Integrative structural biology reveals unique regulatory mechanisms of P-Rex2, highlighting its divergence from P-Rex1.
Abstract Rho guanine-nucleotide exchange factors (RhoGEFs) activate small GTPases to drive cytoskeletal rearrangement, cell motility, and proliferation. The phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP₃)-dependent Rac exchanger (P-Rex) subfamily of RhoGEFs includes P-Rex1 and P-Rex2 which, when misregulated, contribute to cancer progression and metastasis. P-Rex activity is controlled by accessory domains that maintain the protein in a cytosolic, autoinhibited state until activated by the lipid PIP₃ and G protein βγ subunits. While P-Rex1 autoinhibition has been structurally and biochemically characterized, P-Rex2 has remained largely unexplored. Furthermore, despite high sequence similarity and domain conservation, P-Rex homologs differ in substrate specificity and regulatory interactions, and the molecular basis for these divergences is unknown. Here, we have taken an integrative structural biology approach to investigate these gaps. Using cryo-EM, we determined the first structure of full-length P-Rex2 to moderate resolution, revealing that, while the overall structure closely resembles that of P-Rex1, there is a substantial repositioning of the N-terminal module relative to the C-terminal core. This may play a key role in precluding the intramolecular interactions between the N- and C-terminal domains that are observed in autoinhibited P-Rex1. Hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry revealed that, unlike P-Rex1, P-Rex2 dynamics are unaffected by IP₄, the headgroup of PIP₃. SEC-SAXS data support that the N-terminal module itself is less dynamic, and biochemical assays show that P-Rex2 may be differently regulated by autoinhibition, likely through a mechanism divergent from P-Rex1. These findings uncover unique features in the molecular mechanisms of P-Rex2 regulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anderson et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: