The Ras family of small guanine nucleotide-binding proteins behave as molecular switches: they are switched off and inactive when bound to GDP but can be activated by GTP binding in response to signal transduction pathways. Early structural analysis showed that two regions of the protein, which change conformation depending on the nucleotide present, mediate this switch. A large number of X-ray, NMR and simulation studies have shown that this is an over-simplification. The switch regions themselves are highly dynamic and can exist in distinct sub-states in the GTP-bound form that have different affinities for other proteins. Furthermore, regions outside the switches have been found to be sensitive to the nucleotide state of the protein, indicating that allosteric change is more widespread than previously thought. Taken together, the accrued knowledge about small G protein structures, allostery and dynamics will be essential for the design and testing of the next generation of inhibitors, both orthosteric and allosteric, as well as for understanding their mode of action.

The Myc proteins comprise a family of ubiquitous regulators of gene expression implicated in over half of all human cancers. They interact with a large number of other proteins, such as transcription factors, chromatin-modifying enzymes and kinases. Remarkably, few of these interactions have been characterized structurally. This is at least in part due to the intrinsically disordered nature of Myc proteins, which adopt a defined conformation only in the presence of binding partners. Owing to this behaviour, crystallographic studies on Myc proteins have been limited to short fragments in complex with other proteins. Most recently, we determined the crystal structure of Aurora-A kinase domain bound to a 28-amino acid fragment of the N-Myc transactivation domain. The structure reveals an α-helical segment within N-Myc capped by two tryptophan residues that recognize the surface of Aurora-A. The kinase domain acts as a molecular scaffold, independently of its catalytic activity, upon which this region of N-Myc becomes ordered. The binding site for N-Myc on Aurora-A is disrupted by certain ATP-competitive inhibitors, such as MLN8237 (alisertib) and CD532, and explains how these kinase inhibitors are able to disrupt the protein–protein interaction to affect Myc destabilization. Structural studies on this and other Myc complexes will lead to the design of protein–protein interaction inhibitors as chemical tools to dissect the complex pathways of Myc regulation and function, which may be developed into Myc inhibitors for the treatment of cancer.

UBDs [Ub (ubiquitin)-binding domains], which are typically small protein motifs of <50 residues, are used by receptor proteins to transduce post-translational Ub modifications in a wide range of biological processes, including NF-κB (nuclear factor κB) signalling and proteasomal degradation pathways. More than 20 families of UBDs have now been characterized in structural detail and, although many recognize the canonical Ile 44 /Val 70 -binding patch on Ub, a smaller number have alternative Ub-recognition sites. The A20 Znf (A20-like zinc finger) of the ZNF216 protein is one of the latter and binds with high affinity to a polar site on Ub centred around Asp 58 /Gln 62 . ZNF216 shares some biological function with p62, with both linked to NF-κB signal activation and as shuttle proteins in proteasomal degradation pathways. The UBA domain (Ub-associated domain) of p62, although binding to Ub through the Ile 44 /Val 70 patch, is unique in forming a stable dimer that negatively regulates Ub recognition. We show that the A20 Znf and UBA domain are able to form a ternary complex through independent interactions with a single Ub molecule, supporting functional models for Ub as a ‘hub’ for mediating multi-protein complex assembly and for enhancing signalling specificity.

Histone H1 and HMGB1 (high-mobility group protein B1) are the most abundant chromosomal proteins apart from the core histones (on average, one copy per nucleosome and per ten nucleosomes respectively). They are both highly mobile in the cell nucleus, with high on/off rates for binding. In vivo and in vitro evidence shows that both are able to organize chromatin structure, with H1 binding resulting in a more stable structure and HMGB1 binding in a less stable structure. The binding sites for H1 and HMGB1 in chromatin are partially overlapping, and replacement of H1 by HMGB1 through the highly dynamic nature of their binding, possibly facilitated by interaction between them, could result in switching of chromatin states. Binding of HMGB1 to DNA or chromatin is regulated by its long and highly acidic tail, which is also involved in H1 binding. The present article focuses mainly on HMGB1 and its interaction with chromatin and H1, as well as its chaperone role in the binding of certain transcription factors (e.g. p53) to their cognate DNA.

Solution-state NMR has become an accepted method for studying the structure of small proteins in solution. This has resulted in over 3000 NMR-based co-ordinate sets being deposited in the Protein Databank. It is becoming increasingly apparent, however, that NMR is also a very powerful tool for accessing interactions between macromolecules and various ligands. These interactions can be assessed at a wide variety of levels, e.g. qualitative screening of libraries of pharmaceuticals and ‘chemical shift mapping’. Dissociation constants can sometimes be obtained in such cases. Another example would be the complete three-dimensional structure determination of a protein–ligand complex. Here we briefly describe a few of the principles involved and illustrate the method with recent examples.