Differential specificity of endocrine FGF19 and FGF21 to FGFR1 and FGFR4 in complex with KLB

Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, France
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.23). 03/2012; 7(3):e33870. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033870
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recent studies suggest that betaKlotho (KLB) and endocrine FGF19 and FGF21 redirect FGFR signaling to regulation of metabolic homeostasis and suppression of obesity and diabetes. However, the identity of the predominant metabolic tissue in which a major FGFR-KLB resides that critically mediates the differential actions and metabolism effects of FGF19 and FGF21 remain unclear.
We determined the receptor and tissue specificity of FGF21 in comparison to FGF19 by using direct, sensitive and quantitative binding kinetics, and downstream signal transduction and expression of early response gene upon administration of FGF19 and FGF21 in mice. We found that FGF21 binds FGFR1 with much higher affinity than FGFR4 in presence of KLB; while FGF19 binds both FGFR1 and FGFR4 in presence of KLB with comparable affinity. The interaction of FGF21 with FGFR4-KLB is very weak even at high concentration and could be negligible at physiological concentration. Both FGF19 and FGF21 but not FGF1 exhibit binding affinity to KLB. The binding of FGF1 is dependent on where FGFRs are present. Both FGF19 and FGF21 are unable to displace the FGF1 binding, and conversely FGF1 cannot displace FGF19 and FGF21 binding. These results indicate that KLB is an indispensable mediator for the binding of FGF19 and FGF21 to FGFRs that is not required for FGF1. Although FGF19 can predominantly activate the responses of the liver and to a less extent the adipose tissue, FGF21 can do so significantly only in the adipose tissue and adipocytes. Among several metabolic and endocrine tissues, the response of adipose tissue to FGF21 is predominant, and can be blunted by the ablation of KLB or FGFR1.
Our results indicate that unlike FGF19, FGF21 is unable to bind FGFR4-KLB complex with affinity comparable to FGFR1-KLB, and therefore, at physiological concentration less likely to directly and significantly target the liver where FGFR4-KLB predominantly resides. However, both FGF21 and FGF19 have the potential to activate responses of primarily the adipose tissue where FGFR1-KLB resides.

Download full-text


Available from: Chengliu Jin, Aug 25, 2015
  • Source
    • "(FR1KO) mice that have a conditional deletion of FGFR1 in adipose tissue (Yang et al., 2012). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) is a multifaceted metabolic regulator which has several potential applications in the treatment of metabolic disease. When administered in vivo, FGF21 exhibits a plethora of actions, modulating metabolic homeostasis in a diverse manner. However, the mechanism and site of action underlying these effects were, until recently, entirely uncertain. Using mouse models lacking either FGF receptor isoform 1 (FGFR1) or βKlotho (KLB), a transmembrane co factor critical for FGF21 action, our group and others psought to determine the tissue upon which FGF21 acts and the receptor complex responsible for mediating it's in vivo efficacy. Importantly, when KLB was ablated from all tissues mice were completely refractory to FGF21 action. Therefore, to determine the precise tissue of action we utilized mice with tissue specific deletion of FGFR1 in either adipose tissue or neurons, respectively. Surprisingly, in animals with neuronal FGFR1 loss there was no change in the metabolic activity of FGF21, suggesting a lack of central FGF21 action in the pharmacologic setting. In contrast, we found dramatic attenuation of metabolic efficacy in mice with adipose-specific FGFR1 ablation following either acute or chronic dosing with recombinant FGF21. Furthermore, several recent studies have suggested that the metabolic effects of FGF21 may occur via modulation of adipokines such as adiponectin and leptin. Importantly, the action of FGF21 via adipose tissue results in alterations in both secretion as well as systemic sensitivity to these factors. Therefore, while FGF21 itself does not seem to directly act on the CNS, leptin and other endocrine mediators may serve as intermediary facilitators of FGF21's secondary central effects downstream of an initial and direct engagement of FGF21 receptor complex in adipose tissue. Further studies are required to delineate the precise mechanistic basis underlying the interplay between peripheral and central FGF21 modes of action in both the physiological and pharmacological settings.
    Journal of Animal Science 01/2014; 92(2). DOI:10.2527/jas.2013-7076 · 1.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Here we evaluate the requirement of FGFR1 in adipose tissue for mediating both signaling and metabolic actions of FGF21 and FGF19 action in vivo. We utilized FGFR1 lox/lox AP2 CRE mice with a conditional deletion of FGFR1 in fat tissue (FR1KO) which exhibit a significant reduction in FGFR1 expression in adipose tissue ([6] and Supplemental Figure 2A), and subjected these animals to a panel of acute and chronic administration with recombinant human FGF21 and FGF19. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: FGF21 is a multifunctional metabolic regulator. The co-factor βKlotho (KLB) allows FGF21 to signal via FGF receptors. Given the widespread nature of FGFR expression and KLB presence in several organs, it remains unclear which tissue/FGFR isoform determine FGF21 action. Here we show that deletion of FGFR1 in fat (FR1KO) leads to a complete ablation of FGF21 stimulated transcriptional activity in this tissue. Furthermore, FR1KO mice showed no FGF21-mediated lowering of plasma glucose, insulin and triglycerides, altered serum levels of adipokines, no increase in energy expenditure, but preserved reductions in serum/liver FFAs as compared to wild type mice. Of importance, the anti-glycaemic actions of FGF19 were fully evident in FR1KO mice implying that FGF19 functions in a FGFR1/adipose independent manner. Taken together, our findings reveal the existence of an adipose FGFR1 driven axis of cross-tissue communication which defines several aspects of FGF21 biology and delineates mechanistic distinctions between FGF21 and FGF19.
    01/2012; 2(1):31-7. DOI:10.1016/j.molmet.2012.08.007
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fibroblast growth factor 21 is a member of endocrine FGFs subfamily, along with FGF19 and FGF23. It is emerging as a novel regulator with beneficial effects on a variety of metabolic parameters, including glucose and lipid control. FGF21 activity depends on membrane protein betaKlotho that physically complexes with various FGF receptors, thus conferring them the ability to bind FGF21 and activate downstream signaling pathways. FGF21, like other FGFs, folds to a beta-trefoil-like core region, with disordered N- and C-termini. In order to investigate their role in the activity of FGF21, we have constructed a series of deletion mutants and tested them for their ability to (1) bind betaKlotho, analyzed by surface plasmon resonance spectroscopy (2) signal through MAPK phosphorylation and inhibit apoptosis in 3T3-L1/betaKlotho fibroblasts (3) stimulate GLUT1 mRNA upregulation and glucose uptake in 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Binding studies with betaKlotho revealed that the interaction with the co-receptor involves the C-terminus, as progressive removal of amino acids from the carboxy end decreased affinity for betaKlotho. By contrast, removal of up to 17 amino acids from the N-terminus had no effect on the interaction with betaKlotho. Terminal deletions had greater effect on function, as deletions of six amino acids from the amino-terminus and only four from the carboxy-terminus each significantly impacted activity (10-fold). Of the extreme terminal truncations, with no detectable activity, DeltaN17 acted as competitive antagonist while DeltaC20 did not. Our structure/function studies show that the C-terminus is important for betaKlotho interaction whereas the N-terminus likely interacts directly with FGF receptors.
    Journal of Cellular Physiology 05/2009; 219(2):227-34. DOI:10.1002/jcp.21675 · 3.87 Impact Factor
Show more