell such as the endosomes, plasma membrane, the cytoplasm, mitochondria, Golgi, and the nucleus. Years of research in this field have revealed the versatility of this class of protein and the important role it plays in maintaining the normal functions of the human body. Here, we discuss the role of several scaffold proteins which are implicated in important signaling pathways that play important roles in cardiac diseases, metabolic diseases, neurological disorders, and cancer. Their versatility and functions in human diseases make them attractive drug targets, several of which have been investigated in clinical trials. Future studies of scaffold proteins should give us an in-depth knowledge of how cell signaling works in normal and pathological conditions and would offer avenues to disrupt harmful cellular pathways to circumvent diseases.

Keywords:

References

1. M. C. Good, J. G. Zalatan and W. A. Lim, Scaffold proteins: Hubs for controlling the flow of cellular information. Science (2011) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1198701. Crossref, Google Scholar
2. C. Q. Pan, M. Sudol, M. Sheetz and B. C. Low, Modularity and functional plasticity of scaffold proteins as p(l)acemakers in cell signaling. Cellular Signalling (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2012.06.002. Crossref, Google Scholar
3. B. N. Kholodenko, Cell-signalling dynamics in time and space. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2006) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1838. Crossref, Google Scholar
4. B. N. Kholodenko, J. F. Hancock and W. Kolch, Signalling ballet in space and time. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2010) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2901. Crossref, Google Scholar
5. T. Pawson and J. D. Scott, Signaling through scaffold, anchoring, and adaptor proteins. Science (80) (1997) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.278.5346.2075. Crossref, Google Scholar
6. D. N. Dhanasekaran, K. Kashef, C. M. Lee, H. Xu and E. P. Reddy, Scaffold proteins of MAP-kinase modules. Oncogene (2007) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1210411. Crossref, Google Scholar
7. A. S. Shaw and E. L. Filbert, Scaffold proteins and immune-cell signalling. Nature Reviews Immunology (2009) https://doi.org/10.1038/nri2473. Crossref, Google Scholar
8. Y. Mugabo and G. E. Lim, Scaffold proteins: From coordinating signaling pathways to metabolic regulation. Endocrinology (2018) https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2018-00705. Crossref, Google Scholar
9. C. P. Ponting and R. R. Russell, The natural history of protein domains. Annual Review of Biophysics and Biomolecular Structure (2002) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biophys.31.082901.134314. Crossref, Google Scholar
10. G. B. Cohen, R. Ren and D. Baltimore, Modular binding domains in signal transduction proteins. Cell (1995) https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(95)90406-9. Crossref, Google Scholar
11. W. A. Lim, The modular logic of signaling proteins: Building allosteric switches from simple binding domains. Current Opinion in Structural Biology (2002) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-440X(02)00290-7. Crossref, Google Scholar
12. R. P. Bhattacharyya, A. Reményi, B. J. Yeh and W. A. Lim, Domains, motifs, and scaffolds: The role of modular interactions in the evolution and wiring of cell signaling circuits. Annual Review of Biochemistry (2006) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biochem.75.103004.142710. Crossref, Google Scholar
13. J. L. Kadrmas and M. C. Beckerle, The LIM domain: From the cytoskeleton to the nucleus. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2004) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1499. Crossref, Google Scholar
14. M. Sheng and C. Sala, PDZ domains and the organization of supramolecular complexes. Annual Review of Neuroscience (2001) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.1. Crossref, Google Scholar
15. A. Bononi et al., Protein kinases and phosphatases in the control of cell fate. Enzyme Research (2011) https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/329098. Crossref, Google Scholar
16. C. E. Turner, Paxillin and focal adhesion signalling. Nature Cell Biology (2000) https://doi.org/10.1038/35046659. Crossref, Google Scholar
17. M. W. Briggs and D. B. Sacks, IQGAP1 as signal integrator: Ca2 $+$ $+$ , calmodulin, Cdc42 and the cytoskeleton. FEBS Letters (2003) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-5793(03)00333-8. Crossref, Google Scholar
18. Z. Wei and H. T. Liu, MAPK signal pathways in the regulation of cell proliferation in mammalian cells. Cell Research (2002) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.cr.7290105. Google Scholar
19. T. Reya and H. Clevers, Wnt signalling in stem cells and cancer. Nature (2005) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03319. Crossref, Google Scholar
20. C. P. D. Wheeler-Jones, Cell signalling in the cardiovascular system: An overview. Heart (2005) https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2005.072280. Crossref, Google Scholar
21. R. G. Gourdie, S. Dimmeler and P. Kohl, Novel therapeutic strategies targeting fibroblasts and fibrosis in heart disease. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd.2016.89. Crossref, Google Scholar
22. M. P. Wymann and R. Schneiter, Lipid signalling in disease. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2008) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2335. Crossref, Google Scholar
23. R. A. Haeusler, T. E. McGraw and D. Accili, Metabolic Signalling: Biochemical and cellular properties of insulin receptor signalling. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2018) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2017.89. Crossref, Google Scholar
24. H. S. Goodridge and M. M. Harnett, Introduction to immune cell signalling. in Parasitology (2005). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031182005008115. Google Scholar
25. A. Arakelyan et al., Autoimmunity and autoinflammation: A systems view on signaling pathway dysregulation profiles. PLoS One (2017) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187572. Crossref, Google Scholar
26. P. Scheltens et al., Alzheimer’s disease. The Lancet (2016) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01124-1. Crossref, Google Scholar
27. M. A. Deture and D. W. Dickson, The neuropathological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Molecular Neurodegeneration (2019) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-019-0333-5. Crossref, Google Scholar
28. R. Sever and J. S. Brugge, Signal transduction in cancer. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a006098. Crossref, Google Scholar
29. W. Kolch, M. Halasz, M. Granovskaya and B. N. Kholodenko, The dynamic control of signal transduction networks in cancer cells. Nature Reviews Cancer (2015) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3983. Crossref, Google Scholar
30. R. Bianco, D. Melisi, F. Ciardiello and G. Tortora, Key cancer cell signal transduction pathways as therapeutic targets. Eur. J. Cancer (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2005.07.034. Crossref, Google Scholar
31. S. Gallo, A. Vitacolonna, A. Bonzano, P. Comoglio and T. Crepaldi, ERK: A key player in the pathophysiology of cardiac hypertrophy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. (2019) https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20092164. Crossref, Google Scholar
32. M. Mutlak et al., Extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) activation preserves cardiac function in pressure overload induced hypertrophy. Int. J. Cardiol. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.05.068. Crossref, Google Scholar
33. B. A. Rose, T. Force and Y. Wang, Mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling in the heart: Angels versus demons in a heart-breaking tale. Physiological Reviews (2010) https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00054.2009. Crossref, Google Scholar
34. C. P. Shen, Y. Tsimberg, C. Salvadore and E. Meller, Activation of Erk and JNK MAPK pathways by acute swim stress in rat brain regions. BMC Neurosci. (2004) https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-5-36. Crossref, Google Scholar
35. T. Arimura et al., Cardiac Ankyrin Repeat Protein Gene (ANKRD1) Mutations in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.12.082. Crossref, Google Scholar
36. R. Cinquetti et al., Transcriptional deregulation and a missense mutation define ANKRD1 as a candidate gene for total anomalous pulmonary venous return. Hum. Mutat. (2008) https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.20711. Crossref, Google Scholar
37. M. Krüger and W. A. Linke, Protein kinase-A phosphorylates titin in human heart muscle and reduces myofibrillar passive tension. J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. (2006) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10974-006-9090-5. Crossref, Google Scholar
38. Y. Wu, C. L. Ruggiero, W. A. Bauman and C. Cardozo, Ankrd1 is a transcriptional repressor for the androgen receptor that is downregulated by testosterone. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.06.079. Crossref, Google Scholar
