The Cytoplasmic and Transmembrane Domains of the p75 and Trk A Receptors Regulate High Affinity Binding to Nerve Growth Factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ligand-induced receptor oligomerization is an established mechanism for receptor-tyrosine kinase activation. However, numerous receptor-tyrosine kinases are expressed in multicomponent complexes with other receptors that may signal independently or alter the binding characteristics of the receptor-tyrosine kinase. Nerve growth factor (NGF) interacts with two structurally unrelated receptors, the Trk A receptor-tyrosine kinase and p75, a tumor necrosis factor receptor family member. Each receptor binds independently to NGF with predominantly low affinity (K(d) = 10(-9) m), but they produce high affinity binding sites (K(d) = 10(-11) m) upon receptor co-expression. Here we provide evidence that the number of high affinity sites is regulated by the ratio of the two receptors and by specific domains of Trk A and p75. Co-expression of Trk A containing mutant transmembrane or cytoplasmic domains with p75 yielded reduced numbers of high affinity binding sites. Similarly, co-expression of mutant p75 containing altered transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains with Trk A also resulted in predominantly low affinity binding sites. Surprisingly, extracellular domain mutations of p75 that abolished NGF binding still generated high affinity binding with Trk A. These results indicate that the transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains of Trk A and p75 are responsible for high affinity site formation and suggest that p75 alters the conformation of Trk A to generate high affinity NGF binding.
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".