Prion Protein Endoproteolysis: Cleavage Sites, Mechanisms and Connections to Prion Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Highly abundant in neurons, the cellular prion protein (PrP C ) is an obligatory precursor to the disease‐associated misfolded isoform denoted PrP Sc that accumulates in the rare neurodegenerative disorders referred to either as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) or as prion diseases. The ability of PrP C to serve as a substrate for this template‐mediated conversion process depends on several criteria but importantly includes the presence or absence of certain endoproteolytic events performed at the cell surface or in acidic endolysosomal compartments. The major endoproteolytic events affecting PrP C are referred to as α‐ and β‐cleavages, and in this review we outline the sites within PrP C at which the cleavages occur, the mechanisms potentially responsible and their relevance to pathology. Although the association of α‐cleavage with neuroprotection is well‐supported, we identify open questions regarding the importance of β‐cleavage in TSEs and suggest experimental approaches that could provide clarification. We also combine findings from in vitro cleavage assays and mass spectrometry‐based studies of prion protein fragments in the brain to present an updated view in which α‐ and β‐cleavages may represent two distinct clusters of proteolytic events that occur at multiple neighbouring sites rather than at single positions. Furthermore, we highlight the candidate proteolytic mechanisms best supported by the literature; currently, despite several proteases identified as capable of processing PrP C in vitro, in cell‐based models and in some cases, in vivo, none have been shown conclusively to cleave PrP C in the brain. Addressing this knowledge gap will be crucial for developing therapeutic interventions to drive PrP C endoproteolysis in a neuroprotective direction. Finally, we end this review by briefly addressing other cleavage events, specifically ectodomain shedding, γ‐cleavage, the generation of atypical pathological fragments in the familial prion disorder Gerstmann–Sträussler–Scheinker syndrome and the possibility of an additional form of endoproteolysis close to the PrP C N‐terminus. image
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".