Structural and dynamic characterization of the C-terminal tail of ErbB2: disordered but not random
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT ErbB2 (or HER2) is a receptor tyrosine kinase overexpressed in some breast cancers, associated with poor prognosis. Treatments targeting the receptor extracellular and kinase domains have greatly improved disease outcome in the last twenty years. In parallel, the structures of these domains have been described, enabling better mechanistic understanding of the receptor function and targeted inhibition. However, ErbB2 disordered C-terminal cytoplasmic tail (CtErbB2) remains very poorly characterized in terms of structure, dynamics and detailed functional mechanism. Yet, it is where signal transduction is triggered, via phosphorylation of tyrosine residues, and carried out, via interaction with adaptor proteins. Here we report the first description of ErbB2 disordered tail at atomic resolution, using NMR and SAXS. We show that although no part of CtErbB2 has any stable secondary or tertiary structure, it has around 20% propensity for a N-terminal helix that is suspected to interact with the kinase domain, and many PPII stretches distributed all along the sequence, forming potential SH3 and WW domains binding sites. Moreover, we identified a long-range transient contact involving CtErbB2 termini. These characteristics suggest new potential mechanisms of auto-regulation and protein-protein interaction. SIGNIFICANCE We report here the first description of the receptor tyrosine kinase ErbB2 disordered tail (CtErbB2) at atomic resolution, using NMR and SAXS. We show that although CtErbB2 exhibits no stable structure, it does exhibit partial secondary and tertiary structures likely important for its function. These structural elements are consistent with an active role of the C-terminal tail in the regulation of the receptor’s activity, thanks to the presence of preformed structures for intramolecular interactions, as well as long-range contacts modulating accessibility of those sites and proline interaction sites distinct from the main tyrosine sites. Together, those results reinforce the view that disordered tails of receptors are more than random anchors for partners.
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 | 0.000 |
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".