Direct evidence for co‐binding of cisplatin and cadmium to a native zinc‐ and cadmium‐containing metallothionein
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cisplatin is widely used to treat a number of cancers, and its covalent binding to DNA is believed to cause cell death; however, the roles of cisplatin–protein interactions in the mechanisms of action, toxicity, and resistance of the drug largely remain to be elucidated. Here, we investigate the interactions of cisplatin and a native rabbit metallothionein (MT), containing 1.4% zinc and 7.9% cadmium, using nanospray tandem quadrupole time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry (MS) and size‐exclusion high‐performance liquid chromatography with inductively coupled plasma MS. At near‐neutral pH conditions, reactions between cisplatin and MT resulted in the formation of complexes that contained Cd4–Ptn–MT (n = 1–7). While zinc was displaced by cisplatin, both platinum and cadmium were bound to the same MT molecule. This is the first report to provide direct evidence for the co‐binding of cadmium and platinum to MT, which suggests that the mechanism of the binding of cisplatin to the native MT may not be through the displacement of cadmium as previously proposed. A tandem MS investigation into the binding sites of the platinum and cadmium to MT showed platinum‐ and cadmium‐related fragments, such as (PtS2C2H7N)+ and (CdS3C5H17N2)+, demonstrating the platinum–cysteine and cadmium–cysteine binding. In addition, detection of Cd4–Pt7–MT demonstrated more than ten metals bound to a single MT molecule. This finding was extended to the binding of MT with a five‐fold excess of CdCl2. As many as 14 metal atoms (13 cadmium and one zinc) were detected bound to a single MT molecule, the complexes being Cdx–Zn–MT (x = 5–13). The high binding capacity of MT for cadmium and platinum is consistent with the role of MT in reduction of metal toxicity and its involvement in drug resistance. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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".