MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Role of Plasminogen-Fibrin Interaction in Plasminogen Activation by t-PA.

2004· article· en· W2589711530 on OpenAlexaff
Long D. Tieu, Jim C. Fredenburgh, Alan R. Stafford, Jeffrey I. Weitz

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtease and Inhibitor Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZymogenPlasminChemistryPlasminogen activatorFibrinTissue plasminogen activatorBinding siteFibrinogenSurface plasmon resonanceLysineBiochemistryStereochemistryEnzymeMolecular biologyAmino acidBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Plasminogen (Pg) is the zymogen of the fibrinolytic enzyme plasmin (Pn). Fibrin (Fn) promotes the activation of Pg by tissue-type plasminogen activator (t-PA) by serving as a template that brings t-PA and Pg into close proximity. In addition, proteolysis of Fn by Pn generates carboxyl-terminal lysine residues that provide nascent high affinity binding sites for Glu-Pg, thereby promoting Pg activation. Pg activation is also enhanced when Glu-Pg is converted to Lys-Pg, a derivative with higher Fn affinity. Therefore, kinetic and functional data suggest that Pg binding to Fn is a key aspect of efficient Pg activation. To explore this concept, we performed binding and kinetic analyses with Mini-Pg, an elastase-derived fragment of Glu-Pg with reduced Fn affinity. Binding of Glu-Pg, Lys-Pg and Mini-Pg to immobilized fibrinogen (Fg) and fibrin monomer (Fm) was monitored by surface plasmon resonance. The affinity of Glu-Pg for Fm is 4-fold higher than that for Fg with Kd values of 3.1 and 12.5 μM, respectively, whereas Lys-Pg binds with high affinity to both Fg and Fm (Kd values of 0.25 and 0.21 μM, respectively). In contrast, Mini-Pg demonstrates weak binding to Fg and Fm with Kd values of 10.5 and 24.5 μM, respectively. To complement the binding experiments, kinetic studies of Pg activation by t-PA were performed in the absence or presence of native Fn clots by monitoring Pn formation using a Pn-directed chromogenic substrate. As expected, the catalytic efficiency of Lys-Pg or Mini-Pg activation by t-PA in the absence of cofactor was higher than that of Glu-Pg (kcat/KM values of 1.3, 0.325, and 0.026 μM−1 min−1, respectively). The catalytic efficiency of Glu-Pg activation by t-PA is 500-fold higher in the presence of Fn than it is in its absence. The stimulatory effect of fibrin was maintained with Lys and Mini-Pg with over 100-fold enhancement in catalytic efficiency of activation. The fibrin-dependent increase in catalytic efficiency was expressed predominantly through a decrease in KM, with values of >20 and 0.2 μM for Glu-Pg activation in the absence and presence of fibrin, respectively. Lys and Mini-Pg also expressed similar enhancements in catalytic efficiency through a decrease in KM. Thus, despite a 100-fold range in their affinities for Fn, the activation of Mini-Pg, Glu-Pg and Lys-Pg by t-PA are all enhanced by at least 2 orders of magnitude in the presence of Fn. These results demonstrate that substrate binding to Fn is not essential for Fn-mediated stimulation of Pg activation by t-PA. To investigate the importance of the Fn-plasminogen activator interaction, activation studies were carried out using urokinase-type plasminogen activator (u-PA), an activator without Fn affinity. In contrast to the results with t-PA, Fn did not enhance u-PA-mediated activation of Glu, Lys or Mini-Pg. The lack of fibrin stimulation of Pg activation by u-PA suggests that the Pg-Fn interaction is not essential to Pg activation. Therefore, the cofactor role of Fn is expressed predominantly through interaction and stimulation of t-PA. These findings support the hypothesis that Fn binding to t-PA may expose cryptic binding sites in the activator that stabilize the formation of the enzyme-substrate complex.

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicProtease and Inhibitor Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→