The F4 fimbrial chaperone FaeE is stable as a monomer that does not require self-capping of its pilin-interactive surfaces.

Many Gram-negative bacteria use the chaperone-usher pathway to express adhesive surface structures, such as fimbriae, in order to mediate attachment to host cells. Periplasmic chaperones are required to shuttle fimbrial subunits or pilins through the periplasmic space in an assembly-competent form. The chaperones cap the hydrophobic surface of the pilins through a donor-strand complementation mechanism. FaeE is the periplasmic chaperone required for the assembly of the F4 fimbriae of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. The FaeE crystal structure shows a dimer formed by interaction between the pilin-binding interfaces of the two monomers. Dimerization and tetramerization have been observed previously in crystal structures of fimbrial chaperones and have been suggested to serve as a self-capping mechanism that protects the pilin-interactive surfaces in solution in the absence of the pilins. However, thermodynamic and biochemical data show that FaeE occurs as a stable monomer in solution. Other lines of evidence indicate that self-capping of the pilin-interactive interfaces is not a mechanism that is conservedly applied by all periplasmic chaperones, but is rather a case-specific solution to cap aggregation-prone surfaces.

Paclitaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study with cross-over.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival ¿PFS) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2), 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2), intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P =.003) for doxorubicin (response rate ¿RR, 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P <.001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P =.38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.