[Ser2]- and [Ser(P)2]Incretin Analogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP; also known as gastric inhibitory polypeptide) are incretin hormones that reduce postprandial glycemic excursions via enhancing insulin release but are rapidly inactivated by enzymatic N-terminal truncation. As such, efforts have been made to improve their plasma stability by synthetic modification or by inhibition of the responsible protease, dipeptidyl peptidase (DP) IV. Here we report a parallel comparison of synthetic GIP and GLP-1 with their Ser2- and Ser(P)2-substituted analogs, examining receptor binding and activation, metabolic stability, and biological effects in vivo. Both incretins and their Ser2-substituted analogs showed similar EC50s (0.16-0.52 nm) and IC50s (4.3-8.1 nm) at their respective cloned receptors. Although both phosphoserine 2-modified (Ser(PO3H2); Ser(P)) peptides were able to stimulate maximal cAMP production and fully displace receptor-bound tracer, they showed significantly right-shifted concentration-response curves and binding affinities. Ser2-substituted analogs were moderately resistant to DP IV cleavage, whereas [Ser(P)2]GIP and [Ser(P)2] GLP-1 showed complete resistance to purified DP IV. It was shown that the Ser(P) forms were dephosphorylated in serum and thus in vivo act as precursor forms of Ser2-substituted analogs. When injected subcutaneously into conscious Wistar rats, all peptides reduced glycemic excursions (rank potency: [Ser(P)2]incretins > or = [Ser2] incretins > native hormones). Insulin determinations indicated that the reductions in postprandial glycemia were at least in part insulin-mediated. Thus it has been shown that despite having low in vitro bioactivity using receptor-transfected cells, in vivo potency of [Ser(P)2] incretins was comparable with or greater than that of native or [Ser2]peptides. Hence, Ser(P)2-modified incretins present as novel glucose-lowering agents.
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) | 0.002 | 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".