MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2623450488 · doi:10.1161/str.47.suppl_1.wp263

Abstract WP263: Mutagenesis Studies Revealed Minimal Impact of Human A120T Variant of Protease-activated Receptor 4 on Receptor function or Pharmacological Response to a Potent and Selective Antagonist

2016· article· en· W2623450488 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Callejo, Jeffrey Colin, Sophie Desmeules, Chi Shing Sum, Tao Wang, John N. Feder, Gabe Mintier, Ke Xu, Zhaoqing Wang, Fraz A. Ismat, Xuewen Ma, Roger Rémillard, Jacques Banville, Anne Marinier, Scott Priestley, Michel Bouvier, Jing Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReceptorPharmacologyAgonistThrombin receptorAntagonistThrombinPlateletInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Protease-activated receptor 4 (PAR4) is a platelet thrombin receptor and a novel target for ischemic stroke treatment. Recent reports suggested a subtle racial difference in platelet responses to submaximal concentrations of PAR4 agonist peptide (PAR4-AP). One of the PAR4 variants, A120T, is more common in African American than white (63% vs. 19%, Edelstein et al., Blood 2014). It was suggested that this variant contributes to the difference in response to PAR4-AP and impacts the in vitro response to YD-3, a PAR4 antagonist. In this study, site-directed mutagenesis was used to evaluate the effect of the A120T variant on PAR4 function and response to a newly discovered potent and selective PAR4 antagonist, UDM-001651. Unlike YD-3, UDM-001651 inhibited thrombin-induced platelet aggregation and prevented thrombosis in a monkey model and thus served as a relevant PAR4 pharmacology tool. Methods: Human PAR4 cDNAs expressing A120 and T120 variants were stably expressed in HEK293 cells. Cell surface expression of PAR4 was analyzed by FACS. Functional responses of cells were evaluated by monitoring calcium mobilization induced by BMS PAR4-AP, which was optimized based on AYPGKF. The potency of UDM-001651 was derived from an 11-point concentration response curve in the calcium assay using PAR4-AP at the EC80 concentration. Transient transfection studies were also performed to confirm the results. Results: Comparable levels of expression and functional responses were observed between A120 and T120 expressing cells. Results from side-by-side comparison between the two cell lines demonstrated no detectable difference in the mean EC50 values (0.42±0.054 versus 0.46±0.051 uM standard error, n=9) in calcium responses to PAR4-AP stimulation. Similarly, the potency of UDM-001651 in the same assay were similar between these two cell lines. Moreover, preliminary clinical results did not show differences in PAR4-mediated platelet response between African-American and white subjects. Conclusion: In contrast to the previous report, the results reported herein from site directed mutagenesis studies indicate that the A120T variant of PAR4 has no apparent impact on calcium signaling in response to agonist stimulation or response to a PAR4 antagonist.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→