Population studies have established that one of the common isoforms of apolipoprotein E, the apoE4, is associated with higher incidence and earlier age of onset of late onset familial Alzheimer's disease (AD), whereas apoE2 may have the opposite effect. The apoE3 and apoE4 isoforms were shown to display different binding reactivities with amyloid beta peptide (Abeta) and tau protein in vitro. On the basis of these findings, it has been proposed that the apoE isoforms may modulate positively or negatively the formation of either the neurofibrillary tangles or the amyloid deposits in the brain of patients with AD. To study the interaction of Abeta with nascent apoE isoforms we have expressed their cDNAs in baby hamster kidney (BHK-21) cells using the Semliki Forest Virus expression system. Analysis of the secreted apoE by one- and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and immunoblotting showed that the nascent apoE is heavily modified with carbohydrate chains containing sialic acid. A dimeric form of apoE is formed with apoE2 and apoE3 but not with apoE4 isoforms. Analysis of the interaction of nascent apoE2, apoE3, and apoE4 produced by BHK-21 cells with Abeta (1-40) under physiological conditions (pH 7.4, 37 degrees C) showed that the efficiency of the apoE monomer-Abeta complex formation follows the order apoE2 > apoE3 >> apoE4. In addition, the apoE2 dimer formed a complex with Abeta more efficiently than the apoE3 dimer. The isoform-specific differences in binding were temperature-dependent and are attenuated upon decrease of the temperature. The binding behavior of the monomeric apoE is different from that reported for plasma apoE3 and apoE4 or commercially available apoE3 and apoE4 preparations and similar to that described for apoE3 and apoE4 produced by human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) cells. It appears that the efficiency of binding between each of three main apoE isoforms and Abeta correlates inversely with the risk of developing late-onset familial AD and may indicate possible involvement of apoE in the binding and clearance of Abeta in vivo.
Plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) is an important physiological inhibitor of the plasminogen activator system. To investigate the structure-functional aspects of this inhibitor, we have taken advantage of the lack of cysteine residues in the PAI-1 molecule and substituted Ser344 (P3) and Met347 (P1'), in the reactive center loop, with cysteines, thereby creating unique attachment sites for extrinsic fluorescent probe. Both cysteine mutants were purified and labeled with a sulfhydryl specific fluorophore, N-(4,4-difluoro-5,7-dimethyl-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-s-indacen yl-3-propionyl)-N- (iodoacetyl)ethylenediamine (BDYIA). The labeled mutants were found to reveal biochemical characteristics very similar to those of wild type PAI-1. Time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy was used to examine orientational freedom of BDYIA in the reactive center loop of PAI-1. The orientational freedom of the probe was found to be greater in the latent form than in the active form of PAI-1, suggesting that the reactive center has a more relaxed conformation in the latent form than in the active form. Complex formation with target proteases, tissue type plasminogen activator (tPA) and urokinase type plasminogen activator (uPA), caused decreased orientational freedom of BDYIA in the P3 position, while the orientational freedom of BDYIA in position P1' increased to a level similar to that of BDYIA in reactive center-cleaved PAI-1. In contrast, complex formation with modified anhydro-uPA, which is unable to cleave its substrate, largely restricted the orientational freedom of BDYIA probe in the P1' position.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.