Transition-state structure as a unifying basis in protein-folding mechanisms: Contact order, chain topology, stability, and the extended nucleus mechanism

I attempt to reconcile apparently conflicting factors and mechanisms that have been proposed to determine the rate constant for two-state folding of small proteins, on the basis of general features of the structures of transition states. Φ-Value analysis implies a transition state for folding that resembles an expanded and distorted native structure, which is built around an extended nucleus. The nucleus is composed predominantly of elements of partly or well-formed native secondary structure that are stabilized by local and long-range tertiary interactions. These long-range interactions give rise to connecting loops, frequently containing the native loops that are poorly structured. I derive an equation that relates differences in the contact order of a protein to changes in the length of linking loops, which, in turn, is directly related to the unfavorable free energy of the loops in the transition state. Kinetic data on loop extension mutants of CI2 and α-spectrin SH3 domain fit the equation qualitatively. The rate of folding depends primarily on the interactions that directly stabilize the nucleus, especially those in native-like secondary structure and those resulting from the entropy loss from the connecting loops, which vary with contact order. This partitioning of energy accounts for the success of some algorithms that predict folding rates, because they use these principles either explicitly or implicitly. The extended nucleus model thus unifies the observations of rate depending on both stability and topology.

Hormones and mammary carcinogenesis in mice, rats, and humans: a unifying hypothesis.

An attempt has been made to put forward a unifying hypothesis explaining the role hormones play in the genesis of mammary cancers of different phenotypes and genotypes in mice, rats, and humans. Most mammary cancers in these species originate in luminal mammary epithelial cells lining the mammary ducts and alveoli. These cancers are histopathologically diverse and are classified on the basis of growth requirements as hormone-dependent or hormone-independent tumors. In most strains of mice, mammary cancers at the time of detection are largely of the hormone-independent type; in rats, almost all mammary cancers are hormone-dependent, while humans have both phenotypes. In spite of these differences, in vivo studies show that hormones (ovarian and pituitary) are essential for luminal mammary epithelial cell proliferation and also for the development of mammary cancers of both hormone-independent and hormone-dependent types. This article, based on our extensive in vivo and in vivo studies and on current literature, proposes a model to explain the central role of hormones in the genesis of all types of mammary cancers. The model attempts to address the following questions: (i) how hormones regulate luminal mammary epithelial cell proliferation, (ii) why hormones are required for the genesis of mammary cancers of all phenotypes and genotypes, including those which are always classified as hormone-independent tumors, and (iii) why the three species (mouse, rat, and human) have consistently different ratios of hormone-dependent to hormone-independent tumors.