MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115123775 · doi:10.1096/fj.06-7060com

Proprotein convertases promote processing of VEGF‐D, a critical step for binding the angiogenic receptor VEGFR‐2

2007· article· en· W2115123775 on OpenAlexaff
Bradley McColl, Karri Paavonen, Tara Karnezis, Nicole C. Harris, Natalia Davydova, Julie Rothacker, Edouard C. Nice, Kenneth W. Harder, Sally Roufail, Margaret L. Hibbs, Peter A. W. Rogers, Kari Alitalo, Steven A. Stacker, Marc G. Achen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic System and Diseases
Canadian institutionsVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsFurinAngiogenesisProprotein ConvertasesProteasesVascular endothelial growth factorProprotein convertaseReceptorCell biologyBiologyChemistryCancer researchLDL receptorBiochemistryVEGF receptorsEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)‐D is a secreted glycoprotein that induces angio‐genesis and lymphangiogenesis. It consists of a central domain, containing binding sites for VEGF receptor‐2 (VEGFR‐2) and VEGFR‐3, and N‐ and C‐terminal propep‐tides. It is secreted from the cell as homodimers of the full‐length form that can be proteolytically processed to remove the propeptides. It was recently shown, using adenoviral gene delivery, that fully processed VEGF‐D induces angiogenesis in vivo , whereas full‐length VEGF‐D does not. To better understand these observations, we monitored the effect of VEGF‐D processing on receptor binding using a full‐length VEGF‐D mutant that cannot be processed. This mutant binds VEGFR‐2, the receptor signaling for angiogenesis, with ~17, 000‐fold lower affinity than mature VEGF‐D, indicating the importance of processing for interaction with this receptor. Further, we show that members of the proprotein convertase (PC) family of proteases promote VEGF‐D processing, which facilitates the VEGF‐D/VEGFR‐2 interaction. The PCs furin and PC5 promote cleavage of both propeptides, whereas PC7 promotes cleavage of the C‐terminal propeptide only. The finding that PCs promote activation of VEGF‐D and other proteins with roles in cancer such as matrix metalloproteinases, emphasizes the importance of these enzymes as potential regulators of tumor progression and metastasis.—McColl, B. K., Paavonen, K., Karnezis, T., Harris, N. C., Davydova, N., Rothacker, J., Nice, E. C., Harder, K. W., Roufail, S., Hibbs, M. L., Rogers, P. A. W., Alitalo, K., Stacker, S. A., Achen, M. G. Proprotein convertases promote processing of VEGF‐D, a critical step for binding the angiogenic receptor VEGFR‐2. FASEB J. 21, 1088–1098 (2007)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations119
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicLymphatic System and DiseasesFrench-language works237,207