To facilitate the myriad of different (signaling) processes that take place at the plasma membrane, cells depend on a high degree of membrane protein organization. Important mediators of this organization are tetraspanin proteins. Tetraspanins interact laterally among themselves and with partner proteins to control the spatial organization of membrane proteins in large networks called the tetraspanin web. The molecular interactions underlying the formation of the tetraspanin web were hitherto mainly described based on their resistance to different detergents, a classification which does not necessarily correlate with functionality in the living cell. To look at these interactions from a more physiological point of view, this review discusses tetraspanin interactions based on their function in the tetraspanin web: (1) intramolecular interactions supporting tetraspanin structure, (2) tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions supporting web formation, (3) tetraspanin–partner interactions adding functional partners to the web and (4) cytosolic tetraspanin interactions regulating intracellular signaling. The recent publication of the first full-length tetraspanin crystal structure sheds new light on both the intra- and intermolecular tetraspanin interactions that shape the tetraspanin web. Furthermore, recent molecular dynamic modeling studies indicate that the binding strength between tetraspanins and between tetraspanins and their partners is the complex sum of both promiscuous and specific interactions. A deeper insight into this complex mixture of interactions is essential to our fundamental understanding of the tetraspanin web and its dynamics which constitute a basic building block of the cell surface.

Introduction: spinning the tetraspanin web

Tetraspanins are highly conserved integral membrane proteins involved in membrane organization and compartmentalization. This is achieved through lateral interactions among tetraspanins and between tetraspanins and their partner proteins, thereby forming tetraspanin-enriched microdomains (TEMs), also referred to as ‘the tetraspanin web’. The tetraspanin web creates a local environment containing a specific set of proteins in the plasma membrane which can facilitate or impede particular cellular processes [1].

Tetraspanins are small hydrophobic proteins that are ∼200–350 amino acids in length and protrude 3–5 nm from the cell surface [2,3]. They consist of four transmembrane (TM) regions, one small extracellular loop (EC1) and one large extracellular loop (EC2), one small cytoplasmic loop and two short cytoplasmic tails. Although there are many different four-TM-domain proteins present on the cell surface, not all of these proteins are considered part of the tetraspanin superfamily. For example, the MS4A protein family comprises four-TM-domain proteins (including CD20 and HTm4), which are not considered to be genuine tetraspanins [4]. Genuine tetraspanins are characterized by the presence of a conserved CCG motif and two conserved cysteine residues located in the EC2 domain [5]. Tetraspanins have been shown to play a role in many vital cell biological processes, including adhesion, migration, fusion and signaling [6,7]. As a result of their involvement in these fundamental processes, tetraspanins have been implicated in the pathophysiology of numerous diseases, including HIV [8], hepatitis C [9], malaria [10], type 1 diabetes [11] and cancer [12]. The recent discovery that loss of a specific tetraspanin (CD37) leads to spontaneous development of B-cell lymphoma indicates that individual members of this family can have non-redundant functions in maintaining cellular health [13]. These studies demonstrate that cells rely on the organizational capacity of tetraspanins to regulate their function, which is inextricably tied to their ability to assemble the tetraspanin web.

The assembly of the tetraspanin web was proposed to be reliant upon three different levels of interactions, referred to as first-level (primary), second-level (secondary) and third-level (tertiary) interactions [7]. First-level interactions denote only tetraspanin–tetraspanin and tetraspanin–partner interactions that are direct in nature and resistant to disruption by strong detergents. Second-level interactions are only resistant to weak detergents and are formed when tetraspanins further interact by linking primary complexes to each other. Secondary interactions are at least partially dependent on palmitoylation since the removal of palmitoylation sites impairs the formation of second-level interactions between integrins and tetraspanins [14]. Third-level interactions are weak interactions which can only be detected in the presence of very mild detergents (e.g. CHAPS). Under these mild conditions, third-level tetraspanin complexes localize to low-density membrane fractions in a sucrose gradient [15,16]. This model for complex assembly based on a hierarchical approach allows for very dynamic and adaptable interactions between tetraspanins and other surface proteins. This model is, however, based on a rather descriptive division and says little about the functionality of these interactions. This review therefore classifies tetraspanin interactions based on their function in the formation of the tetraspanin web: interactions necessary to maintain tetraspanin structure, interactions that support tetraspanin web formation, interactions that add functional partners to the web and interactions that facilitate intracellular events.

Intramolecular interactions: supporting the structure of tetraspanins

The four TM domains that tetraspanins are named after are vital in determining the structure of these proteins. Several lines of evidence suggest that the four TM domains (20–25 amino acids in length) form a tightly packed bundle in the membrane [2,17]. However, this model is challenged by the first crystal structure of a full-length tetraspanin (CD81) as published by Zimmerman et al. [18]. A pair-wise packing of TM1 with TM2 and TM3 with TM4 was identified in a cone-shaped conformation wherein the pairs are in close proximity within the inner leaflet of the membrane and show further separation in the outer leaflet of the membrane (Figure 1). The results from evolutionary coupling analysis are consistent with this new model and suggest that TMs of other tetraspanins probably have a similar conformation [18]. Consistent with the idea that proper packing of the TMs is essential for the entire tetraspanin structure, mutations in TM domains were shown to affect the folding, stability and transport of several tetraspanins, e.g. uroplakin 1B [19], CD9 [17,20] and CD82 [21]. The molecular interactions enforcing proper packing are thought to be mediated by two highly conserved features in the TM domains of tetraspanins. The first is a set of polar residues (Asn, Gln and Glu) in TM1, TM3 and TM4 that are predicted to stabilize TM domain packing by polar interactions, hydrogen bonds and/or interactions with cholesterol [5,18,22]. The second is a conserved heptad repeat in TM1 and TM2 in which large hydrophobic residues in one TM domain are closely packed with small residues in the other TM domain (Figure 1) [17].

Intramolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Figure 1.
Intramolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Model of the intramolecular tetraspanin interactions involved in the maintenance of its structure. The conformation of the large extracellular loop (EC2) is stabilized by salt bridges and hydrophobic interactions between the A- and E-helices in the ‘stalk-region’ and covalent cysteine bridges in the ‘head-region’ (B-, C-helices and D-loop). The conformation of the EC2 may also be stabilized by interactions with the small extracellular loop (EC1) under certain conditions. Inside the membrane, proper packing of the transmembrane domains (TM1–4) is assumed to be mediated by interactions between conserved polar residues in TM1, 3 and 4, which may be direct or indirect via the binding of cholesterol. Of note, the presence or absence of cholesterol is suggested to result in two different conformations of the tetraspanin, which are not visualized in this figure. Tight packing of TM1 with TM2 is facilitated by large and small residues opposing each other in a conserved heptad repeat motif.

