Structure-Function Analysis of the Prosegment of the Proprotein Convertase PC5A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate if some residues within the prosegment of PC5A are important for its optimal proteolytic function, various PC5A mutants were cellularly expressed, and their processing activities were compared using pro-vascular endothelial growth factor C (pro-VEGF-C) as a substrate. Although wild type PC5A almost completely processes pro-VEGF-C, a prosegment deletion as well as both P1 mutants of the primary (R116A) and secondary (R84A) autocatalytic cleavage sites are inactive. The in vitro inhibitory potency of various decapeptides mimicking the C-terminal sequence of PC5 prosegment (pPC5) revealed that the native (107)QQVVKKRTKR(116) peptide is a nanomolar inhibitor, whereas its P6 mutant K111H is more selective toward PC5A than Furin. In vitro activity assays using the bacterially expressed pPC5 and its mutants revealed them to be very potent nanomolar inhibitors (IC(50)) and only approximately 6-fold more selective inhibitors of PC5A versus Furin. Expression of the preprosegment of PC5 (ppPC5) and its mutants in Chinese hamster ovary FD11 cells overexpressing pro-VEGF-C with either PC5A or Furin showed them to be as good inhibitors of PC5A as the serpin alpha1-antitrypsin Portland (alpha1-PDX), ppFurin, or ppPACE4 but less potent toward overexpressed Furin. In conclusion, cleavages of the prosegment of PC5A at both Arg(116) and Arg(84) are required for PC5A cellular activity, and ppPC5 is a very potent but modestly selective cellular inhibitor of PC5A.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".