39. J. Bogomolovas et al., Induction of Ankrd1 in dilated cardiomyopathy correlates with the heart failure progression. Biomed Res. Int. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/273936. Crossref, Google Scholar
40. L. Duboscq-Bidot et al., Mutations in the ANKRD1 gene encoding CARP are responsible for human dilated cardiomyopathy. Eur. Heart J. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehp225. Crossref, Google Scholar
41. C. Crocini et al., Impact of ANKRD1 mutations associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy on contraction parameters of engineered heart tissue. Basic Res. Cardiol. (2013) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00395-013-0349-x. Crossref, Google Scholar
42. B. Chen et al., Disruption of a GATA4/Ankrd1 signaling axis in cardiomyocytes leads to sarcomere disarray: Implications for anthracycline cardiomyopathy. PLoS One (2012) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035743. Google Scholar
43. N. Piroddi et al., Myocardial overexpression of ANKRD1 causes sinus venosus defects and progressive diastolic dysfunction. Cardiovasc. Res. (2020) https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvz291. Crossref, Google Scholar
44. L. Zhong et al., Targeted inhibition of ANKRD1 disrupts sarcomeric ERK-GATA4 signal transduction and abrogates phenylephrine-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. Cardiovasc. Res. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvv108. Crossref, Google Scholar
45. A. He et al., Dynamic GATA4 enhancers shape the chromatin landscape central to heart development and disease. Nat. Commun. (2014) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5907. Crossref, Google Scholar
46. M. Roy, Z. Li and D. B. Sacks, IQGAP1 Is a Scaffold for Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Signaling. Mol. Cell. Biol. (2005) https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.25.18.7940-7952.2005. Crossref, Google Scholar
47. J. Noritake, T. Watanabe, K. Sato, S. Wang and K. Kaibuchi, IQGAP1: A key regulator of adhesion and migration. J. Cell Sci. (2005) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.02379. Crossref, Google Scholar
48. M. Fukata et al., Rac1 and Cdc42 capture microtubules through IQGAP1 and CLIP-170. Cell (2002) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(02)00800-0. Crossref, Google Scholar
49. S. Choi et al., IQGAP1 is a novel phosphatidylinositol 4,5 bisphosphate effector in regulation of directional cell migration. EMBO J. (2013) https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2013.191. Crossref, Google Scholar
50. J. Wang, Bin, R. Sonn, Y. K. Tekietsadik, D. Samorodnitsky and M. A. Osman, IQGAP1 regulates cell proliferation through a novel CDC42-mTOR pathway. J. Cell Sci. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.044644. Crossref, Google Scholar
51. M. Sbroggiò et al., IQGAP1 regulates ERK1/2 and AKT signalling in the heart and sustains functional remodelling upon pressure overload. Cardiovasc. Res. (2011) https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvr103. Crossref, Google Scholar
52. M. Sbroggiò et al., ERK1/2 activation in heart is controlled by melusin, focal adhesion kinase and the scaffold protein IQGAP1. J. Cell Sci. (2011) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.091140. Crossref, Google Scholar
53. M. Brancaccio et al., Melusin, a muscle-specific integrin $β$ $β$ 1-interacting protein, is required to prevent cardiac failure in response to chronic pressure overload. Nat. Med. (2003) https://doi.org/10.1038/nm805. Crossref, Google Scholar
54. M. Brancaccio et al., Integrin signalling: The tug-of-war in heart hypertrophy. Cardiovascular Research (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardiores.2005.12.015. Google Scholar
55. E. D. Rosen and O. A. MacDougald, Adipocyte differentiation from the inside out. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (2006) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2066. Crossref, Google Scholar
56. H. Fu, R. R. Subramanian and S. C. Masters, 14-3-3 Proteins: Structure, function, and regulation. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology (2000) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.40.1.617. Crossref, Google Scholar
57. K. Tsuruzoe, R. Emkey, K. M. Kriauciunas, K. Ueki and C. R. Kahn, Insulin Receptor Substrate 3 (IRS-3) and IRS-4 Impair IRS-1- and IRS-2-Mediated Signaling. Mol. Cell. Biol. (2001) https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.21.1.26-38.2001. Crossref, Google Scholar
58. A. Fischer et al., Regulation of RAF activity by 14-3-3 proteins: RAF kinases associate functionally with both homo- and heterodimeric forms of 14-3-3 proteins. J. Biol. Chem. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M804795200. Crossref, Google Scholar
59. K. M. Geraghty et al., Regulation of multisite phosphorylation and 14-3-3 binding of AS160 in response to IGF-1, EGF, PMA and AICAR. Biochem. J. (2007) https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20070649. Crossref, Google Scholar
60. G. Tzivion, M. Dobson and G. Ramakrishnan, FoxO transcription factors; Regulation by AKT and 14-3-3 proteins. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta – Molecular Cell Research (2011) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamcr.2011.06.002. Crossref, Google Scholar
61. A. Aitken, 14-3-3 proteins: A historic overview. Seminars in Cancer Biology (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2006.03.005. Crossref, Google Scholar
62. G. E. Lim et al., 14-3-3 $ζ$ $ζ$ coordinates adipogenesis of visceral fat. Nat. Commun. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8671. Crossref, Google Scholar
63. G. E. Lim and J. D. Johnson, 14-3-3 $ζ$ $ζ$ : A numbers game in adipocyte function? Adipocyte (2016) https://doi.org/10.1080/21623945.2015.1120913. Crossref, Google Scholar
64. K. Pennington, T. Chan, M. Torres and J. Andersen, The dynamic and stress-adaptive signaling hub of 14-3-3: emerging mechanisms of regulation and context-dependent protein–protein interactions. Oncogene (2018) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41388-018-0348-3. Crossref, Google Scholar
65. C. E. Alvarez, On the origins of arrestin and rhodopsin. BMC Evol. Biol. (2008) https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-8-222. Crossref, Google Scholar
66. K. A. DeFea, Beta-arrestins as regulators of signal termination and transduction: How do they determine what to scaffold? Cellular Signalling (2011) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2010.10.004. Crossref, Google Scholar
67. P. A. Patel, D. G. Tilley and H. A. Rockman, Physiologic and cardiac roles of $β$ $β$ -arrestins. Journal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjmcc.2008.11.015. Crossref, Google Scholar
68. J. Dromey and K. Pfleger, G Protein Coupled Receptors as Drug Targets: The Role of $β$ $β$ -Arrestins. Endocrine, Metab. Immune Disord. Targets (2008) https://doi.org/10.2174/187153008783928352. Crossref, Google Scholar
69. B. Jones, S. R. Bloom, T. Buenaventura, A. Tomas and G. A. Rutter, Control of insulin secretion by GLP-1. Peptides (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2017.12.013. Crossref, Google Scholar
70. N. Sonoda et al., $β$ $β$ -Arrestin-1 mediates glucagon-like peptide-1 signaling to insulin secretion in cultured pancreatic $β$ $β$ cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. (2008) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710402105. Crossref, Google Scholar
71. A. R. Saltiel and C. R. Kahn, Insulin signalling and the regulation of glucose and lipid metabolism. Nature (2001) https://doi.org/10.1038/414799a. Crossref, Google Scholar
72. M. E. Doyle and J. M. Egan, Mechanisms of action of glucagon-like peptide 1 in the pancreas. Pharmacology and Therapeutics (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pharmthera.2006.11.007. Crossref, Google Scholar
73. S. P. Pydi et al., Adipocyte $β$ $β$ -arrestin-2 is essential for maintaining whole body glucose and energy homeostasis. Nat. Commun. (2019) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11003-4. Crossref, Google Scholar
74. L. Zhu et al., $β$ $β$ -Arrestin-2 is an essential regulator of pancreatic $β$ $β$ -cell function under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. Nat. Commun. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14295. Google Scholar
75. A. S. Dhillon, S. Hagan, O. Rath and W. Kolch, MAP kinase signalling pathways in cancer. Oncogene (2007) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1210421. Crossref, Google Scholar
76. E. F. Wagner and Á. R. Nebreda, Signal integration by JNK and p38 MAPK pathways in cancer development. Nature Reviews Cancer (2009) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2694. Crossref, Google Scholar
77. S. Fan, Z. Wei, H. Xu and W. Gong, Crystal structure of human synbindin reveals two conformations of longin domain. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2008.04.143. Crossref, Google Scholar
78. I. M. Ethell, K. Hagihara, Y. Miura, F. Irie and Y. Yamaguchi, Synbindin, a novel syndecan-2-binding protein in neuronal dendritic spines. J. Cell Biol. (2000) https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.151.1.53. Crossref, Google Scholar
79. X. Kong et al., Synbindin in extracellular signal-regulated protein kinase spatial regulation and gastric cancer aggressiveness. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. (2013) https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt271. Crossref, Google Scholar
80. J. Qian et al., OCT1 is a determinant of synbindin-related ERK signalling with independent prognostic significance in gastric cancer. Gut (2015) https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306584. Crossref, Google Scholar
81. M. M. McKay, D. A. Ritt and D. K. Morrison, Signaling dynamics of the KSR1 scaffold complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. (2009) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901590106. Crossref, Google Scholar
82. H. Zhang et al., Proteomic profile of KSR1-regulated signalling in response to genotoxic agents in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3443-y. Crossref, Google Scholar
83. H. Lavoie et al., MEK drives BRAF activation through allosteric control of KSR proteins. Nature (2018) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25478. Crossref, Google Scholar
84. M. M. McKay, D. A. Ritt and D. K. Morrison, RAF inhibitor-induced KSR1/B-RAF binding and its effects on ERK cascade signaling. Curr. Biol. (2011) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.02.033. Crossref, Google Scholar
85. H. R. Xing et al., Pharmacologic inactivation of kinase suppressor of ras-1 abrogates ras-mediated pancreatic cancer. Nat. Med. (2003) https://doi.org/10.1038/nm927. Crossref, Google Scholar
86. L. Zhou et al., The scaffold protein KSR1, a novel therapeutic target for the treatment of Merlin-deficient tumors. Oncogene (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2015.404. Google Scholar
87. B. Sanchez-Laorden, A. Viros and R. Marais, Mind the IQGAP. Cancer Cell (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2013.05.017. Crossref, Google Scholar
88. D. V. Guebel, U. Schmitz, O. Wolkenhauer and J. Vera, Analysis of cell adhesion during early stages of colon cancer based on an extended multi-valued logic approach. Mol. Biosyst. (2012) https://doi.org/10.1039/c2mb05277f. Crossref, Google Scholar
89. C. D. White, M. D. Brown and D. B. Sacks, IQGAPs in cancer: A family of scaffold proteins underlying tumorigenesis. FEBS Letters (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2009.05.007. Crossref, Google Scholar
90. J. Faix et al., The IQGAP-related protein DGAP1 interacts with Rac and is involved in the modulation of the F-actin cytoskeleton and control of cell motility. J. Cell Sci. (1998). Crossref, Google Scholar
91. E. Sila Ozdemir et al., Unraveling the molecular mechanism of interactions of the Rho GTPases Cdc42 and Rac1 with the scaffolding protein IQGAP2. J. Biol. Chem. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA117.001596. Google Scholar
92. T. Watanabe, S. Wang and K. Kaibuchi, IQGAPS as key regulators of actin-cytoskeleton dynamics. Cell Struct. Funct. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1247/csf.15003. Crossref, Google Scholar
93. A. J. Bardwell, L. Lagunes, R. Zebarjedi and L. Bardwell, TheWWdomain of the scaffolding protein IQGAP1 is neither necessary nor sufficient for binding to the MAPKs ERK1 and ERK2. J. Biol. Chem. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M116.767087. Crossref, Google Scholar
94. A. C. Hedman, J. M. Smith and D. B. Sacks, The biology of IQGAP proteins: Beyond the cytoskeleton. EMBO Rep. (2015) https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201439834. Crossref, Google Scholar
95. C. E. Turner, Paxillin interactions. J. Cell Sci. (2000). Crossref, Google Scholar
96. S. K. Mitra and D. D. Schlaepfer, Integrin-regulated FAK-Src signaling in normal and cancer cells. Current Opinion in Cell Biology (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2006.08.011. Crossref, Google Scholar
97. Y. L. Hu et al., FAK and paxillin dynamics at focal adhesions in the protrusions of migrating cells. Sci. Rep. (2014) https://doi.org/10.1038/srep06024. Google Scholar
98. M. C. Subauste et al., Vinculin modulation of paxillin-FAK interactions regulates ERK to control survival and motility. J. Cell Biol. (2004) https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200308011. Crossref, Google Scholar
99. S. N. Nikolopoulos and C. E. Turner, Actopaxin, a new focal adhesion protein that binds paxillin LD motifs and actin and regulates cell adhesion. J. Cell Biol. (2000) https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.151.7.1435. Crossref, Google Scholar
100. N. O. Deakin and C. E. Turner, Paxillin comes of age. J. Cell Sci. (2008) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.018044. Crossref, Google Scholar
