Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Baseline activity of α1-AMPK is higher than its α2 counterpart and is more sensitive to synergistic allosteric activation by metabolites and small molecules. α2 complexes however, show a greater response to energy stress (i.e., AMP production) and appear to be better substrates for LKB1 and mTORC1 upstream. These differences may explain to some extent why in certain cancers α1 is a tumour promoter and α2 a suppressor. β1-AMPK activity is toggled by a 'myristoyl-switch' mechanism that likely precedes a series of signalling events culminating in phosphorylation by ULK1 and sensitisation to small molecules or endogenous ligands like fatty acids. β2-AMPK, not entirely beholden to this myristoyl-switch, has a greater propensity to infiltrate the nucleus, which we suspect contributes to its oncogenicity in some cancers. Last, the unique N-terminal extensions of the γ2 and γ3 isoforms are major regulatory domains of AMPK. mTORC1 may directly phosphorylate this region in γ2, although whether this is inhibitory, especially in disease states, is unclear. Conversely, γ3 complexes might be preferentially regulated by mTORC1 in response to physical exercise.
Smiles et al. (Wed,) studied this question.