4.7 Article

Apolipoprotein A-I Tryptophan Substitution Leads to Resistance to Myeloperoxidase-Mediated Loss of Function

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.108.173815

关键词

dysfunctional HDL; oxidation; atherosclerosis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL66082, P50 HL077107, PO1 HL076491]
  2. American Heart Association Fellowship Award [0525386B]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-Apolipoprotein A-I (apoAI) acts as an ABCA1-dependent acceptor of cellular phospholipids and cholesterol during the biogenesis of HDL, but this activity is susceptible to oxidative inactivation by myeloperoxidase. We tried to determine which residues mediated this inactivation and create an oxidant-resistant apoAI variant. Methods and Results-Mass spectrometry detected the presence of tryptophan, methionine, tyrosine, and lysine oxidation in apoAI recovered from human atheroma. We investigated the role of these residues in the myeloperoxidase-mediated loss of apoAI activity. Site-directed mutagenesis and chemical modification were used to create variants of apoAI which were tested for ABCA1-dependent cholesterol acceptor activity and oxidative inactivation. We previously reported that tyrosine modification is not required for myeloperoxidase- induced loss of apoAI function. Lysine methylation did not alter the sensitivity of apoAI to myeloperoxidase, whereas site-specific substitution of apoAI methionine to valine increased the sensitivity of apoAI to myeloperoxidase. ApoAI tryptophan residues were identified as essential in apoAI function and oxidant sensitivity as substitution of all four apoAI tryptophan residues to leucine led to loss of function, but the conservative substitution to phenylalanine retained full function and was resistant to oxidative inactivation. Conclusions-Tryptophan modification of apoAI is primarily responsible for the myeloperoxidase- mediated loss of the cholesterol acceptor activity of apoAI. (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008; 28: 2063-2070)

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

4.7
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