Transgenic Studies of Cardiac Adrenergic Receptor Regulation

Transcription

1 /01/ $3.00 THE JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY AND EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS Vol. 299, No. 1 Copyright 2001 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics / JPET 299:1 5, 2001 Printed in U.S.A. Perspectives in Pharmacology Transgenic Studies of Cardiac Adrenergic Receptor Regulation ANDREA D. ECKHART and WALTER J. KOCH Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina Received February 28, 2001; accepted May 10, 2001 This paper is available online at ABSTRACT An accumulation of recent data on genetically engineered mouse models suggests that results from studies done in vitro are not necessarily duplicated in vivo. The genetic manipulation of the adrenergic receptor (AR) signaling system in the heart has afforded us the opportunity to not only study the physiological impact of AR signaling manipulation but also to examine how the various components interact with one another in vivo. In particular, although members of the G protein-coupled receptor kinase family do not exhibit substrate selectivity when overexpressed in cell culture, in vivo selectivity is apparent when examined in the cardiovascular system of genetically Regulation of the cardiovascular system is under tight control in order to establish and maintain homeostasis. G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is an essential component of this regulation. Adrenergic receptors (ARs) are a member of the superfamily of GPCRs that bind epinephrine and norepinephrine, thereby mediating their intracellular effects. Within the AR family, there are three main subfamilies, the 1, 2, and ARs. Each of these subfamilies comprises three subtypes. The 1 AR subfamily is made up of 1A, 1B, and 1C ; the 2 ARs comprise 2A, 2B, and 2C ; and the AR subtypes include 1, 2, and 3. The signaling complexity does not reside solely in the large number of transmembrane-spanning receptor subtypes, as each receptor is coupled to distinct heterotrimeric G proteins that activate a multitude of second messengers upon agonist occupancy (Koch et al., 2000). In addition, regulation of signaling through the ARs is desensitized by a family of GPCR kinases (GRKs) that phosphorylate the receptor when it is in the agonist-bound conformation (Lefkowitz, 1998). It is apparent that the study of cardiovascular AR regulation is complex, and for this reason, many of the initial studies to delineate the pathways were completed in vitro using either cell lines or primary cell culture. However, more recent data suggest engineered mice. Additionally, transgenic expression of peptide inhibitors of signaling represents a powerful tool to examine specific targets in order to determine their contribution to a physiologic phenotype following stimulation. Finally, in vivo manipulation of the AR system has provided a broader understanding of the role that various G protein-coupled receptors play in situations where multiple members contribute to a phenotype. Thus, although in vitro studies allow for a more defined environment in which to study the signaling mediated by various receptors, it is essential to verify these findings in vivo to confirm or refute in vitro results. that in vitro situations do not necessarily duplicate in vivo interactions; therefore, in vivo studies are critical to understand the physiological and pathological significance of adrenergic receptor regulation (Eckhart et al., 2000; Gainetdinov et al., 2000). Use of Transgenic Models to Delineate in Vivo GRK Selectivity The obviousness for the need to study GPCR specificity in vivo is evident when examining the properties of GRKs. To date, seven members of the GRK family, GRK1 7, have been identified (Gainetdinov et al., 2000). Of the seven members of the GRK family, GRK2, GRK3, GRK5, and GRK6 have been found in the cardiovascular system, although GRK2, otherwise known as the -adrenergic receptor kinase 1 ( ARK1), GRK3, and GRK5 are the most abundant forms (Feldman et al., 1995; Koch et al., 2000). The GRKs have a tri-domain structure. The central catalytic domain has homology to other kinases such as the camp-dependent protein kinase A. This central domain is flanked by amino-terminal and carboxyl-terminal domains, both of which contain elements involved in the regulation of GRK activity (Inglese et al., 1993; ABBREVIATIONS: GPCR, G protein-coupled receptor; GRK, GPCR kinases; AR, adrenergic receptor; PLC, phospholipase C; DAG, diacylglycerol; MAP kinase, mitogen-activated protein kinase; GqI, inhibitor of Gq; ARK, -adrenergic receptor kinase; ARKct, carboxyl-terminal portion of ARK; HEK, human embryonic kidney; MHC, -myosin heavy chain; PLB, phospholamban; TAC, transverse aortic constriction. 1

2 2 Eckhart and Koch Palczewski, 1997). Whereas GRK5 binds phospholipids through a poorly defined carboxyl terminal polybasic domain and is normally associated with the membrane, GRK2 and GRK3 reside in the cytoplasm. Upon agonist binding to the appropriate GPCR, GRK2 and/or GRK3 translocate to the membrane via association of the carboxyl-terminal portion that contains a pleckstrin homology domain and which can interact specifically with the membrane-bound -subunits of activated G proteins (Inglese et al., 1995). Interestingly, although GRK2 and GRK3 share 85% identity across their entire sequence, they share a more limited 52% identity within this carboxyl-terminal G binding domain (Koch et al., 1993; Daaka et al., 1997). Therefore, although these kinases share a common endpoint of GPCR phosphorylation, the disparity between them suggests that there are differences in their selectivity, which can hypothetically occur in their membrane targeting in response to different G pools. In vitro studies have hinted at the need to study selectivity not only in a cell-specific way but also in tissue- and even species-specific manners, and this is particularly apparent when studying GRK phosphorylation of the 1B AR. Initial examination of GRK selectivity against activated 1B ARs was performed in vitro using fairly generic fibroblast-like cell lines, including COS-7, HEK293, and DDT1-MF2 (Diviani et al., 1996). The 1B AR is coupled to the heterotrimeric G protein, Gq. Activation of the 1B AR results in phospholipase C (PLC) activation by G q. PLC produces diacylglycerol (DAG) that activates protein kinase C and inositol 1,4,5- trisphosphate that results in Ca 2 accumulation. Overexpression of either the GRK2 or GRK3 in COS-7 and HEK293 cells increased agonist-induced phosphorylation of transiently transfected 1B ARs and promoted desensitization of the receptor-mediated stimulation of PLC activation (Diviani et al., 1996). Therefore, there did not appear to be any GRK specificity between these homologous GRKs. Interestingly, purified bovine GRK2 was not capable of phosphorylating endogenous 1B ARs purified from DDT1-MF2 cells (Diviani et al., 1996). Moreover, it was also found that stable overexpression of GRK2 in rat FRTL-5 cells was not able to desensitize inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate accumulation due to stimulation of endogenous 1B ARs (Iacovelli et al., 1999). In addition, it was also seen in the COS-7 and HEK293 cells that there were species differences between using rat and bovine GRK3 to transfect into the cells. Therefore, although both GRK2 and GRK3 are equally capable of phosphorylating 1B ARs in vitro, even within the context of cell culture, some GRK properties, perhaps post-translational modification, compartmentalization, and/or conformation of the protein, are apparently important in determining protein-protein interaction and kinase activity. Thus, this illustrates clearly that to understand GPCR signaling within the cardiovascular system, it was essential to study GRK specificity in vivo in the heart. To study GRK specificity of the 1B AR in vivo we took advantage of transgenic mouse models (Eckhart et al., 2000). Transgenic mice have been created with cardiac overexpression of either a constitutively active mutant of the 1B AR (Milano et al., 1994b) or the wild-type 1B AR using the cardiac-specific -myosin heavy chain ( MHC) promoter (Akhter et al., 1997). In addition, mice with cardiac-targeted overexpression of GRK2 (Koch et al., 1995), GRK3 (Iaccarino et al., 1998), and GRK5 (Rockman et al., 1996) were all available. We bred the various transgenic mice to create double transgenic, hybrid mice. Thus, we had overexpression of both the 1B AR and the various GRKs, which provided unique and powerful models to examine cardiac-specific in vivo selectivity. Cardiac GRK2 overexpression, at both low and high levels, was unable to inhibit 1B AR-mediated hypertrophy, DAG content, ventricular ANF re-expression, and mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase activation (Eckhart et al., 2000). These in vivo results were similar to the findings in cell culture that noted that GRK2 overexpression did not affect endogenous 1B AR signaling, but they contrasted with the findings that GRK2 overexpression inhibited overexpressed 1B AR-mediated signaling. Importantly, GRK3 completely attenuated all of the in vivo 1B AR signaling parameters (Eckhart et al., 2000). GRK5 had variable effects in vivo and was capable of inhibiting 1B AR-mediated hypertrophy, ventricular ANF re-expression, and MAP kinase signaling but not DAG content (Eckhart et al., 2000). Therefore, these in vivo studies illustrate that there is specificity among GRK2, GRK3, and GRK5 in desensitizing 1B AR signaling in the heart and that the GRKs play distinct roles in the normal regulation of myocardial signaling and function. Moreover, these results indicate that the relevant GRK for 1B AR desensitization in the heart appears to be GRK3. Other in vivo studies have also shown selective GRK selectivity in the heart. Although GRK2 overexpression was capable of inhibiting both AR-mediated and angiotensin II receptor-mediated stimulation of cardiac function (Koch et al., 1995), GRK5 overexpression chronically uncoupled myocardial ARs but not angiotensin II receptors (Rockman et al., 1996). In vivo cardiac GRK3 overexpression had no effect on AR or angiotensin II signaling but inhibited myocardial thrombin-mediated MAP kinase stimulation (Iaccarino et al., 1998). The lack of AR desensitization in GRK3-overexpressing mice was surprising; however, it illustrates that GRK2 and GRK3 are not isozymes but distinct GRKs that act on independent sets of GPCR substrates in vivo. Therefore, in vivo in the heart, GRK2 phosphorylates ARs and angiotensin II receptors, GRK3 is selective for the 1B AR and thrombin receptors, and GRK5 phosphorylates ARs. Importantly, these in vivo studies have allowed us to discern selective preferences for the GRKs in the absence of specific chemical antagonists. Use of Transgenic Mice to Delineate Differences in Cardiac AR Signaling Because of the similarity in sequence within the adrenergic receptor subfamilies, it also has been challenging to distinguish distinct signaling pathways and physiological consequences of the cardiac 1 AR and 2 ARs using pharmacological methods. In addition, acquisition of the data for the in vivo cardiac 1 AR and 2 AR pathways is essential because it provides us with the ability to better address treatments for cardiovascular diseases in which there is altered GPCR signaling. For example, in heart failure, there is an impairment of the myocardial AR system such that there is a decrease in total ARs, a parallel decrease in agonist-stimulated adenylyl cyclase activity, and an even greater decrease in agonistmediated inotropy (Bristow et al., 1982; Brodde, 1993; Ungerer et al., 1993). Both 1 AR and 2 ARs are expressed in the

3 Transgenic Studies of Cardiac Adrenergic Receptor Regulation 3 heart of most mammalian species with 1 ARs being the most abundant subtype expressed at levels close to 75% of the total AR population and the receptor subtype that decreases during heart failure (Brodde, 1993). Both 1 AR and 2 ARs couple to adenylyl cyclase in the heart resulting in positive inotropy mediated by camp and increased intracellular calcium (Bristow et al., 1989), although recently cell studies have revealed that 2 ARs can also couple to G i, an inhibitor of adenylyl cyclase that is important for AR-mediated MAP kinase activation (Koch et al., 1993, 1994; Daaka et al., 1997; Xiao et al., 1999; Zou et al., 1999). In addition, 1 AR stimulation has been linked to induction of apoptosis, or programmed cell death, whereas 2 AR stimulation has no effect or may be protective (Lefkowitz et al., 2000; Zhu et al., 2001). Therefore, although both receptors are present in the cardiac myocyte and mediate inotropic effects, it appears that 1 AR and 2 AR signaling is fundamentally different, and studies on transgenic mice have allowed us to begin to discern the differences in signaling between the AR subtypes. Recent studies in transgenic mice with cardiac overexpression of ARs have provided a more thorough appreciation of the signaling complexity. Mice with cardiac-specific overexpression of the 2 ARs at lower levels of overexpression (30 50-fold) to levels greater than 100-fold over endogenous myocardial AR expression have biochemically and physiologically enhanced cardiac function which at nonstimulated baseline levels is equal to or greater than in vivo function of nontransgenic littermate control mice with maximum doses of the -agonist isoproterenol (Milano et al., 1994a; Turki et al., 1996; Liggett et al., 2000). Interestingly, there is no additional contractility response as measured by left ventricular contractility in response to isoproterenol in the 2 AR-overexpressing mice (Milano et al., 1994a), and this is probably due to a marked increase in spontaneously isomerized receptors present in the active conformation (Koch et al., 2000). Importantly, mice with 60- and 100-fold overexpression of 2 ARs have enhanced heart rates and contractility from birth (Koch et al., 2000). The 60-fold overexpressing mice show minimal pathology with age, although the 100-fold overexpressing mice had significant pathology by 1 year (Koch et al., 2000). Mice with greater than 350-fold 2 AR overexpression displayed aggressive cardiomyopathy (Liggett et al., 2000). Therefore, even within the in vivo setting, it is essential to not overwhelm the signaling elements within the organ, thus decreasing the selectivity of interaction. It is difficult to interpret this 2 AR-induced cardiomyopathy, with 350-fold overexpression, because there may be potential for any protein, including benign proteins, overexpressed using transgenic technology to produce nonphysiologic effects (Huang et al., 2000). As an interesting sideline to AR overexpression, transgenic mice with ventricular-targeted adenylyl cyclase V overexpression displayed increased heart rates and fractional shortening as assessed by echocardiography, although there was no response of in vivo hemodynamics (heart rate or contractility) to isoproterenol infusion, suggesting that the levels of adenylyl cyclase do not constrain AR signaling in the cardiomyocyte (Tepe et al., 1999; Ostrom et al., 2000). Additionally, several downstream targets of AR-mediated phosphorylation have also been manipulated and shown to be important to AR signaling. Phospholamban (PLB) is one such critical AR substrate, in which ablation of PLB is associated with attenuation of the contractile responses to AR stimulation in the mouse heart. This attenuation of isoproterenol-mediated increases in contractility of the PLBknockout hearts is not due to alterations in the AR signal transduction pathway or the degree of phosphorylation of other cardiac regulatory phosphoproteins in myofibrils and the sarcolemma (Kiss et al., 1997). Therefore, a multitude of components act in concert to increase the complexity of interpretation of AR signaling. To add further to the complexity, differences in 1 AR versus 2 AR signaling in vivo have recently been documented in transgenic mouse models. Interestingly, whereas an approximately 100-fold increase in 2 ARs appears to be well tolerated, cardiac-targeted 1 AR overexpression at only 5 to 15 times endogenous AR levels causes dilated cardiomyopathy and premature death (Engelhardt et al., 1999; Bisognano et al., 2000). These results mimic what others have found in cell culture (Communal et al., 1999; Zaugg et al., 2000). With this very modest overexpression, these mice present significant early ventricular remodeling, including fibrosis (Engelhardt et al., 1999). Transgenic mice with myocardial-targeted G s overexpression also develop cardiac pathology (Iwase et al., 1996), indicating a similarity to 1 AR but not 2 AR overexpression (Koch et al., 2000). Thus, 2 AR overexpression offers increased inotropy without the apparent deleterious effects on the heart seen with overexpression of 1 AR or G s, and these models may provide insight into novel therapeutic strategies for enhancing 2 AR signaling but not 1 AR signaling during compromised heart function. As noted above, these specific differences in pathophysiology seen in these different mice may be due to the apparent 1 AR versus 2 AR differences in stimulation of apoptosis and/or specific G protein coupling. Gene Knockout Strategies in the Mouse to Study AR Function Intricacies in the distinction between 1 AR and 2 AR signaling have also been examined in mice with gene-targeted deletion of 1 AR or 2 ARs (Rohrer, 1998; Chruscinski et al., 1999). When isolated cardiac muscle from 1 AR knockout mice is stimulated with isoproterenol, inotropic and chronotropic responses are not observed (Rohrer, 1998). Disruption of the 2 AR gene does not have severe implications for cardiac physiology. Consequences are only observed during exercise. This is probably because 2 ARs are the major subtype mediating vasodilation in the vasculature, and loss of these receptors would disrupt vasoregulation and energy metabolism during increased catecholamine release (i.e., exercise) (Chruscinski et al., 1999). Cardiac function is certainly dependent on vascular resistance, and because the 2 ARs are the major subtype in the vascular system, drawing conclusions regarding cardiac 2 AR disruption difficult is difficult. Recently, a Cre-LoxP technique has been devised that allows for site-specific gene deletion. Mice are generated with targeted insertion of loxp (locus of crossing over) recognition sites for the cre (causes recombination) recombinase enzyme that recognizes these sites and mediates excision of the sequence between the recognition sites (Sauer, 1998). The targeted gene with flanking loxp sites is referred to as the floxed locus. The floxed gene is present in all cells of the body throughout development. The loxp sites are placed such that expression of the floxed gene is unaffected. Tissue-specific

4 4 Eckhart and Koch targeted deletion is achieved by expression of cre in a tissuespecific manner, such as using the -MHC promoter. Cre expression will mediate excision of the floxed sequence only in those cells in which cre is expressed and the gene of interest will remain and be functional in all non cre-expressing cells. This cre/lox technique will be particularly powerful for examining the cardiac implications of 2 AR disruption in absence of the vascular effects, and further conclusions will be able to be made as to the distinction in the cardiac signaling of these two AR subtypes. This also will be a powerful strategy to further investigate the role of GRKs in cardiovascular regulation (see below). Inhibition of GRK2 in the Heart Has Therapeutic Potential As noted above, gene disruption is not always a straightforward or viable technique to study signaling implications and this has been demonstrated in GRK2 knockout mice (Jaber et al., 1996). GRK2 gene ablation leads to embryonic death with severe cardiac malformations (Jaber et al., 1996). Therefore, to study the inhibition of GRK2 activity in the heart, alternative strategies had to be used. The cre/lox strategy described above is certainly a worthwhile strategy; however, another interesting approach that has been used successfully is the technique of signaling interruption via the use of peptide inhibitors expressed in a tissue-specific manner in transgenic mice. This technique has been used to inhibit the activity of GRK2. Since GRK2 activity is elevated in heart failure and is responsible for the lack of AR responsiveness in a number of animal models and human heart failure (Koch et al., 2000), it is of interest to lower GRK2 activity in the heart to observe the physiologic consequences through expression of the last 194-amino acid, pleckstrinhomology domain-containing portion of the GRK2 ( ARKct) in the heart. This GRK2 (or ARK1) activity can be inhibited via competition for binding to G released following GPCR stimulation and blockade of GRK2 membrane translocation (Koch et al., 1994, 1995). Mice expressing the ARKct in their myocardium have enhanced left ventricular contractility at baseline and an augmented response to isoproterenol administration (Koch et al., 1995). In addition, breeding this ARKct mouse with a mouse model of heart failure that has disruption of the muscle lim protein rescued this mouse model as demonstrated by restored fractional shortening, normalized systolic, and diastolic hemodynamic function, as well as normalized responsiveness to -agonism (Rockman et al., 1998). The use of this peptide inhibitor strategy in vivo illustrates the devastating impact of elevated GRK2 levels in the setting of heart failure and indicates that GRK2 inhibition is a novel therapeutic strategy for heart failure (Koch et al., 2000). In addition, in the absence of chemical inhibitors of GRK2 and the lethality of complete GRK2 ablation, it provides a broader understanding of the importance of minimizing the activity of this enzyme to restore AR signaling and normalize cardiac function. Consequences of Specific Inhibition of Myocardial Gq-Mediated Signaling Like the ARKct, a peptide inhibitor strategy has been used to study the role of class-specific G protein signaling in the heart (Akhter et al., 1998). It has been well documented in vitro that activation of Gq signaling, through receptors including the 1 ARs, angiotensin II, and endothelin receptors, leads to hypertrophy via a number of mechanisms. In vitro, these mechanisms include MAP kinase activation and calcium signaling; however, it was not clear whether this was also the case in vivo. Studies in vivo using Gq-coupled receptor agonists did result in cardiac hypertrophy; however, because these agents exert potent vasoconstrictive effects, it is impossible to definitively assess the role of cardiac Gq-coupled signaling using this approach. To circumvent this, a peptide inhibitor specific for inhibiting Gq signaling was targeted to the hearts of transgenic mice with the MHC promoter (Akhter et al., 1998). This peptide consisted of the last 54 amino acids of G q (GqI) and represents the carboxylterminal portion of the G q that interacts with the activated Gq-coupled receptor. This peptide can selectively block Gqcoupled signaling, and when it was introduced into the hearts of transgenic mice, it significantly attenuated the ventricular hypertrophy response induced by transverse aortic constriction (TAC) and pressure overload (Akhter et al., 1998). When TAC was applied, the GqI transgenic mice developed significantly less left ventricular hypertrophy at any given pressure load as compared with that of nontransgenic littermate control mice, demonstrating that Gq signaling is crucial for TAC-induced in vivo ventricular hypertrophy (Akhter et al., 1998). Thus, this strategy demonstrated the importance of cardiac Gq-signaling in vivo in isolation of any vascular effects. These data also suggest that class-specific G protein inhibition offers potentially significant advantages over single receptor antagonists, especially in conditions where multiple hormones or neurotransmitters may be involved, such as in hypertension and myocardial hypertrophy (Koch et al., 2000). Conclusions and Future Directions Studies using cardiac-specific gene targeting of molecules have provided us with a greater understanding of GPCR signaling in vivo. Transgenic mice are powerful models because they allow for tissue-specific modification of various aspects of the signaling cascade. They have helped us appreciate that although there is much sequence similarity among the various AR subfamilies, specific subtypes play very distinct roles. This includes the specific activity of the GPCRdesensitizing GRKs. GRKs phosphorylate and desensitize distinct subtypes and are undoubtedly regulated differently with respect to expression and distribution. The 1 AR and 2 AR possess unique functional consequences, although they both can signal through adenylyl cyclase. Finally, as reviewed above, peptide inhibitor expression makes it possible to discern the tissue-specific impact of cardiac-specific signaling inhibition in the setting of genetic or induced cardiac pathology. The cardiovascular system is complicated and multifactorial with common elements in both the cardiac and vascular component. The function and regulation of both cardiac and vascular systems are dependent on each other; therefore, transgenic animals provide us with excellent models with which to discern in vivo GPCR signaling distinctions between these two tissues. Currently, studies in transgenic mice have primarily used cardiac targeting utilizing the MHC pro-

5 Transgenic Studies of Cardiac Adrenergic Receptor Regulation 5 moter, but vascular smooth muscle promoters can also be utilized to study the role of AR signaling and GRK selectivity in the vasculature. Importantly, studies in cardiac transgenic mouse models have demonstrated the potential for GRK2 inhibition as a novel therapeutic strategy for improving the function of the failing heart, and GRK2 inhibitors may be a future new class of pharmacologic agonists (Koch et al., 2000). Finally, class-specific Gq inhibition may also represent a novel strategy limiting pathological cardiac hypertrophy and may replace multiple Gq-coupled receptor antagonist therapy. References Akhter SA, Luttrell LM, Rockman HA, Iaccarino G, Lefkowitz RJ, and Koch WJ (1998) Targeting the receptor-gq interface to inhibit in vivo pressure overload myocardial hypertrophy. Science (Wash DC) 280: Akhter SA, Milano CA, Shotwell KF, Cho MC, Rockman HA, Lefkowitz RJ, and Koch WJ (1997) Transgenic mice with cardiac overexpression of 1B -adrenergic receptors. In vivo 1 -adrenergic receptor-mediated regulation of -adrenergic signaling. J Biol Chem 272: Bisognano JD, Weinberger HD, Bohlmeyer TJ, Pende A, Raynolds MV, Sastravaha A, Roden R, Asano K, Blaxall BC, Wu SC, et al. (2000) Myocardial-directed overexpression of the human 1 -adrenergic receptor in transgenic mice. J Mol Cell Cardiol 32: Bristow MR, Ginsburg R, Minobe W, Cubicciotti RS, Sageman WS, Lurie K, Billingham ME, Harrison DC, and Stinson EB (1982) Decreased catecholamine sensitivity and -adrenergic receptor density in failing human hearts. N Engl J Med 307: Bristow MR, Hershberger RE, Port JD, and Rasmussen R (1989) 1 and 2 adrenergic receptor mediated adenylyl cyclase stimulation in nonfailing and failing human ventricular myocardium. Mol Pharmacol 35: Brodde OE (1993) Beta-adrenoceptors in cardiac disease. Pharmacol Ther 60: Chruscinski AJ, Rohrer DK, Schauble E, Desai KH, Bernstein D, and Kobilka BK (1999) Targeted disruption of the 2 adrenergic receptor gene. J Biol Chem 274: Communal C, Singh K, Sawyer DB, and Colucci WS (1999) Opposing effects of 1 - and 2 -adrenergic receptors on cardiac myocyte apoptosis. Role of a pertussis toxin-sensitive G protein. Circulation 100: Daaka Y, Luttrell LM, and Lefkowitz RJ (1997) Switching of the coupling of the 2 -adrenergic receptor to different G proteins by protein kinase A. Nature (Lond) 390: Diviani D, Lattion AL, Larbi N, Kunapuli P, Pronin A, Benovic JL, and Cottecchia S (1996) Effect of different G protein-coupled receptor kinases on phosphorylation and desensitization of the 1B -adrenergic receptor. J Biol Chem 271: Eckhart AD, Duncan SJ, Penn RB, Benovic JL, Lefkowitz RJ, and Koch WJ (2000) Hybrid transgenic mice reveal in vivo specificity of G protein-coupled receptor kinases in the heart. Circ Res 86: Engelhardt S, Hein L, Wiesmann F, and Lohse MJ (1999) Progressive hypertrophy and heart failure in 1 -adrenergic receptor transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: Feldman RD, Tan CM, and Chorazyczewski J (1995) G-Protein alterations in hypertension and aging. Hypertension 26: Gainetdinov RR, Premont RT, Caron MG, and Lefkowitz RJ (2000) Reply: receptor specificity of G-protein-coupled receptor kinases. Trends Pharmacol Sci 21: Huang WY, Aramburu J, Douglas PS, and Izumo S (2000) Transgenic expression of green fluorescence protein can cause cardiomyopathy. Nat Med 6: Iaccarino G, Rockman HA, Shotwell KF, Tomhave ED, and Koch WJ (1998) Myocardial overexpression of GRK3 in transgenic mice: evidence for in vivo selectivity of GRKs. Am J Physiol 275:H1298 H1306. Iacovelli L, Franchetti R, Grisolia D, and De Blasi A (1999) Selective regulation of G protein-coupled receptor-mediated signaling by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 in FRTL-5 cells: analysis of thyrotropin 1B -adrenergic, and A 1 adenosine receptor-mediated responses. Mol Pharmacol 56: Inglese J, Freedman NJ, Koch WJ, and Lefkowitz RJ (1993) Structure and mechanism of the G protein-coupled receptor kinases. J Biol Chem 268: Inglese J, Koch WJ, Touhara K, and Lefkowitz RJ (1995) G interactions with PH domains and Ras-MAP kinase signaling pathways. Trends Biochem Sci 20: Iwase M, Bishop SP, Uechi M, Vatner DE, Shannon RP, Kudej RK, Wight DC, Wagner TE, Ishikawa Y, Homcy CJ, and Vatner SF (1996) Adverse effects of chronic endogenous sympathetic drive induced by cardiac Gs overexpression. Circ Res 78: Jaber M, Koch WJ, Rockman HA, Smith B, Bond RA, Caron MG, and Lefkowitz RJ (1996) Essential role of -adrenergic receptor kinase-1 in cardiac development and function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: Kiss E, Edes I, Sato Y, Luo W, Liggett SB, and Kranias EG (1997) -Adrenergic regulation of camp and protein phosphorylation in phospholamban-knockout mouse hearts. Am J Physiol 272:H785 H790. Koch WJ, Hawes BE, Allen LF, and Lefkowitz RJ (1994) Direct evidence that Gi-coupled receptor stimulation of mitogen-activated protein kinase is mediated by G activation of p21ras. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: Koch WJ, Inglese J, Stone WC, and Lefkowitz RJ (1993) The binding site for the subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins on the -adrenergic receptor kinase. J Biol Chem 268: Koch WJ, Lefkowitz RJ, and Rockman HA (2000) Functional consequences of altering myocardial adrenergic receptor signaling. Annu Rev Physiol 62: Koch WJ, Rockman HA, Samama P, Hamilton RA, Bond RA, Milano CA, and Lefkowitz RJ (1995) Cardiac function in mice overexpressing the -adrenergic receptor kinase or a ARK inhibitor. Science (Wash DC) 268: Lefkowitz RJ (1998) G protein-coupled receptors III. New roles for receptor kinases and -arrestins in receptor signaling and desensitization. J Biol Chem 273: Lefkowitz RJ, Rockman HA, and Koch WJ (2000). Catecholamines, cardiac -adrenergic receptors and heart failure. Circulation 101: Liggett SB, Tepe NM, Lorenz JN, Canning AM, Jantz TD, Mitarai S, Yatani A, and Dorn GW 2nd (2000) Early and delayed consequences of 2 -adrenergic receptor overexpression in mouse hearts. Critical role for expression level. Circulation 101: Milano CA, Allen LF, Rockman HA, Dolber PC, McMinn TR, Chien KR, Johnson TD, Bond RA, and Lefkowitz RJ (1994a) Enhanced myocardial function in transgenic mice overexpressing the 2 -adrenergic receptor. Science (Wash DC) 264: Milano CA, Dolber PC, Rockman HA, Bond RA, Venable ME, Allen LF, and Lefkowitz RJ (1994b) Myocardial expression of a constitutively active 1B -adrenergic receptor in transgenic mice induces cardiac hypertrophy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: Ostrom RS, Post SR, and Insel PA (2000) Stoichiometry and compartmentalization in G protein-coupled receptor signaling implications for therapeutic interventions involving Gs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 294: Palczewski K (1997) GTP-binding-protein-coupled receptor kinases: two mechanistic models. Eur J Biochem 248: Rockman HA, Chien KR, Choi DJ, Iaccarino G, Hunter JJ, Ross J, Lefkowitz RJ, and Koch WJ (1998) Expression of a -adrenergic receptor kinase 1 inhibitor prevents the development of myocardial failure in gene-targeted mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: Rockman HA, Choi DJ, Rahman NU, Akhter SA, Lefkowitz RJ, and Koch WJ (1996) Receptor-specific in vivo desensitization by the G protein-coupled receptor kinase-5 in transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: Rohrer DK (1998) Physiological consequences of -adrenergic receptor disruption. J Mol Med 76: Sauer B (1998) Inducible gene targeting in mice using the Cre/lox system. Methods 14: Tepe NM, Lorenz JN, Yatani A, Dash R, Kranias EG, Dorn GW 2nd, and Liggett SB (1999) Altering the receptor-effector ratio by transgenic overexpression of type V adenylyl cyclase: enhanced basal catalytic activity and function without increased cardiomyocyte -adrenergic signaling. Biochemistry 38: Turki J, Lorenz JN, Green SA, Donnelly ET, Jacinto M, and Liggett SB (1996) Myocardial signaling defects and impaired cardiac function of a human 2 - adrenergic receptor polymorphism expressed in transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: Ungerer M, Bohm M, Elce JS, Erdmann E, and Lohse MJ (1993) Altered expression of -adrenergic receptor kinase and 1 -adrenergic receptors in the failing human heart. Circulation 87: Xiao RP, Avdonin P, Zhou YY, Cheng H, Akhter SA, Eschenhagen T, Lefkowitz RJ, Koch WJ, and Lakatta EG (1999) Coupling of 2 -adrenoceptor to Gi proteins and its physiological relevance in murine cardiac myocytes. Circ Res 84: Zaugg M, Xu W, Lucchinetti E, Shafiq SA, Jamali NZ, and Siddiqui MAQ (2000) -Adrenergic receptor subtypes differentially affect apoptosis in adult rat ventricular myocytes. Circulation 102: Zhu WZ, Zheng M, Koch WJ, Lefkowitz RJ, Kobilka BK, and Xiao RP (2001) Dual modulation of cell survival and cell death by 2 -adrenergic signaling in adult mouse cardiac myocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: Zou Y, Komuro I, Yamazaki T, Kudoh S, Uozumi H, Kadowaki T, and Yazaki Y (1999) Goth Gs and Gi proteins are critically involved in isoproterenol-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. J Biol Chem 274: Address correspondence to: Walter J. Koch, Ph.D., Department of Surgery, Box 2606, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC koch0002@mc.duke.edu