101. Q. Feng, D. Baird, S. Yoo, M. Antonyak and R. A. Cerione, Phosphorylation of the cool-1/ $β$ $β$ -pix protein serves as a regulatory signal for the migration and invasive activity of Src-transformed cells. J. Biol. Chem. (2010) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M109.098079. Crossref, Google Scholar
102. M. C. Brown, L. A. Cary, J. S. Jamieson, J. A. Cooper and C. E. Turner, Src and FAK kinases cooperate to phosphorylate paxillin kinase linker, stimulate its focal adhesion localization, and regulate cell spreading and protrusiveness. Mol. Biol. Cell (2005) https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E05-02-0131. Crossref, Google Scholar
103. M. P. Playford and M. D. Schaller, The interplay between Src and integrins in normal and tumor biology. Oncogene (2004) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1208080. Crossref, Google Scholar
104. L. Lamorte, S. Rodrigues, V. Sangwan, C. E. Turner and M. Park, Crk associates with a multimolecular Paxillin/GIT2/ $β$ $β$ -PIX complex and promotes Rac-dependent relocalization of Paxillin to focal contacts. Mol. Biol. Cell (2003) https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E02-08-0497. Crossref, Google Scholar
105. Y. Zhao et al., Identification and functional characterization of paxillin as a target of protein tyrosine phosphatase receptor T. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. (2010) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914884107. Google Scholar
106. N. O. Deakin, J. Pignatelli and C. E. Turner, Diverse Roles for the Paxillin Family of Proteins in Cancer. Genes and Cancer (2012) https://doi.org/10.1177/1947601912458582. Crossref, Google Scholar
107. R. Salgia et al., Expression of the focal adhesion protein paxillin in lung cancer and its relation to cell motility. Oncogene (1999) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1202273. Crossref, Google Scholar
108. J. J. Toutounchian et al., Novel small molecule JP-153 targets the Src-FAK-paxillin signaling complex to inhibit VEGF-induced retinal angiogenesis. Mol. Pharmacol. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1124/mol.116.105031. Crossref, Google Scholar
109. P. K. Chaudhuri, B. C. Low and C. T. Lim, Mechanobiology of Tumor Growth. Chemical Reviews (2018) https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00042. Crossref, Google Scholar
110. C. Q. Pan and B. C. Low, Functional plasticity of the BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP Homology (BCH) domain in cell signaling and cell dynamics. FEBS Letters (2012) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2012.04.023. Crossref, Google Scholar
111. A. B. Gupta, L. E. Wee, Y. T. Zhou, M. Hortsch and B. C. Low, Cross-species analyses identify the BNIP-2 and Cdc42gap Homology (BCH) domain as a distinct functional subclass of the CRAL_TRIO/sec14 superfamily. PLoS One (2012) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033863. Google Scholar
112. A. Ravichandran and B. C. Low, SmgGDS antagonizes BPGAP1-induced Ras/ERK activation and neuritogenesis in PC12 cell differentiation. Mol. Biol. Cell 24, 145–156 (2013). Crossref, Google Scholar
113. Y. T. Zhou, L. L. Chew, S. C. Lin and B. C. Low, The BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP Homology (BCH) domain of p50RhoGAP/Cdc42GAP sequesters RhoA from inactivation by the adjacent GTPase-activating protein domain. Mol. Biol. Cell (2010) https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E09-05-0408. Crossref, Google Scholar
114. C. N. Johnstone et al., ARHGAP8 is a novel member of the RHOGAP family related to ARHGAP1/CDC42GAP/p50RHOGAP: Mutation and expression analyses in colorectal and breast cancers. Gene (2004) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2004.01.025. Crossref, Google Scholar
115. M. Pan et al., BNIP-2 retards breast cancer cell migration by coupling microtubule-mediated GEF-H1 and RhoA activation. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz1534 (2020). Crossref, Google Scholar
116. B. C. Low, K. T. Seow and G. R. Guy, The BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP homology domain of BNIP-2 mediates its homophilic association and heterophilic interaction with Cdc42GAP. J. Biol. Chem. (2000) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M004897200. Crossref, Google Scholar
117. U. J. K. Soh and B. C. Low, BNIP2 extra long inhibits RhoA and cellular transformation by Lbc RhoGEF via its BCH domain. J. Cell Sci. 121, 1739 LP– 1749 (2008). Crossref, Google Scholar
118. T. Jiang, C. Q. Pan and B. C. Low, BPGAP1 spatially integrates JNK/ERK signaling crosstalk in oncogenesis. Oncogene 36, 3178–3192 (2017). Crossref, Google Scholar
119. J. Sun et al., BNIP-H Recruits the Cholinergic Machinery to Neurite Terminals to Promote Acetylcholine Signaling and Neuritogenesis. Dev. Cell (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2015.08.006. Crossref, Google Scholar
120. Y. T. Zhou, G. R. Guy and B. C. Low, BNIP-2 induces cell elongation and membrane protrusions by interacting with Cdc42 via a unique Cdc42-binding motif within its BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP homology domain. Exp. Cell Res. (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2004.08.044. Crossref, Google Scholar
121. J. S. Kang et al., A Cdo-Bnip-2-Cdc42 signaling pathway regulates p38 $α / β$ $α / β$ MAPK activity and myogenic differentiation. J. Cell Biol. (2008) https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200801119. Crossref, Google Scholar
122. J. P. Buschdorf et al., Brain-specific BNIP-2-homology protein Caytaxin relocalises glutaminase to neurite terminals and reduces glutamate levels. J. Cell Sci. (2006) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.03061. Crossref, Google Scholar
123. Y. T. Zhou, G. R. Guy and B. C. Low, BNIP-S $α$ $α$ induces cell rounding and apoptosis by displacing p50RhoGAP and facilitating RhoA activation via its unique motifs in the BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP homology domain. Oncogene (2006) https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1209274. Crossref, Google Scholar
124. X. Shang, Y. T. Zhou and B. C. Low, Concerted Regulation of Cell Dynamics by BNIP-2 and Cdc42GAP Homology/Sec14p-like, Proline-rich and GTPase-activating Protein Domains of a Novel Rho GTPase-activating Protein, BPGAP1. J. Biol. Chem. (2003) https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M304514200. Crossref, Google Scholar
125. C. Q. Pan, Y. C. Liou and B. C. Low, Active Mek2 as a regulatory scaffold that promotes Pin1 binding to BPGAP1 to suppress BPGAP1-induced acute Erk activation and cell migration. J. Cell Sci. (2010) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.064162. Crossref, Google Scholar
126. B. L. Lua and B. C. Low, Filling the GAPs in cell dynamics control: BPGAP1 promotes cortactin translocation to the cell periphery for enhanced cell migration. in Biochemical Society Transactions (2004). https://doi.org/10.1042/BST0321110. Crossref, Google Scholar
127. B. L. Lua and B. C. Low, Activation of EGF receptor endocytosis and ERK1/2 signaling by BPGAP1 requires direct interaction with EEN/endophilin II and a functional RhoGAP domain. J. Cell Sci. (2005) https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.02383. Crossref, Google Scholar
128. A. Ravichandran and B. C. Low, SmgGDS antagonizes BPGAP1-induced Ras/ERK activation and neuritogenesis in PC12 cell differentiation. Mol. Biol. Cell (2013) https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E12-04-0300. Crossref, Google Scholar
129. E. Moisseiev and A. Loewenstein, Abicipar pegol — a novel anti-VEGF therapy with a long duration of action. Eye (Basingstoke) (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-019-0584-y. Google Scholar
130. N. Grząśko et al., The MP0250-CP201 mirror study: A phase 2 study update of MP0250 Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Relapse/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Patients Previously Exposed to Proteasome Inhibitors and Immunomodulatory Drugs. Blood (2019) https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-129827. Crossref, Google Scholar
131. Mullard, A. FDA rejects first DARPin. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 19, 501–501 (2020). Google Scholar
132. Khan, Z. M. et al. Structural basis for the action of the drug trametinib at KSR-bound MEK. Nature (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2760-4. Crossref, Google Scholar
133. Odogwu, L. et al. FDA approval summary: Dabrafenib and trametinib for the treatment of metastatic non‐small cell lung cancers harboring BRAF V600E mutations. Oncologist 23, 740–745 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
134. P. J. Bucko and J. D. Scott, Drugs that regulate local cell signaling: AKAP targeting as a therapeutic option. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 61, annurev-pharmtox-022420-112134 (2021). Crossref, Google Scholar
135. J. L. Esseltine and J. D. Scott, AKAP signaling complexes: pointing towards the next generation of therapeutic targets? Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 34, 648–655 (2013). Crossref, Google Scholar
136. R. Dummer et al., Overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib (COLUMBUS): A multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30497-2. Google Scholar