Figure 1.
Intramolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Model of the intramolecular tetraspanin interactions involved in the maintenance of its structure. The conformation of the large extracellular loop (EC2) is stabilized by salt bridges and hydrophobic interactions between the A- and E-helices in the ‘stalk-region’ and covalent cysteine bridges in the ‘head-region’ (B-, C-helices and D-loop). The conformation of the EC2 may also be stabilized by interactions with the small extracellular loop (EC1) under certain conditions. Inside the membrane, proper packing of the transmembrane domains (TM1–4) is assumed to be mediated by interactions between conserved polar residues in TM1, 3 and 4, which may be direct or indirect via the binding of cholesterol. Of note, the presence or absence of cholesterol is suggested to result in two different conformations of the tetraspanin, which are not visualized in this figure. Tight packing of TM1 with TM2 is facilitated by large and small residues opposing each other in a conserved heptad repeat motif.

Next to the TM domains, folding of the EC2 is of particular importance since most tetraspanin intermolecular interactions are suggested to be mediated through this domain. Based on the crystal structure of the CD81 EC2 and the conservation of key features in other tetraspanins, the EC2 was proposed to contain five α-helices (A–E) forming a mushroom-shaped structure that can be divided in a rod-shaped ‘stalk’ region (A- and E-helices) and a ‘head’ region formed by the B-, C- and D-helices (Figure 1) [3]. Whereas the helical nature of the B- and C-helices was confirmed in a later NMR study, no secondary structure was found in the region of the D-helix [23]. Also, molecular dynamic simulations suggest that the region of the D-helix (and to a lesser extent the C-helix) is extremely flexible [24]. We will therefore refer to the region of the D-helix as the D-loop. Apart from the D-loop, the ‘head’ region has a rather defined structure. Structural integrity of the ‘head’ is mediated largely by the tetraspanin-wide conserved CCG motif that forms two disulfide bridges with two cysteine residues located at relatively fixed positions elsewhere in the EC2. These disulfide bridges were observed in both crystal structures and in an NMR structure of CD81 (EC2) [18,3,23], and have been reported to be important for proper CD81 and CD9 functioning [25,26]. The ‘stalk’ region is relatively rigid due to hydrophobic interactions and two salt bridges between the A- and E-helices [3]. Tight packing of the A- and E-helices was confirmed by NMR spectroscopy of the CD81 EC2 in solution [23], and conservation of involved residues suggests that this structural feature is shared between members of the tetraspanin family [27]. A recently proposed third factor influencing the structure (and thereby interactions with other proteins) of the EC2 is the binding of cholesterol within the TM region of tetraspanins. Molecular dynamics simulations on the basis of the full-length CD81 crystal structure suggest that lack of cholesterol results in an extended or ‘open’ conformation of the EC2, whereas the EC2 stays close to the membrane in a ‘closed’ conformation when cholesterol is bound [18]. In the closed conformation, the EC2 is predicted to fold on top of the EC1 which is consistent with the interactions between both domains suggested on the basis of cryoEM on uroplakins and modeling of CD81 [2,28]. However, an NMR study using soluble CD81 EC1 and EC2 could not detect any interaction, possibly because the full protein context is missing [23].

Whereas the TM region and the EC2 of tetraspanins have a rather defined structure, little or nothing is known about structural elements in the remainder of the protein (EC1, cytoplasmic tails and -loop). Thus, intramolecular interactions in the TM and EC2 region of tetraspanins support their overall structure and set the stage for intermolecular protein–protein interactions.

Tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions: promiscuous and specific interactions underlie tetraspanin web formation

The first eras of tetraspanin research resulted in a model in which tetraspanins interact promiscuously (and mostly heterotypic) and extensively among each other to form the tetraspanin web [29]. This model, which was primarily based on immune precipitation studies, was recently challenged by studies based on chemical cross-linking and super-resolution microscopy, showing that several tetraspanins have a preference for specific homotypic interactions [30,31]. The observations on which both models are based suggest two modes of tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions: promiscuous interactions and specific interactions.

An important mediator of promiscuous interactions is palmitoylation of cytoplasmic cysteine residues that are present in all known tetraspanins. The contribution of this reversible post-translational modification was first recognized in 2002 for tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions between CD9 and CD151 [32,33], and was subsequently observed for CD9 [34], CD81 [35], CD82 [36] and CD63 [37]. From these studies, a model arises in which the tetraspanin web as a whole is supported by constitutive palmitoylation, whereas induced (de) palmitoylation can facilitate the plasticity needed to react to different stimuli [38]. In addition to palmitoylation, cholesterol also supports promiscuous tetraspanin interactions, probably in a palmitoylation-dependent manner [10,39]. Gangliosides are a third membrane component suggested to be involved in promiscuous tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions as is proposed for CD82 and CD81 (Figure 2A) [40,41,24].

Intermolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Figure 2.
Intermolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Models showing the different intermolecular interactions tetraspanins are capable of, which together shape the tetraspanin web. (A) Tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions can be mediated by, and are probably a sum of, palmitoylation, cholesterol and gangliosides, and direct protein–protein interactions between TM1 and TM2 or the D-loops of different tetraspanins. The D-loops are suggested to mediate specificity to tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions, whereas the other modes of interaction are likely of a more promiscuous nature. (B) Most tetraspanin–partner interactions are assigned to the EC2, although the precise interaction domain often remains elusive. A small selection of partner proteins binding the EC2 is boxed on the left. The role of the N-glycosylation sites that are present on the EC2 of many tetraspanins (the position in this figure is random) and the role of the EC1 in tetraspanin–partner interactions are a largely unexplored area. Tetraspanin–partner interactions can also be aided by palmitoylation, cholesterol and gangliosides. (C) Tetraspanin interactions with cytoplasmic proteins facilitate intracellular signaling events and are mediated by binding to the N- and C-terminal tails. Although many cytoplasmic proteins have been shown to interact with tetraspanins, direct binding to a specific tail has only been shown for a few of these proteins. The C-terminal tail of many tetraspanins contains an endocytosis motif and/or a PDZ-binding domain, and, arguably, some tetraspanins may harbor ITIM/ITAM-like domains which allow them to participate directly in signaling.

Figure 2.
Intermolecular interactions of tetraspanins.

Models showing the different intermolecular interactions tetraspanins are capable of, which together shape the tetraspanin web. (A) Tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions can be mediated by, and are probably a sum of, palmitoylation, cholesterol and gangliosides, and direct protein–protein interactions between TM1 and TM2 or the D-loops of different tetraspanins. The D-loops are suggested to mediate specificity to tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions, whereas the other modes of interaction are likely of a more promiscuous nature. (B) Most tetraspanin–partner interactions are assigned to the EC2, although the precise interaction domain often remains elusive. A small selection of partner proteins binding the EC2 is boxed on the left. The role of the N-glycosylation sites that are present on the EC2 of many tetraspanins (the position in this figure is random) and the role of the EC1 in tetraspanin–partner interactions are a largely unexplored area. Tetraspanin–partner interactions can also be aided by palmitoylation, cholesterol and gangliosides. (C) Tetraspanin interactions with cytoplasmic proteins facilitate intracellular signaling events and are mediated by binding to the N- and C-terminal tails. Although many cytoplasmic proteins have been shown to interact with tetraspanins, direct binding to a specific tail has only been shown for a few of these proteins. The C-terminal tail of many tetraspanins contains an endocytosis motif and/or a PDZ-binding domain, and, arguably, some tetraspanins may harbor ITIM/ITAM-like domains which allow them to participate directly in signaling.

A potential tetraspanin domain involved in more specific interactions was identified when the CD81 EC2 crystal structure was found to be a dimer with an important role for the A- and, to a lesser extent, B- and E-helices in the interaction area [3]. Although the dimeric nature of the CD81 EC2 was confirmed in subsequent studies and the amino acids predicted to be important for dimerization could be confirmed in a random mutagenesis study, the same mutations had little or no effect on dimerization of the complete CD81 molecule [25,23]. Also arguing against the importance of this proposed dimerization domain in the complete protein is the fact that the position of the termini of both monomers hardly allows fitting of the TM domains into this homodimer model.

Another dimerization domain was identified using disulfide cross-linking which was used to map the homodimeric interface of CD9 to the TM1 and TM2 domains [17]. Although the authors showed that CD9 molecules interact among themselves via this domain, they did not test dimerization with other tetraspanins and thus did not determine the specificity for homotypic interactions. In fact, the high conservation of TM domains among tetraspanins makes it more likely that they are involved in promiscuous rather than specific tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions.

A third domain that could account for specific homotypic interactions was identified when the D-loop of the CD81 EC2 was shown to be required for its recruitment into CD81 clusters on the plasma membrane and sufficient to recruit other tetraspanins into these clusters [42,43]. In the same study, a palmitoylation-deficient CD81 and an AB-helix deletion mutant were also tested, but these had a far less pronounced effect on CD81 recruitment into domains. Thus, the D-loop seems to be a good candidate for specific interactions, also given its high flexibility and high variety between tetraspanins (Figure 2A). A follow-up molecular modeling study suggests that the high flexibility of the D-loop in the otherwise relatively stiff EC2 domain allows tetraspanins to ‘probe’ the surrounding area for interaction partners [24]. The same model also suggests that when a specific interaction partner is found, more promiscuous binding factors, such as palmitoylation or gangliosides, further stabilize the interaction allowing formation of larger clusters. Whether the modeled interplay between promiscuous and specific interactions among tetraspanins indeed underlies formation of a tetraspanin web with predominantly homotypic tetraspanin–tetraspanin interactions remains to be confirmed in wet laboratory experiments, but this model is at least consistent with the current knowledge on these interactions.

Tetraspanin–partner interactions: adding functional partners to the tetraspanin web

The function and structure of the tetraspanin web is based on the ability of tetraspanins to form lateral associations with their partner proteins in order to influence their interaction capacity and function. Tetraspanins are known to interact with many partners including integrins (α3β1, α4β1 and α6β1), CD19, EWI-2, MHC complexes, CD4 and CD8 [4448]. The adeptness of specific tetraspanins at binding selective partner proteins indicates that a high level of variability must exist between tetraspanins. Comparisons between sequences of different tetraspanins have pinpointed the large extracellular loop (EC2) of tetraspanins as the most variable domain [27].

Interactions between the EC2 and partners have been reported for numerous tetraspanins, one of the best characterized examples being the interaction between tetraspanin CD151 and integrins (Figure 2B). CD151 has been demonstrated to bind very strongly to the α3β1 integrin under stringent detergent conditions and is highly specific and stoichiometric [49]. Furthermore, this interaction was shown to be mediated by the variable head region of the EC2 domain since mutation of these residues left CD151 unable to bind either integrins or other tetraspanins [50]. Though the interaction between the head region of the EC2 domain of tetraspanins and their partners has long been proposed to be the paradigm, recent findings indicate that integrins are also able to strongly bind to the stalk region of the EC2, revealing the need for a more in-depth look at these regions with respect to tetraspanin–partner interactions [51]. The ability of tetraspanins to bind partners may also be influenced by the conformation of the EC2. Recent findings by Zimmerman et al. indicate that the EC2 is capable of undergoing a conformational change depending on binding of cholesterol to the intramembrane pocket. The authors further suggest a relationship between EC2 conformation and CD19 interaction and expression, which indicates a possible mechanism by which the EC2 could modulate its binding to partner proteins [18]. Furthermore, recently, it has been shown that the EC2 of certain tetraspanins (tetraspaninC8 family members) can interact with the same partner (ADAM10) by distinct mechanisms and thereby differentially affect function of this partner protein [52].

The EC2 of most tetraspanins is N-glycosylated; however, the functional implications of this glycosylation remain largely unknown (Figure 2B) [53]. A few studies provide evidence that N-glycosylation is able to modulate the binding capacity of tetraspanins to partner proteins. For example, N-glycosylation of CD82 was shown to regulate adhesion and motility of cells through their interaction with α3 and α5 integrins [54]. Furthermore, the interaction between tetraspanin CD63 and CXCR4, leading to the down-regulation of this chemokine receptor, is regulated by N-linked glycosylation sites in CD63 [55]. Given the high prevalence and large size of the glycosylation found on tetraspanins, it seems likely that many of the interactions assigned to EC2 are affected, and maybe even mediated, by glycosylation of this domain. The possible role of glycosylation in tetraspanin function is supported by the reported variability in glycosylation of tetraspanins in cancer cell lines [56,57].

Although the EC2 is the most variable part of tetraspanins, the EC1 also displays quite some variability which may lend itself to mediation of tetraspanin–partner interactions. So far, no experimental evidence has been presented to support this notion, but phylogenomic analysis of intron/exon structure shows that the EC1 contains 46% of new intron insertions despite only accounting for 10.5% of the total protein length [58]. This appearance of evolutionary novelty in the EC1 loop (which is also found in the variable head region of the EC2) may support its possible role in defining the specificity of tetraspanins for their partner proteins.

So far, we have primarily focused on direct protein–protein interactions, but it should be noted that other membrane constituents also contribute to tetraspanin–partner interactions, including membrane cholesterol, gangliosides and palmitate moieties (Figure 2B). Cholesterol has been shown to directly interact with tetraspanins and has been proposed to play a role in the stabilization of tetraspanin interactions [39]. A role for palmitoylation in tetraspanin–partner interactions became apparent when palmitoylation-deficient β4 integrins were found to be less able to associate with tetraspanins including CD9, CD81 and CD63 [14]. It has also been shown that palmitoylation is required for the interaction of EWI-2 and EWI-2wint with CD81 and CD9 [59]. In addition, interactions aided by palmitoylation have functional consequences as demonstrated by Berditchevski et al. [32] who showed that palmitoylation of tetraspanins is essential for recruitment of partners to the tetraspanin web and modulates the function of these partners. Gangliosides are also suggested to be involved in tetraspanin–partner interactions as depletion of gangliosides was shown to affect the interaction between CD82 and its partners [41]. Furthermore, ganglioside GM3 has been found to interact with CD9, which is involved in down-regulation of tumor cell motility [60]. From the above, it can be concluded that cholesterol, gangliosides and palmitoylation are able to assist in both the stabilization and function of the tetraspanin web.

Taken together, tetraspanin function is defined by its ability to bind specific partner proteins and thereby influences cell function. Thus far, most studies suggest that the EC2 is primarily responsible for interactions between tetraspanins and partners, though the influence of other membrane constituents and protein modifications should not be overlooked in this process.

Cytosolic tetraspanin interactions: regulating intracellular signaling

Tetraspanins not only organize their partner proteins in the plasma membrane, but they are also often involved in protein organization in the cytoplasm beneath the tetraspanin web, thereby facilitating intracellular signaling processes. The idea that the tetraspanin web can function as a membrane scaffold for intracellular signaling arose when cytosolic protein kinase C (PKC) was found to associate with tetraspanins after PKC translocation to the plasma membrane upon PMA stimulus [61]. Subsequently, many associations between tetraspanins and signaling molecules have been described, e.g. with Ras, Rac, 14-3-3 and SOCS3, though the protein domains involved in these interactions often remained unstudied [13,6264].

Downstream signaling processes initiated at the tetraspanin web can, in principle, be mediated through interactions between cytoplasmic signaling proteins and the intracellular loop or the N- and C-terminal tails of tetraspanins, but so far only a few examples of this have been shown (Figure 2C). The relatively short (4–40 amino acids for most tetraspanins) cytoplasmic extensions of tetraspanins are assumed to be flexible and show little conservation between different tetraspanin family members [5], which enables a range of tetraspanin-specific interaction partners. For many of the reported interactions, it is yet unclear whether these are direct or indirect due to limitations of the techniques used, but novel (microscopy) techniques have increased our ability to distinguish direct from indirect interactions in live cells. Marked examples of direct interactions include the interaction between the N-terminal tail of CD53 and PKC-β which is important for B-cell receptor signaling (Zuidscherwoude and Dunlock, under revision), between the C-terminal tail of CD81 and Rac involved in the regulation of cell motility [64] and between the C-terminal tail of CD63 and the PDZ domain of syntenin-1-regulating endocytosis [65]. Since a PDZ-binding motif is present in the C-terminal tail of several other tetraspanins, cytosolic interactions mediated by PDZ domains are probably not restricted to CD63 [7]. The importance of intracellular tetraspanin interactions in signaling processes was nicely illustrated by Termini et al. [66] who showed that CD82-containing TEMs facilitate the formation of large PKC-α complexes on the inside of the plasma membrane which enable sustained PKC activation.

In addition to facilitating intracellular signaling through recruitment of cytoplasmic signaling proteins, tetraspanins can also play a more direct role in signaling as was demonstrated by Lapalombella et al. They showed that tyrosine residues in ITIM- and ITAM-like domains in the tails of CD37 are phosphorylated upon ligation with a CD37-directed antibody, which controls cell death signaling in B cells [67]. In line with this, CD37 deficiency affects plasma cell survival in vivo through coupling to the Akt kinase signaling pathway [68]. Although other tetraspanin family members may also harbor ITIM/ITAM-like (immune tyrosine-based inhibitory/activation motif) motifs, their functionality in signaling processes remains to be tested. A more common tyrosine-based signaling motif is the YXXΦ endocytosis motif found in the C-terminal tail of many tetraspanins (Figure 2C). This motif was shown to be a bona fide internalization signal for CD151, Tspan7 and CD82, and is assumed to be a general mechanism for endocytic trafficking of tetraspanins containing this motif [5,69]. In CD63, a C-terminal lysosomal targeting signal is present which orchestrates its lysosomal localization [70].

Apart from tetraspanin interactions with signaling molecules, interactions with the actin cytoskeleton have also long been suspected based on membrane fractionation experiments [71]. For tetraspanins CD9 and CD81, it is now known that this interaction is mediated by indirect binding with actin-linking ezrin–radixin–moesin (ERM) proteins via EWI proteins. Moreover, CD81 was shown to directly interact with ERM proteins via its C-terminal tail [72].

Taken together, the cytoplasmic interactions of tetraspanins are mediated by their N- and C-terminal tails. These interactions affect intracellular signaling pathways directly or indirectly, and are important for tetraspanin localization and interaction with the cytoskeleton.

Concluding remarks and future perspectives: toward tetraspanin web dynamics

In this review, we propose a new classification of tetraspanin interactions based on their function in the formation of the tetraspanin web rather than their resistance to different detergents. This classification not only correlates more directly with functionality, but also allows inclusion of important intramolecular interactions and interactions with non-membrane proteins. The different classes of functional tetraspanin interactions are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the unique capacity of tetraspanins to unify different types of interactions underlies their function as important regulators of membrane organization.

Whereas our view on the interactions and functions of the tetraspanin web is extending, its dynamics remain largely unexplored. Future research in this direction will be enabled by novel (super-resolution) microscopy techniques that allow visualization of changes in the size, shape, composition and distribution of the tetraspanin web in different cell types. We strongly believe that a thorough understanding of tetraspanin interactions is key to further uncovering tetraspanin dynamics and its important role in cell biology of health and disease.

Abbreviations

     
  • EC1

    extracellular loop 1

  •  
  • EC2

    extracellular loop 2

  •  
  • ERM

    ezrin–radixin–moesin

  •  
  • ITAM

    immune tyrosine-based activation motif

  •  
  • ITIM

    immune tyrosine-based inhibitory motif

  •  
  • PKC

    protein kinase C

  •  
  • TEM

    tetraspanin-enriched microdomain

  •  
  • TM

    transmembrane.

Funding

A.B.v.S. is a recipient of a Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research Grant [NWO-ALW VIDI grant 864.11.006], a NWO Gravitation Programme 2013 grant [ICI-024.002.009] and a Dutch Cancer Society grant [KUN2014-6845], and was awarded a European Research Council Consolidator Grant [Secret Surface, 724281].

Acknowledgments

We thank Fleur Schaper and Geert van den Bogaart for their helpful criticism during the preparation of this review. We apologize to all authors whose studies could not be included in this review due to space limitations.

Competing Interests

The Authors declare that there are no competing interests associated with the manuscript.

References

References
1
Charrin
,
S.
,
Jouannet
,
S.
,
Boucheix
,
C.
and
Rubinstein
,
E.
(
2014
)
Tetraspanins at a glance
.
J. Cell Sci.
127
(
Pt 17
),
3641
3648
doi:
2
Min
,
G.
,
Wang
,
H.
,
Sun
,
T.-T.
and
Kong
,
X.-P.
(
2006
)
Structural basis for tetraspanin functions as revealed by the cryo-EM structure of uroplakin complexes at 6-Å resolution
.
J. Cell Biol.
173
,
975
983
doi:
3
Kitadokoro
,
K.
,
Bordo
,
D.
,
Galli
,
G.
,
Petracca
,
R.
,
Falugi
,
F.
,
Abrignani
,
S.
et al. 
(
2001
)
CD81 extracellular domain 3D structure: insight into the tetraspanin superfamily structural motifs
.
EMBO J.
20
,
12
18
doi:
4
Eon Kuek
,
L.
,
Leffler
,
M.
,
Mackay
,
G.A.
and
Hulett
,
M.D.
(
2016
)
The MS4A family: counting past 1, 2 and 3
.
Immunol. Cell Biol.
94
,
11
23
doi:
5
Stipp
,
C.S.
,
Kolesnikova
,
T.V.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2003
)
Functional domains in tetraspanin proteins
.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
28
,
106
112
doi:
6
Levy
,
S.
and
Shoham
,
T.
(
2005
)
The tetraspanin web modulates immune-signalling complexes
.
Nat. Rev. Immunol.
5
,
136
148
doi:
7
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2005
)
Tetraspanin functions and associated microdomains
.
Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol.
6
,
801
811
doi:
8
Thali
,
M.
(
2011
)
Tetraspanin functions during HIV-1 and influenza virus replication
.
Biochem. Soc. Trans.
39
,
529
531
doi:
9
Farquhar
,
M.J.
,
Harris
,
H.J.
and
McKeating
,
J.A.
(
2011
)
Hepatitis C virus entry and the tetraspanin CD81
.
Biochem. Soc. Trans.
39
,
532
536
doi:
10
Silvie
,
O.
,
Charrin
,
S.
,
Billard
,
M.
,
Franetich
,
J.-F.
,
Clark
,
K.L.
,
van Gemert
,
G.-J.
et al. 
(
2006
)
Cholesterol contributes to the organization of tetraspanin-enriched microdomains and to CD81-dependent infection by malaria sporozoites
.
J. Cell Sci.
119
(
Pt 10
),
1992
2002
doi:
11
Mclaughlin
,
K.A.
,
Richardson
,
C.C.
,
Ravishankar
,
A.
,
Brigatti
,
C.
,
Liberati
,
D.
,
Lampasona
,
V.
et al. 
(
2016
)
Identification of tetraspanin-7 as a target of autoantibodies in type 1 diabetes
.
Diabetes
65
,
1690
1698
doi:
12
Yang
,
Y.-G.
,
Sari
,
I.N.
,
Zia
,
M.F.
,
Lee
,
S.R.
,
Song
,
S.J.
and
Kwon
,
H.Y.
(
2016
)
Tetraspanins: spanning from solid tumors to hematologic malignancies
.
Exp. Hematol.
44
,
322
328
doi:
13
De Winde
,
C.M.
,
Veenbergen
,
S.
,
Young
,
H.K.
,
Xu-monette
,
Z.Y.
,
Wang
,
X.
,
Xia
,
Y.
et al. 
(
2016
)
Tetraspanin CD37 protects against the development of B cell lymphoma
.
J. Clin. Invest.
126
,
653
666
doi:
14
Yang
,
X.
,
Kovalenko
,
O.V.
,
Tang
,
W.
,
Claas
,
C.
,
Stipp
,
C.S.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2004
)
Palmitoylation supports assembly and function of integrin-tetraspanin complexes
.
J. Cell Biol.
167
,
1231
1240
doi:
15
Claas
,
C.
,
Stipp
,
C.S.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2001
)
Evaluation of prototype transmembrane 4 superfamily protein complexes and their relation to lipid rafts
.
J. Biol. Chem.
276
,
7974
7984
doi:
16
Skubitz
,
K.M.
,
Campbell
,
K.D.
and
Skubitz
,
A.P.N.
(
2000
)
CD63 associates with CD11/CD18 in large detergent-resistant complexes after translocation to the cell surface in human neutrophils 1
.
Cell
469
,
52
56
PMID:
[PubMed]
17
Kovalenko
,
O.V.
Metcalf
,
D.G.
,
DeGrado
,
W.F.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2005
)
Structural organization and interactions of transmembrane domains in tetraspanin proteins
.
BMC Struct. Biol.
5
,
11
doi:
18
Zimmerman
,
B.
,
Kelly
,
B.
,
McMillan
,
B.J.
,
Seegar
,
T.C.M.
,
Dror
,
R.O.
,
Kruse
,
A.
et al. 
(
2016
)
Crystal structure of a full-length human tetraspanin reveals a cholesterol-binding pocket
.
Cell
167
,
1041
1051.e11
doi:
19
Tu
,
L.
,
Kong
,
X.-P.
,
Sun
,
T.-T.
and
Kreibich
,
G.
(
2006
)
Integrity of all four transmembrane domains of the tetraspanin uroplakin Ib is required for its exit from the ER
.
J. Cell Sci.
119
(
Pt 24
),
5077
5086
doi:
20
Toyo-oka
,
K.
,
Yashiro-ohtani
,
Y.Y.
,
Park
,
C.-S.
,
Tai
,
X.-G.
,
Miyake
,
K.
,
Hamaoka
,
T.
et al. 
(
1999
)
Association of a tetraspanin CD9 with CD5 on the T cell surface: role of particular transmembrane domains in the association
.
Int. Immunol.
11
,
2043
2052
doi:
21
Cannon
,
K.S.
and
Cresswell
,
P.
(
2001
)
Quality control of transmembrane domain assembly in the tetraspanin CD82
.
EMBO J.
20
,
2443
2453
doi:
22
Bienstock
,
R.J.
and
Carl Barrett
,
J.C.
(
2001
)
KAI1, a prostate metastasis suppressor: prediction of solvated structure and interactions with binding partners; integrins, cadherins, and cell-surface receptor proteins
.
Mol. Carcinog.
32
,
139
153
doi:
23
Rajesh
,
S.
,
Sridhar
,
P.
,
Tews
,
B.A.
,
Fénéant
,
L.
,
Cocquerel
,
L.
,
Ward
,
D.G.
et al. 
(
2012
)
Structural basis of ligand interactions of the large extracellular domain of tetraspanin CD81
.
J. Virol.
86
,
9606
9616
doi:
24
Schmidt
,
T.H.
,
Homsi
,
Y.
and
Lang
,
T.
(
2016
)
Oligomerization of the tetraspanin CD81 via the flexibility of its δ-loop
.
Biophys. J.
110
,
2463
2474
doi:
25
Drummer
,
H.E.
,
Wilson
,
K.A.
and
Poumbourios
,
P.
(
2005
)
Determinants of CD81 dimerization and interaction with hepatitis C virus glycoprotein E2
.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
328
,
251
257
doi:
26
Hulme
,
R.S.
,
Higginbottom
,
A.
,
Palmer
,
J.
,
Partridge
,
L.J.
,
Monk
,
P.N.
and
Thali
,
M.
(
2014
)
Distinct regions of the large extracellular domain of tetraspanin CD9 are involved in the control of human multinucleated giant cell formation
.
PLoS ONE
9
,
e116289
doi:
27
Seigneuret
,
M.
,
Delaguillaumie
,
A.
,
Lagaudrière-Gesbert
,
C.
and
Conjeaud
,
H.
(
2001
)
Structure of the tetraspanin main extracellular domain: a partially conserved fold with a structurally variable domain insertion
.
J. Biol. Chem.
276
,
40055
40064
doi:
28
Seigneuret
,
M.
(
2006
)
Complete predicted three-dimensional structure of the facilitator transmembrane protein and hepatitis C virus receptor CD81: conserved and variable structural domains in the tetraspanin superfamily
.
Biophys. J.
90
,
212
227
doi:
29
Charrin
,
S.
,
le Naour
,
F.
,
Silvie
,
O.
,
Milhiet
,
P.-E.
,
Boucheix
,
C.
and
Rubinstein
,
E.
(
2009
)
Lateral organization of membrane proteins: tetraspanins spin their web
.
Biochem. J.
420
,
133
154
doi:
30
Kovalenko
,
O.V.
Yang
,
X.
,
Kolesnikova
,
T.V.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2004
)
Evidence for specific tetraspanin homodimers: inhibition of palmitoylation makes cysteine residues available for cross-linking
.
Biochem. J.
377
(
Pt 2
),
407
417
doi:
31
Zuidscherwoude
,
M.
,
Göttfert
,
F.
,
Dunlock
,
V.M.E.
,
Figdor
,
C.G.
,
van den Bogaart
,
G.
and
Van Spriel
,
A.B.
(
2015
)
The tetraspanin web revisited by super-resolution microscopy
.
Sci. Rep.
5
,
12201
doi:
32
Berditchevski
,
F.
,
Odintsova
,
E.
,
Sawada
,
S.
and
Gilbert
,
E.
(
2002
)
Expression of the palmitoylation-deficient CD151 weakens the association of α3β1 integrin with the tetraspanin-enriched microdomains and affects integrin-dependent signaling
.
J. Biol. Chem.
277
,
36991
37000
doi:
33
Charrin
,
S.
,
Manié
,
S.
,
Oualid
,
M.
,
Billard
,
M.
,
Boucheix
,
C.
and
Rubinstein
,
E.
(
2002
)
Differential stability of tetraspanin/tetraspanin interactions: role of palmitoylation
.
FEBS Lett.
516
,
139
144
doi:
34
Yang
,
X.H.
,
Kovalenko
,
O.V.
,
Kolesnikova
,
T.V.
,
Andzelm
,
M.M.
,
Rubinstein
,
E.
,
Strominger
,
J.L.
et al. 
(
2006
)
Contrasting effects of EWI proteins, integrins, and protein palmitoylation on cell surface CD9 organization
.
J. Biol. Chem.
281
,
12976
12985
doi:
35
Delandrea
,
C.
,
Penabaz
,
T.R.
,
Passarelli
,
A.L.
,
Chapes
,
S.K.
and
Clema
,
R.J.
(
2009
)
Mutation of juxtamembrane cysteines in the tetraspanin CD81 affects palmitoylation and alters interaction with other proteins at the cell surface
.
Exp. Cell Res.
315
,
1953
1963
doi:
36
Zhou
,
B.
,
Liu
,
L.
,
Reddivari
,
M.
and
Zhang
,
X.A.
(
2004
)
The palmitoylation of metastasis suppressor KAI1/CD82 is important for its motility- and invasiveness-inhibitory activity
.
Cancer Res.
64
,
7455
7463
doi:
37
Israels
,
S.J.
and
McMillan-Ward
,
E.M.
(
2010
)
Palmitoylation supports the association of tetraspanin CD63 with CD9 and integrin αIIbβ3 in activated platelets
.
Thromb. Res.
125
,
152
158
doi:
38
Cherukuri
,
A.
,
Carter
,
R.H.
,
Brooks
,
S.
,
Bornmann
,
W.
,
Finn
,
R.
,
Dowd
,
C.S.
et al. 
(
2004
)
B cell signaling is regulated by induced palmitoylation of CD81
.
J. Biol. Chem.
279
,
31973
31982
doi:
39
Charrin
,
S.
,
Manié
,
S.
,
Thiele
,
C.
,
Billard
,
M.
,
Gerlier
,
D.
,
Boucheix
,
C.
et al. 
(
2003
)
A physical and functional link between cholesterol and tetraspanins
.
Eur. J. Immunol.
33
,
2479
2489
doi:
40
Toledo
,
M.S.
,
Suzuki
,
E.
,
Handa
,
K.
and
Hakomori
,
S.
(
2005
)
Effect of ganglioside and tetraspanins in microdomains on interaction of integrins with fibroblast growth factor receptor
.
J. Biol. Chem.
280
,
16227
16234
doi:
41
Odintsova
,
E.
,
Butters
,
T.D.
,
Monti
,
E.
,
Sprong
,
H.
,
van Meer
,
G.
and
Berditchevski
,
F.
(
2006
)
Gangliosides play an important role in the organization of CD82-enriched microdomains
.
Biochem. J.
400
,
315
325
doi:
42
Homsi
,
Y.
,
Schloetel
,
J.-G.
,
Scheffer
,
K.D.
,
Schmidt
,
T.H.
,
Destainville
,
N.
,
Florin
,
L.
et al. 
(
2014
)
The extracellular δ-domain is essential for the formation of CD81 tetraspanin webs
.
Biophys. J.
107
,
100
113
doi:
43
Homsi
,
Y.
and
Lang
,
T.
(
2017
)
The specificity of homomeric clustering of CD81 is mediated by its δ-loop
.
FEBS Open Bio.
7
,
274
283
doi:
44
Serru
,
V.
,
Le Naour
,
F.
,
Billard
,
M.
,
Azorsa
,
D.O.
,
Lanza
,
F.
,
Boucheix
,
C.
et al. 
(
1999
)
Selective tetraspan–integrin complexes (CD81/α4β1, CD151/α3β1,CD151/α6β1) under conditions disrupting tetraspan interactions
.
Biochem. J.
340
,
103
111
doi:
45
Shoham
,
T.
,
Rajapaksa
,
R.
,
Kuo
,
C.-C.
,
Haimovich
,
J.
and
Levy
,
S.
(
2006
)
Building of the tetraspanin web: distinct structural domains of CD81 function in different cellular compartments
.
Mol. Cell Biol.
26
,
1373
1385
doi:
46
Charrin
,
S.
,
Le Naour
,
F.
,
Labas
,
V.
,
Billard
,
M.
,
Le Caer
,
J.-P.
,
Emile
,
J.-F.
et al. 
(
2003
)
EWI-2 is a new component of the tetraspanin web in hepatocytes and lymphoid cells
.
Biochem. J.
373
(
Pt 2
),
409
421
doi:
47
Imai
,
T.
and
Yoshie
,
O.
(
1993
)
C33 antigen and M38 antigen recognized by monoclonal antibodies inhibitory to syncytium formation by human T cell leukemia virus type 1 are both members of the transmembrane 4 superfamily and associate with each other and with CD4 or CD8 in T cells
.
J. Immunol.
151
,
6470
6481
PMID:
[PubMed]
48
Szöllósi
,
J.
,
Horejsí
,
V.
,
Bene
,
L.
,
Angelisová
,
P.
and
Damjanovich
,
S.
(
1996
)
Supramolecular complexes of MHC class I, MHC class II, CD20, and tetraspan molecules (CD53, CD81, and CD82) at the surface of a B cell line JY
.
J. Immunol.
157
,
2939
2946
PMID:
[PubMed]
49
Yauch
,
R.L.
,
Berditchevski
,
F.
,
Harler
,
M.B.
,
Reichner
,
J.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
1998
)
Highly stoichiometric, stable, and specific association of integrin α3β1 with CD151 provides a major link to phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase, and may regulate cell migration
