4.7 Article

Prothrombin activation on the activated platelet surface optimizes expression of procoagulant activity

期刊

BLOOD
卷 117, 期 5, 页码 1710-1718

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2010-09-311035

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01HL046703]
  2. Hemostasis and Thrombosis Program for Academic Trainees [T32HL07594]
  3. Hughes Endeavor for Life Science Excellence
  4. Undergraduate Research Endeavors Competitive Award (University of Vermont)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effective hemostasis relies on the timely formation of alpha-thrombin via prothrombinase, a Ca(2+)-dependent complex of factors Va and Xa assembled on the activated platelet surface, which cleaves prothrombin at Arg271 and Arg320. Whereas initial cleavage at Arg271 generates the inactive intermediate prethrombin-2, initial cleavage at Arg320 generates the enzymatically active intermediate meizothrombin. To determine which of these intermediates is formed when prothrombin is processed on the activated platelet surface, the cleavage of prothrombin, and prothrombin mutants lacking either one of the cleavage sites, was monitored on the surface of either thrombin- or collagen-activated platelets. Regardless of the agonist used, prothrombin was initially cleaved at Arg271 generating prethrombin-2, with alpha-thrombin formation quickly after via cleavage at Arg320. The pathway used was independent of the source of factor Va (plasma- or platelet-derived) and was unaffected by soluble components of the platelet releasate. When both cleavage sites are presented within the same substrate molecule, Arg271 effectively competes against Arg320 (with an apparent IC(50) = 0.3 mu M), such that more than 90% to 95% of the initial cleavage occurs at Arg271. We hypothesize that use of the prethrombin-2 pathway serves to optimize the procoagulant activity expressed by activated platelets, by limiting the anticoagulant functions of the alternate intermediate, meizothrombin. (Blood. 2011; 117(5): 1710-1718)

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