MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Use of BRET‐based biosensors to characterize the adhesion GPCR ADGRE5/CD97 signalling profile

2018· article· en· W3175825531 on OpenAlexafffund
A Maiga, Élie Simard, Richard Leduc, Michel Bouvier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsQ & T ResearchUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
FundersMitacs
KeywordsG protein-coupled receptorReceptorCell biologyIntegrinChemistryGene isoformCell adhesionBiologyBiochemistryGeneCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADGRE5 or CD97 is an adhesion GPCR broadly expressed in normal hematopoietic cells, smooth muscle cells and has been proposed to play important roles during development. Its expression is found to be increased in a growing number of cancers including acute myeloid leukemia, prostate, gastric, pancreatic, rectal and gallbladder cancers. The receptor is expressed as three alternatively spliced isoforms characterized by the presence of three to five EGF like motifs that play important roles in the binding of differents cells partners, including integrins, CD55 and chondroitin sulfate B. Interstingly, despite their ability to bind to the receptor and participate to its adhesion function, none of these extra‐cellular ligands were linked to signalling activity downstream of the receptor. The lack of functional agonist makes CD97 characterization difficult and very little is known about the downstream signalling pathway(s) that can be engaged by the receptor. A constitutive ability of CD97 towards the G12/G13‐Rho pathway has been reported upon overexpression of the receptor using a gene reporter system[1]. Recent studies on some adhesion GPCRs have demonstrated that the dissociation of their extra cellular domain (ECD) up to their GPCR proteolysis site (GPS) is important for their activation since it reveals a tethered ligand that can activate some of the aGPCR. Consistent with this mode of activation, it has been shown that N‐terminal truncated forms up to the GPS have higher constitutive activity than their wild type (WT) counterparts. Also, soluble peptides mimicking the tethered ligands were shown to activate aGPCRs such as GPR126, GPR133, GPR56 and GPR110 [2 3]. The aim of the study was to characterize the signalling activity of ADGRE5/CD97 and to assess whether the thetered ligand mode of activation also applies to this member of the adhesion GPCR family. For this purpose we used a collection of BRET‐based biosensors monitoring the real time activation of G12, G13, Gs, Gq and b‐arrestin in living cells. The constitutive activity of the WT and GPS‐truncated (CD97‐GPS) forms of CD97 were assessed on each pathways by expressing increasing concentration of the receptor. No significant constutive activity was observed for any of the pathways tested upon overexpression of the wt receptor whereas constitutive activation of all the pathways tested was observed following expression of CD97‐GPS. Signalling downstream of G12/13 was confirmed by monitoring the recruitment of Rho‐GEF‐P115 to the plasma membrane upon over‐expression of CD97‐GPS. Sequential deletion of amino acids from the GPS site into the proposed thetered ligands resulted in a reduced constitutive activation, suggesting the presence of a cryptic activating peptide in the N‐terminus of CD97. To further test this hypothesis, synthetic peptides mimicking the putative the thered ligands were tested for ther ability to activate G13 and b‐arrestin. Our prelimirary results suggest that such a 13 amino acid peptide may activate the receptor. Taken together our data suggest that CD97 can engage G protein and b‐arrestin signalling pathways and that the activation may involve a thetered agonist revealed by the cleavage of CD97 at the GPS. The assays developed in the present study are suitable for hight throughtup screening for the identification of synthetic agonists and antagonists for the study of this receptor. Support or Funding Information MITACS, Domain therapeutics This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling→French-language works237,207→