Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV (DPIV/CD26) Degradation of Glucagon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, numerous studies have been targeted at defining structure-activity relationships of glucagon. Recently, we have found that glucagon(1-29) is hydrolyzed by dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPIV) to produce glucagon(3-29) and glucagon(5-29); in human serum, [pyroglutamyl (pGlu)(3)]glucagon(3-29) is formed from glucagon(3-29), and this prevents further hydrolysis of glucagon by DPIV (H.-U. Demuth, K. Glund, U. Heiser, J. Pospisilik, S. Hinke, T. Hoffmann, F. Rosche, D. Schlenzig, M. Wermann, C. McIntosh, and R. Pederson, manuscript in preparation). In the current study, the biological activity of these peptides was examined in vitro. The amino-terminally truncated peptides all behaved as partial agonists in cyclic AMP stimulation assays, with Chinese hamster ovary K1 cells overexpressing the human glucagon receptor (potency: glucagon(1-29) > [pGlu(3)]glu- cagon(3-29) > glucagon(3-29) > glucagon(5-29) > [Glu(9)]glu- cagon(2-29)). In competition binding experiments, [pGlu(3)]glucagon(3-29) and glucagon(5-29) both demonstrated 5-fold lower affinity for the receptor than glucagon(1-29), whereas glucagon(3-29) exhibited 18-fold lower affinity. Of the peptides tested, only glucagon(5-29) showed antagonist activity, and this was weak compared with the classical glucagon antagonist, [Glu(9)]glucagon(2-29). Hence, DPIV hydrolysis of glucagon yields low affinity agonists of the glucagon receptor. As a corollary to evidence indicating that DPIV degrades glucagon (Demuth, et al., manuscript in preparation), DPIV-resistant analogs were synthesized. Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry was used to assess DPIV resistance, and it allowed kinetic analysis of degradation. Of several analogs generated, only [D-Ser(2)] and [Gly(2)]glucagon retained high affinity binding and biological potency, similar to native glucagon in vitro. [D-Ser(2)]Glucagon exhibited enhanced hyperglycemic activity in a bioassay, whereas [Gly(2)]glucagon was not completely resistant to DPIV degradation.
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 | 0.001 |
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".