Inhibition of a Cathepsin L-Like Cysteine Protease by a Chimeric Propeptide-Derived Inhibitor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Like other papain-related cathepsins, congopain from Trypanosoma congolense is synthesized as a zymogen. We have previously identified a proregion-derived peptide (Pcp27), acting as a weak and reversible inhibitor of congopain. Pcp27 contains a 5-mer YHNGA motif, which is essential for selectivity in the inhibition of its mature form [Lalmanach, G., Lecaille, F., Chagas, J. R., Authié, E., Scharfstein, J., Juliano, M. A., and Gauthier, F. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 25112-25116]. In the work presented here, a homology model of procongopain was generated and subsequently used to model a chimeric 50-mer peptide (called H3-Pcp27) corresponding to the covalent linkage of an unrelated peptide (H3 helix from Antennapedia) to Pcp27. Molecular simulations suggested that H3-Pcp27 (pI = 9.99) maintains an N-terminal helical conformation, and establishes more complementary electrostatic interactions (E(coul) = -25.77 kcal/mol) than 16N-Pcp27, the 34-mer Pcp27 sequence plus the 16 native residues upstream from the proregion (E(coul) = 0.20 kcal/mol), with the acid catalytic domain (pI = 5.2) of the mature enzyme. In silico results correlated with the significant improvement of congopain inhibition by H3-Pcp27 (K(i) = 24 nM), compared to 16N-Pcp27 (K(i) = 1 microM). In addition, virtual alanine scanning of H3 and 16N identified the residues contributing most to binding affinity. Both peptides did not inhibit human cathepsins B and L. In conclusion, these data support the notion that the positively charged H3 helix favors binding, without modifying the selectivity of Pcp27 for congopain.
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) | 0.000 | 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".