FGFR (fibroblast growth factor receptor) signaling controls fundamental processes in embryonic, fetal and adult human life. The magnitude, duration, and location of FGFR signaling must be strictly controlled in order to induce the correct biological response. Uncontrolled receptor signaling has been shown to lead to a variety of diseases, such as skeletal disorders and cancer. Here we review the numerous cellular mechanisms that regulate and turn off FGFR signaling, once the receptor is activated. These mechanisms include endocytosis and endocytic sorting, phosphatase activity, negative regulatory proteins and negative feedback phosphorylation events. The mechanisms act together simultaneously or sequentially, controlling the same or different steps in FGFR signaling. Although more work is needed to fully understand the regulation of FGFR signaling, it is clear that the cells in our body have evolved an extensive repertoire of mechanisms that together keep FGFR signaling tightly controlled and prevent excess FGFR signaling.

Tight regulation of signaling from receptor tyrosine kinases is required for normal cellular functions and uncontrolled signaling can lead to cancer. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) is a receptor tyrosine kinase that induces proliferation and migration. Deregulation of FGFR2 contributes to tumor progression and activating mutations in FGFR2 are found in several types of cancer. Here, we identified a negative feedback loop regulating FGFR2 signaling. FGFR2 stimulates the Ras/MAPK signaling pathway consisting of Ras-Raf-MEK1/2-ERK1/2. Inhibition of this pathway using a MEK1/2 inhibitor increased FGFR2 signaling. The putative ERK1/2 phosphorylation site at serine 780 (S780) in FGFR2 corresponds to serine 777 in FGFR1 which is directly phosphorylated by ERK1/2. Substitution of S780 in FGFR2 to an alanine also increased signaling. Truncated forms of FGFR2 lacking the C-terminal tail, including S780, have been identified in cancer and S780 has been found mutated to leucine in bladder cancer. Substituting S780 in FGFR2 with leucine increased FGFR2 signaling. Importantly, cells expressing these mutated versions of S780 migrated faster than cells expressing wild-type FGFR2. Thus, ERK1/2-mediated phosphorylation of S780 in FGFR2 constitutes a negative feedback loop and inactivation of this feedback loop in cancer cells causes hyperactivation of FGFR2 signaling, which may result in increased invasive properties.

Fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs) have become an attractive target in cancer research and therapy due to their implication in several cancers. Limitations of current treatment options require a need for additional, more specific and potent strategies to overcome cancers driven by FGFRs. Photochemical internalization (PCI) is a light-controlled method for cytosolic delivery of drugs that are entrapped in endosomes and lysosomes. We here evaluated the efficacy and selectivity of PCI of FGF2-saporin (FGF-SAP) in cells overexpressing FGFR1. FGF-SAP is a conjugate of FGF2 and the highly cytotoxic ribosome-inactivating protein (RIP) saporin, which is used as payload to eliminate cancer cells. Evaluation of the targeting effect of PCI of FGF-SAP was done by comparing the cytotoxic response in osteosarcoma cells with very low levels of FGFR1 (U2OS) to cells overexpressing FGFR1 (U2OS-R1). We demonstrate that PCI greatly enhances cytotoxicity of the drug showing efficient cell killing at pM concentrations of the drug in U2OS-R1 cells. However, U2OS cells were also sensitive to the toxin after PCI. Binding experiments using confocal microscopy and Western blotting techniques indicate that FGF-SAP is taken up by cells through heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs) in U2OS cells. We further show that the cytotoxicity of FGF-SAP in U2OS cells was reduced when cells were co-treated with heparin to compete out binding to HSPG, demonstrating that the cytotoxic effect was due to internalization by HSPGs. We conclude that to prevent off-target effects of FGF-based toxins, it will be necessary to circumvent binding to HSPGs, for example by mutating the binding site of FGF2 to HSPGs.

FGFR1 represents an important target for precision medicine and a detailed molecular understanding of the target is important in order to increase the efficacy of FGFR inhibitors. We have here applied proximity labelling of FGFR1 in an osteosarcoma cell line to identify determinants of FGFR1 activity. Many known FGFR interactors were identified (e.g. FRS2, PLCγ, RSK2, SHC4, SRC), but the data also suggested novel determinants. A strong hit in our screen was the tyrosine phosphatase PTPRG. We show that PTPRG and FGFR1 interact and colocalize at the plasma membrane where PTPRG directly dephosphorylates activated FGFR1. We further show that osteosarcoma cell lines depleted for PTPRG display increased FGFR activity and are hypersensitive to stimulation by FGF1. In addition, PTPRG depletion elevated cell growth and negatively affected the efficacy of FGFR kinase inhibitors. Thus, PTPRG may have future clinical relevance by being a predictor of outcome after FGFR inhibitor treatment.