4.4 Article

Computationally designed peptide inhibitors of protein-protein interactions in membranes

期刊

BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 47, 期 33, 页码 8600-8606

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bi800687h

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL40387, P01 HL040387, P50 HL081012, HL81012] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM60610, R37 GM054616, R01 GM060610, R01 GM054616, GM54616, R01 GM060610-08] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We recently reported a computational method (CHAMP) for designing sequence-specific peptides that bind to the membrane-embedded portions of transmembrane proteins. We successfully applied this method to design membrane-spanning peptides targeting the transmembrane domains of the alpha(IIb) subunit of integrin alpha(IIb)beta(3). Previously, we demonstrated that these CHAMP peptides bind specifically with reasonable affinity to isolated transmembrane helices of the targeted transmembrane region. These peptides also induced integrin alpha(IIb)beta(3) activation due to disruption of the helix-helix interactions between the transmembrane domains of the alpha(IIb) and beta(3) subunits. In this paper, we show the direct interaction of the designed anti-alpha(IIb) CHAMP peptide with isolated full-length integrin alpha(IIb)beta(3) in detergent micelles. Further, the behavior of the designed peptides in phospholipid bilayers is essentially identical to their behavior in detergent micelles. In particular, the peptides assume a membrane-spanning alpha-helical conformation that does not disrupt bilayer integrity. The activity and selectivity of the CHAMP peptides were further explored in platelets, comfirming that anti-alpha(IIb) activates wild-type alpha(IIb)beta(3) in whole cells as a result of its disruption of the protein-protein interactions between the alpha and beta subunits in the transmembrane regions. These results demonstrate that CHAMP is a successful chemical biology approach that can provide specific tools for probing the transmembrane domains of proteins.

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

4.4
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