Key result
Molecular dynamics simulations show cation-π interactions between S4 and S2 residues prevent VSD gating-pore leaks.
Why the study?
Voltage sensor domain gating charges are targeted by pathological mutations, motivating investigation into how specific NaV1.2 mutations identified across distinct clinical phenotypes cause differential gating pore currents.
Cation-π and hydrophobic interactions are the primary structural mechanisms preventing gating-pore current leaks in NaV1.2 channels, offering insights into the pathophysiology of related channelopathies.
Gating charge mutations may generate NaV1.2 gating pore currents in patients; leaves open therapeutic targeting pending functional validation.
Voltage Sensor Domains (VSDs) are integral and common regions within voltage-gated ion channels that play a crucial role in cellular signaling and excitability. It has four transmembrane segments (S1-S4) per domain. The transmembrane segment S4 contains positively charged amino acid residues at every third position, which serve as the channel's gating charges. Over the last decade, it has been shown that these gating charges are the target of many pathological mutations. This study investigates three gating charge mutations in Domain I of the NaV1.2 channel (R220G, R223I, R223Q) identified in patients with distinct clinical phenotypes. The three mutations showed differential gating-pore current amplitudes with distinct voltage dependence. To elucidate the molecular basis for the differential Igp observed among these mutants, we performed microsecond-scale molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and a comprehensive analysis of the state-dependent interaction network within VSDI across WT and mutant conformational states. The results showed that cation-π interactions between the S4 gating charges and the hydrophobic residue in S2 are the main forces that prevent VSD from leaking gating-pore current. Hydrophobic interactions represent the second line of defense against VSD leaking, preventing gating-pore formation by maintaining structural integrity across different conformations. Salt-bridge interactions and hydrogen bonds are important stabilizing forces; however, within the voltage-sensing domain, their contribution appears to be less significant than that of cation–π and hydrophobic interactions. Predicting and identifying gating pore currents as a potential shared pathophysiology across diverse clinical presentations may guide the design of targeted therapeutic strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eltokhi et al. (2026) studied NaV1.2 mutations. NaV1.2 mutations (R220G, R223I, R223Q) vs. Wild-type (WT) was evaluated on Gating-pore current amplitudes and state-dependent interaction network. Molecular dynamics simulations showed that cation-π interactions between S4 gating charges and S2 hydrophobic residues are the main forces preventing VSD from leaking gating-pore current.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: