4.5 Review

A mechanistic approach for islet amyloid polypeptide aggregation to develop anti-amyloidogenic agents for type-2 diabetes

期刊

BIOCHIMIE
卷 93, 期 5, 页码 793-805

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2010.12.012

关键词

Amylin; Amyloidogenesis; Diabetes mellitus type-2; Intrinsically disordered polypeptide; pi-pi stacking

资金

  1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2) is a conformational disease involving intrinsically disordered islet amyloid polypeptide (IAPP), in which a structural transition from physiological polypeptide to pathological deposits takes place. Different factors acquired or inherited, contribute to endoplasmic reticulum stress and/or impair mitochondrial function which leads to conformational changes in IAPP intermediates and ultimately produces oligomers of an anti-parallel crossed beta-pleated sheets that eventually accumulate as space-occupying lesions within the islets. Clusters of IAPP monomers form a pore which is linked to channel-like behavior in planar bilayers, indicating that these oligomeric IAPP pores could become incorporated into membranes and alter its barrier properties. Identification of nucleating residues and the residues responsible for this oligomeric tendency could improve understanding of structure function relationships as well as the molecular mechanism of folding and aggregation of IAPP contributing to the onset of DM-2. A combination of biological, chemical or physical approaches is required to be extensively pursued for the development of a successful anti-amyloidogenic agent to prevent this malady. Exploring the hypothesis of pi-stacking may be a better option to control IAPP aggregation if researchers go through the mechanism of pi-pi interaction, which provides entropy driven energy and direction for self-assembly to control amyloidogenic aggregation. (C) 2010 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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