4.6 Article

PAR4, but not PAR1, signals human platelet aggregation via Ca2+ mobilization and synergistic P2Y12 receptor activation

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 281, 期 36, 页码 26665-26674

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M602174200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY010291, R01 EY010291] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [F32 HL082068, HL-082068-01, F32 HL082068-01, HL084388, HL-076133-02, T32 HL076133, R01 HL084388] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Regulation of platelet activation plays a central role in hemostasis and pathophysiological processes such as coronary artery disease. Thrombin is the most potent activator of platelets. Human platelets express two thrombin receptors, PAR1 and PAR4, both of which signal platelet activation. Evidence is lacking on the mechanism by which PAR1 and PAR4 may differentially signal platelet aggregation. Here we show that at the relatively high concentration of agonist most likely found at the site of a local thrombus, dual inhibition of the P2Y(12) receptor and calcium mobilization result in a complete inhibition of PAR4-induced aggregation, while having no effect on either thrombin or PAR1-mediated platelet aggregation. Both PAR1-and PAR4-mediated aggregation are independent of calcium mobilization. Furthermore, we show that P2Y(12) receptor activation is not required for protease-activated receptor-mediated aggregation at higher agonist concentrations and is only partially required for Rap1 as well as GPIIbIIIa activation. P2Y(12) receptor inhibitors clinically in use such as clopidogrel are postulated to decrease platelet aggregation through partial inhibition of PAR1 signaling. Our data, however, indicate that at high local concentrations of thrombin, it is the signaling through PAR4 rather than PAR1 that may be regulated through purinergic feedback. Thus, our data identify an intra-platelet mechanism that may function as a future site for therapeutic intervention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据