.
Mol. Biol. Cell
9
,
2751
2765
doi:
50
Zevian
,
S.
,
Winterwood
,
N.E.
and
Stipp
,
C.S.
(
2011
)
Structure-function analysis of tetraspanin CD151 reveals distinct requirements for tumor cell behaviors mediated by α3β1 versus α6β4 integrin
.
J. Biol. Chem.
286
,
7496
7506
doi:
51
Yu
,
J.
,
Lee
,
C.-Y.
,
Changou
,
C.A.
,
Cedano-Prieto
,
D.M.
,
Takada
,
Y.K.
and
Takada
,
Y.
(
2017
)
The CD9, CD81, and CD151 EC2 domains bind to the classical RGD-binding site of integrin αvβ3
.
Biochem. J.
474
,
589
596
doi:
52
Noy
,
P.J.
,
Yang
,
J.
,
Reyat
,
J.S.
,
Matthews
,
A.L.
,
Charlton
,
A.E.
,
Furmston
,
J.
et al. 
(
2016
)
TspanC8 tetraspanins and a disintegrin and metalloprotease 10 (ADAM10) interact via their extracellular regions: evidence for distinct binding mechanisms for different TspanC8 proteins
.
J. Biol. Chem.
291
,
3145
3157
doi:
53
Maecker
,
T.
,
Todd
,
C.
and
Levy
,
S.
(
1997
)
The tetraspanin facilitators
.
FASEB J.
11
,
428
442
PMID:
[PubMed]
54
Ono
,
M.
,
Handa
,
K.
,
Withers
,
D.A.
and
Hakomori
,
S.-i.
(
2000
)
Glycosylation effect on membrane domain (GEM) involved in cell adhesion and motility: a preliminary note on functional α3, α5-CD82 glycosylation complex in ldlD 14 cells
.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
279
,
744
750
doi:
55
Yoshida
,
T.
,
Ebina
,
H.
and
Koyanagi
,
Y.
(
2009
)
N-linked glycan-dependent interaction of CD63 with CXCR4 at the Golgi apparatus induces downregulation of CXCR4
.
Microbiol. Immunol.
53
,
629
635
doi:
56
White
,
A.
,
Lamb
,
P.W.
and
Barrett
,
J.C.
(
1998
)
Frequent downregulation of the KAI1(CD82) metastasis suppressor protein in human cancer cell lines
.
Oncogene
16
,
3143
3149
doi:
57
Schwartz-Albiez
,
R.
,
Dörken
,
B.
,
Hofmann
,
W.
and
Moldenhauer
,
G.
(
1988
)
The B cell-associated CD37 antigen (gp40-52). Structure and subcellular expression of an extensively glycosylated glycoprotein
.
J. Immunol.
140
,
905
914
PMID:
[PubMed]
58
Garcia-España
,
A.
,
Mares
,
R.
,
Sun
,
T.-T.
,
DeSalle
,
R.
and
Valcarcel
,
J.
(
2009
)
Intron evolution: testing hypotheses of intron evolution using the phylogenomics of tetraspanins
.
PLoS ONE
4
,
e4680
doi:
59
Montpellier
,
C.
,
Tews
,
B.A.
,
Poitrimole
,
J.
,
Rocha-Perugini
,
V.
,
D'Arienzo
,
V.
,
Potel
,
J.
et al. 
(
2011
)
Interacting regions of CD81 and two of its partners, EWI-2 and EWI-2wint, and their effect on hepatitis C virus infection
.
J. Biol. Chem.
286
,
13954
13965
doi:
60
Ono
,
M.
,
Handa
,
K.
,
Sonnino
,
S.
,
Withers
,
D.A.
,
Nagai
,
H.
and
Hakomori
,
S.I.
(
2001
)
GM3 ganglioside inhibits CD9-facilitated haptotactic cell motility: coexpression of GM3 and CD9 is essential in the downregulation of tumor cell motility and malignancy
.
Biochemistry
40
,
6414
6421
doi:
61
Zhang
,
X.A.
,
Bontrager
,
A.L.
and
Hemler
,
M.E.
(
2001
)
Transmembrane-4 superfamily proteins associate with activated protein kinase C (PKC) and link PKC to specific β1 integrins
.
J. Biol. Chem.
276
,
25005
25013
doi:
62
Clark
,
K.L.
,
Oelke
,
A.
,
Johnson
,
M.E.
,
Eilert
,
K.D.
,
Simpson
,
P.C.
, and
Todd
,
S.C.
(
2004
)
CD81 associates with 14-3-3 in a redox-regulated palmitoylation-dependent manner
.
J. Biol. Chem.
279
,
19401
19406
doi:
63
Hong
,
I.-K.
,
Jeoung
,
D.-I.
,
Ha
,
K.-S.
,
Kim
,
Y.-M.
and
Lee
,
H.
(
2012
)
Tetraspanin CD151 stimulates adhesion-dependent activation of Ras, Rac, and Cdc42 by facilitating molecular association between β1 integrins and small GTPases
.
J. Biol. Chem.
287
,
32027
32039
doi:
64
Tejera
,
E.
,
Rocha-perugini
,
V.
,
López-martín
,
S.
,
Pérez-hernández
,
D.,
Bachir
,
A.I.
and
Horwitz
,
A.R.
(
2013
)
CD81 regulates cell migration through its association with Rac GTPase
.
Mol. Biol. Cell
24
,
261
273
doi:
65
Latysheva
,
N.
,
Muratov
,
G.
,
Rajesh
,
S.
,
Padgett
,
M.
,
Hotchin
,
N.A.
,
Overduin
,
M.
et al. 
(
2006
)
Syntenin-1 is a new component of tetraspanin-enriched microdomains: mechanisms and consequences of the interaction of syntenin-1 with CD63
.
Mol. Cell Biol.
26
,
7707
7718
doi:
66
Termini
,
C.M.
,
Lidke
,
K.A.
and
Gillette
,
J.M.
(
2016
)
Tetraspanin CD82 regulates the spatiotemporal dynamics of PKCα in acute myeloid leukemia
.
Sci. Rep.
6
,
1
14
doi:
67
Lapalombella
,
R.
,
Yeh
,
Y.-Y.
,
Wang
,
L.
,
Ramanunni
,
A.
,
Rafiq
,
S.
,
Jha
,
S.
et al. 
(
2012
)
Tetraspanin CD37 directly mediates transduction of survival and apoptotic signals
.
Cancer Cell
21
,
694
708
doi:
68
van Spriel
,
A.B.
,
de Keijzer
,
S.
,
van der Schaaf
,
A.
,
Gartlan
,
K.H.
,
Sofi
,
M.
,
Light
,
A.
et al. 
(
2012
)
The tetraspanin CD37 orchestrates the α4β1 integrin-Akt signaling axis and supports long-lived plasma cell survival
.
Sci. Signal.
5
,
ra82
doi:
69
Liu
,
L.
,
He
,
B.
,
Liu
,
W.M.
,
Zhou
,
D.
,
Cox
,
J.V.
and
Zhang
,
X.A.
(
2007
)
Tetraspanin CD151 promotes cell migration by regulating integrin trafficking
.
J. Biol. Chem.
282
,
31631
31642
doi:
70
Rous
,
B.A.
,
Reaves
,
B.J.
,
Ihrke
,
G.
,
Briggs
,
J.A.G.
,
Gray
,
S.R.
,
Stephens
,
D.J.
et al. 
(
2002
)
Role of adaptor complex AP-3 in targeting wild- type and mutated CD63 to lysosomes
.
Mol. Biol. Cell
13
,
1071
1082
doi:
71
Levy
,
S.
and
Shoham
,
T.
(
2011
)
Protein-protein interactions in the tetraspanin web
.
Physiology
20
,
218
224
doi:
72
Sala-Valdés
,
M.
,
Ursa
,
Á.
,
Charrin
,
S.
,
Rubinstein
,
E.
,
Hemler
,
M.E.
,
Sánchez-Madrid
,
F.
et al. 
(
2006
)
EWI-2 and EWI-F link the tetraspanin web to the actin cytoskeleton through their direct association with ezrin-radixin-moesin proteins
.
J. Biol. Chem.
281
,
19665
19675
doi:

Author notes

*

These authors contributed equally to this work.