Analysis reveals MRCKα negatively regulates GEF-H1 activity and fibrotic gene expression in tubular cells, highlighting its role in kidney fibrosis.
Pro-fibrotic mediators derived from tubular cells have a central role in he development of kidney fibrosis. Our previous studies revealed that GEF-H1 (ARHGEF2)/RhoA signalling is a crucial regulator of tubular mediator release. Fibrotic stimuli elevate GEF-H1 expression and activity, but the molecular mechanisms controlling tubular GEF-H1 activity during fibrotic reprogramming are incompletely explored. Here we used immunoprecipitation and proximity ligation assay to show that GEF-H1 interacts with Myotonic Dystrophy Kinase-related Cdc42-binding kinase (MRCK)α in porcine and human tubular cells. Using GEF-H1 mutants we mapped the interacting domain to the N-terminus of GEF-H1 and showed the requirement for an intact DH domain. MRCKα silencing elevated GEF-H1 activity, induced GEF-H1-dependent RhoA activation and augmented stress fibre formation and phospho-cofilin levels. Interestingly, TNFα or TGFβ1 addition rapidly increased binding between GEF-H1 and MRCKα, suggesting a negative feedback role. Indeed, the effect of TNFα or TGFβ1 on GEF-H1 activation was augmented in the absence of MRCKα. Using an mRNA array, we found that MRCKα depletion elevated basal and TGFβ1-induced expression of key fibrosis-related genes. MRCKα silencing also promoted nuclear translocation of the profibrotic transcriptional co-activator Myocardin- related Transcription Factor (MRTF). Depletion of MRTF-A and B prevented the increase in ACTA-2 (smooth muscle actin) and transgelin (TAGLN), key markers of fibrotic reprogramming, induced by MRCKα-silencing and TGFβ1 treatment. Taken together, we identified MRCKα as a new suppressor of GEF-H1/RhoA/MRTF signaling and tubular fibrotic gene expression. Cytokines augment binding between the two proteins, thereby mitigating GEF-H1 activation in a negative feedback cycle. These effects could be crucial for preventing RhoA overactivation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Theivakadadcham et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: