ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Elevated conformational dynamics makes ACKR3 activation-prone and G protein-incompetent.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The atypical receptor ACKR3 works together with the canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 to drive cell migration along gradients of their shared agonist CXCL12. CXCR4 promotes chemotaxis by activating canonical G protein pathways and recruiting β-arrestins. ACKR3 indirectly regulates CXCR4-mediated chemotaxis by scavenging CXCL12. Unlike canonical chemokine receptors, ACKR3 does not couple to G proteins and instead is 100% biased towards β-arrestins. CXCR4 activation by CXCL12 is exquisitely sensitive to subtle changes in both receptor and ligand. By contrast, ACKR3 is activation-prone: it recruits β-arrestins in response to many ligands and is much less sensitive to mutations, suggesting distinct activation mechanisms compared to CXCR4. To explore the basis of these differences, we compared the dynamics of ACKR3 and CXCR4 complexes with chemokines using molecular dynamic (MD) simulations. Ten-microsecond atomistic MD simulations revealed that CXCR4 adopts a stable active state when bound to WT CXCL12 but transitions to an inactive state when in complex with the antagonist variant, [P2G]CXCL12. By comparison, ACKR3 exhibits a variable transmembrane (TM) 6 state distribution and persistently "active" TM7 when complexed with either WT CXCL12 or [P2G]CXCL12, the latter retaining substantial agonistic activity at ACKR3. We further identified ligand-mediated residue interaction networks in the TM core that regulate TM6 and TM7 activation in CXCR4 but are absent or disrupted in ACKR3, resulting in less constrained receptor dynamics. These findings were validated by BRET-based assays with CXCL12 and ACKR3 mutants. Together, the data suggests that the unique conformational dynamics of ACKR3 govern its activation propensity, its ligand promiscuity, and its atypical effector coupling.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.