Recurrent high-impact mutations at cognate structural positions in class A G protein-coupled receptors expressed in tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of human proteins. They have a common structure and, signaling through a much smaller set of G proteins, arrestins, and effectors, activate downstream pathways that often modulate hallmark mechanisms of cancer. Because there are many more GPCRs than effectors, mutations in different receptors could perturb signaling similarly so as to favor a tumor. We hypothesized that somatic mutations in tumor samples may not be enriched within a single gene but rather that cognate mutations with similar effects on GPCR function are distributed across many receptors. To test this possibility, we systematically aggregated somatic cancer mutations across class A GPCRs and found a nonrandom distribution of positions with variant amino acid residues. Individual cancer types were enriched for highly impactful, recurrent mutations at selected cognate positions of known functional motifs. We also discovered that no single receptor drives this pattern, but rather multiple receptors contain amino acid substitutions at a few cognate positions. Phenotypic characterization suggests these mutations induce perturbation of G protein activation and/or β-arrestin recruitment. These data suggest that recurrent impactful oncogenic mutations perturb different GPCRs to subvert signaling and promote tumor growth or survival. The possibility that multiple different GPCRs could moonlight as drivers or enablers of a given cancer through mutations located at cognate positions across GPCR paralogs opens a window into cancer mechanisms and potential approaches to therapeutics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".