Novel peptide antagonists of adrenomedullin and calcitonin gene-related peptide receptors:identification, pharmacological characterization, and interactions with position 74 in receptor activity-modifying protein 1/3

Human adrenomedullin (AM) is a 52-amino acid peptide belonging to the calcitonin peptide family, which also includes calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and AM2. The two AM receptors, AM(1) and AM(2), are calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CL)/receptor activity-modifying protein (RAMP) (RAMP2 and RAMP3, respectively) heterodimers. CGRP receptors comprise CL/RAMP1. The only human AM receptor antagonist (AM(22-52)) is a truncated form of AM; it has low affinity and is only weakly selective for AM(1) over AM(2) receptors. To develop novel AM receptor antagonists, we explored the importance of different regions of AM in interactions with AM(1), AM(2), and CGRP receptors. AM(22-52) was the framework for generating further AM fragments (AM(26-52) and AM(30-52)), novel AM/alphaCGRP chimeras (C1-C5 and C9), and AM/AM(2) chimeras (C6-C8). cAMP assays were used to screen the antagonists at all receptors to determine their affinity and selectivity. Circular dichroism spectroscopy was used to investigate the secondary structures of AM and its related peptides. The data indicate that the structures of AM, AM2, and alphaCGRP differ from one another. Our chimeric approach enabled the identification of two nonselective high-affinity antagonists of AM(1), AM(2), and CGRP receptors (C2 and C6), one high-affinity antagonist of AM(2) receptors (C7), and a weak antagonist selective for the CGRP receptor (C5). By use of receptor mutagenesis, we also determined that the C-terminal nine amino acids of AM seem to be responsible for its interaction with Glu74 of RAMP3. We provide new information on the structure-activity relationship of AM, alphaCGRP, and AM2 and how AM interacts with CGRP and AM(2) receptors.

Oxidized phospholipid inhibition of toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling is restricted to TLR2 and TLR4 roles for cd14, lps-binding protein, and md2 as targets for specificity of inhibition

The generation of reactive oxygen species is a central feature of inflammation that results in the oxidation of host phospholipids. Oxidized phospholipids, such as 1-palmitoyl-2-arachidonyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphorylcholine (OxPAPC), have been shown to inhibit signaling induced by bacterial lipopeptide or lipopolysac-charide (LPS), yet the mechanisms responsible for the inhibition of Toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling by OxPAPC remain incompletely understood. Here, we examined the mechanisms by which OxPAPC inhibits TLR signaling induced by diverse ligands in macrophages, smooth muscle cells, and epithelial cells. OxPAPC inhibited tumor necrosis factor- production, IB degradation, p38 MAPK phosphorylation, and NF-B-dependent reporter activation induced by stimulants of TLR2 and TLR4 (Pam3CSK4 and LPS) but not by stimulants of other TLRs (poly(I·C), flagellin, loxoribine, single-stranded RNA, or CpG DNA) in macrophages and HEK-293 cells transfected with respective TLRs and significantly reduced inflammatory responses in mice injected subcutaneously or intraperitoneally with Pam3CSK4. Serum proteins, including CD14 and LPS-binding protein, were identified as key targets for the specificity of TLR inhibition as supplementation with excess serum or recombinant CD14 or LBP reversed TLR2 inhibition by OxPAPC, whereas serum accessory proteins or expression of membrane CD14 potentiated signaling via TLR2 and TLR4 but not other TLRs. Binding experiments and functional assays identified MD2 as a novel additional target of OxPAPC inhibition of LPS signaling. Synthetic phospholipid oxidation products 1-palmitoyl-2-(5-oxovaleryl)-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine and 1-palmitoyl-2-glutaryl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine inhibited TLR2 signaling from 30 µM. Taken together, these results suggest that oxidized phospholipid-mediated inhibition of TLR signaling occurs mainly by competitive interaction with accessory proteins that interact directly with bacterial lipids to promote signaling via TLR2 or TLR4.

Receptor activity-modifying protein-dependent effects of mutations in the calcitonin receptor-like receptor:implications for adrenomedullin and calcitonin gene-related peptide pharmacology

Background and Purpose Receptor activity-modifying proteins (RAMPs) define the pharmacology of the calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CLR). The interactions of the different RAMPs with this class B GPCR yield high-affinity calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or adrenomedullin (AM) receptors. However, the mechanism for this is unclear. Experimental Approach Guided by receptor models, we mutated residues in the N-terminal helix of CLR, RAMP2 and RAMP3 hypothesized to be involved in peptide interactions. These were assayed for cAMP production with AM, AM2 and CGRP together with their cell surface expression. Binding studies were also conducted for selected mutants. Key Results An important domain for peptide interactions on CLR from I32 to I52 was defined. Although I41 was universally important for binding and receptor function, the role of other residues depended on both ligand and RAMP. Peptide binding to CLR/RAMP3 involved a more restricted range of residues than that to CLR/RAMP1 or CLR/RAMP2. E101 of RAMP2 had a major role in AM interactions, and F111/W84 of RAMP2/3 was important with each peptide. Conclusions and Implications RAMP-dependent effects of CLR mutations suggest that the different RAMPs control accessibility of peptides to binding residues situated on the CLR N-terminus. RAMP3 appears to alter the role of specific residues at the CLR-RAMP interface compared with RAMP1 and RAMP2. © 2013 The Authors. British Journal of Pharmacology published by John Wiley &. Sons Ltd on behalf of The British Pharmacological Society.

Receptor for activated C Kinase 1 protein binds to and activates the human estrogen receptor α

The classical concept of estrogen receptor (ER) activation is that steroid passes the cell membrane, binds to its specific protein receptor in the cell's cytoplasm and the steroid-receptor complex travels to the nucleus where it activates responsive genes. This basic idea has been challenged by results of experiments demonstrating insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) activation of the ER in the complete absence of estrogen suggesting at least one other mechanism of ER activation not involving steroid. One explanation is that activation of the cell surface IGF-1 receptor leads to synthesis of an intracellular protein(s) able to bind to and stimulate the ER. Based on results using the two-hybrid system, coimmunoprecipitation and transfection-luciferase assays, we herein show that one of these proteins could well be receptor for activated C kinase 1 (RACK-1). Using the human ER type α (ER-α) as bait, a cloned complementary deoxyribonucleic acid (cDNA) library from IGF-1 treated human breast cancer MCF-7 cells was screened for ER-α - protein interactions. Many positive clones were obtained which contained the RACK-1 cDNA sequence. Coimmunoprecipitation of in-vitro translation products of the ER-α and RACK-1 confirmed the interaction between the two proteins. Transfection studies using the estrogen response element spliced to a luciferase reporter gene revealed that constitutive RACK-1 expression was able to powerfully stimulate ER-α activity under estrogen-free conditions. This effect could be enhanced by 17β-estradiol (E2) and blocked by tamoxifen, an E2 antagonist. These results show that RACK-1 is able to activate the ER-α in the absence of E2, although together with the latter, enhanced effects occur. Since RACK-1 gene expression is stimulated by IGF-1, it is distinctly possible that RACK-1 is the mediator of the stimulatory effects of IGF-1 on ER-α. © 2014 JMS.

Modulation of glucagon receptor pharmacology by Receptor Activity-modifying Protein-2 (RAMP2)

The glucagon and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptors play important, opposing roles in regulating blood glucose levels. Consequently, these receptors have been identified as targets for novel diabetes treatments. However, drugs acting at the GLP-1 receptor, whilst having clinical efficacy, have been associated with severe adverse side-effects and targeting of the glucagon receptor has yet to be successful. Here we use a combination of yeast reporter assays and mammalian systems, to provide a more complete understanding of glucagon receptor signaling considering the effect of multiple ligands, association with the receptor-interacting protein, receptor activity modifying protein-2 (RAMP2) and individual G protein α-subunits. We demonstrate that RAMP2 alters both ligand selectivity and G protein preference of the glucagon receptor. Importantly, we also uncover novel cross-reactivity of therapeutically used GLP-1 receptor ligands at the glucagon receptor that is abolished by RAMP2 interaction. This study reveals the glucagon receptor as a previously unidentified target for GLP-1 receptor agonists and highlights a role for RAMP2 in regulating its pharmacology. Such previously unrecognized functions of RAMPs highlight the need to consider all receptor-interacting proteins in future drug development.

Understanding the Effect of Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase Receptor Type 0 on Mammalian Sensory Development: Behavioral Studies on PTPRO Knockout Mice

Nerve development, which includes axon outgrowth and guidance, is regulated by many protein families, including receptor protein tyrosine phosphatases (RPTP's).Protein tyrosine phosphatase receptor type 0 (PTPRO) is a type III RPTP that is important for axon growth and guidance, as observed in chicks and flies. In order to examine the effects ofPTPRO on mammalian development, standard behavioral tests were used to compare mice lacking the gene for PTPRO (ROKO mice) to wild-type (WT) mice. The ROKO mice showed a significant delay in reacting to a thermal noxious stimulus, hotplate analgesia, when compared to the WT mice suggesting deficient nociceptive function. In a rotarod test for proprioceptive function the ROKO mice exhibited a significant decrease in the amount of time spent on the rotating rod than did the WT mice. Additional proprioception tests were performed including the climb, step reflex, beam, and mesh walk tests. In the climb and step (place) test, the ROKO group had a significantly lower accuracy in performing the tests than did the WT mice. Thus, mice lacking the PTPRO gene showed behavioral deficiencies that reflect impairment in sensory function, specifically for nociception and proprioception.

Efeitos in vivo e in vitro de agonistas parciais do receptor NOP: implicações para o tratamento da ansiedade, depressão e mania

Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the effects of the two peptide NOP partial agonists (UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2) and the non peptide NOP partial agonist (AT-090) in the mouse emotional behavior as well as in the intracellular transduction pathways following the receptor binding. Methods: Male Swiss or CD-1 mice were used in this study together with NOP(+/+) and NOP(-/-) mice. The elevated plus maze (EPM) was used to evaluate the effects of compounds on anxiety-like behaviors. Diazepam and the NOP agonists, N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570, were used as positive controls in the EPM. NOP(+/+) and NOP(-/-) mice were used to evaluate the selectivity of those compounds that induced anxiolytic-like behaviors. The forced swim test (FST) was used to evaluate the effects of compounds on depressive-like behaviors. Nortriptyline and the NOP antagonists, UFP-101 and SB-612111, were used as positive controls in the FST. The effects of N/OFQ, UFP-101, SB-612111, UFP-113, [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2, and AT-090 were assessed in the methylphenidate-induced hyperlocomotion (MIH) test; in this assay valproate was used as positive control. The G protein and β-arrestin 2 transduction pathways of NOP receptor agonists (N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570), antagonist (UFP-101), and partial agonists (UFP-113, [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2, and AT-090) were also evaluated using an innovative assay that measures a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer process. For this, cell lines permanently co-expressing the NOP receptor coupled to luciferase (energy donor), and green fluorescent protein (energy acceptor) coupled to one of the effector proteins (G protein or β-arrestin 2) were used. Results: Diazepam (1 mg/kg), N/OFQ (1 nmol), Ro 65-6570 (0.1 mg/kg), and AT-090 (0.01 mg/kg) induced anxiolytic-like effect in mice in the EPM. The effects of Ro 65-6570 and AT-090 were selective to NOP receptor. UFP-113 (0.01-1 nmol) and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (0.1-3 nmol) were inactive in the EPM. In the FST, nortriptyline (30 mg/kg), UFP-101 (10 nmol), SB-612111 (10 mg/kg), UFP-113 (0.01 and 0.1 nmol), and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (0.3 and 1 nmol) induced antidepressant-like effects, while AT-090 (0.001-0.1 mg/kg) was inactive in this assay. The effects of UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 were selective to NOP receptor. Valproate (400 mg/kg) counteracted methylphenidate (MPH, 10 mg/kg)-induced hyperlocomotion in mice in the open field. N/OFQ (1 nmol), UFP-113 (0.01-0.1 nmol), and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (1 nmol) were also able to reduce the MPH-induced hyperlocomotion, without changing the locomotor activity per se. The effect of UFP-113 was selective to NOP receptor. The UFP-101 (10 nmol), SB-612111 (10 mg/kg), and AT-090 (0.001-0.03 mg/kg) did not change the hyperlocomotor effect of methylphenidate. In vitro, N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570 behaved as NOP full agonists for G-protein and β-arrestin 2 pathways. AT-090 behaved as NOP receptor partial agonist for both transduction pathways, while UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 behaved as partial agonists and antagonists of NOP receptor for NOP/G protein and NOP/β-arrestin 2, respectively. UFP-101 behaved as NOP receptor antagonist for both transduction pathways. Conclusion: NOP ligands producing same effects on NOP/G protein interaction (partial agonism), but with opposite effects on β-arrestin 2 recruitment (partial agonism vs antagonism), can promote different in vivo effects on anxiety and mood as it was observed in the behavioral tests. This work corroborates the potential of NOP receptor as an innovative pharmacological target for the treatment of emotional disorders.

Efeitos in vivo e in vitro de agonistas parciais do receptor NOP: implicações para o tratamento da ansiedade, depressão e mania

Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the effects of the two peptide NOP partial agonists (UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2) and the non peptide NOP partial agonist (AT-090) in the mouse emotional behavior as well as in the intracellular transduction pathways following the receptor binding. Methods: Male Swiss or CD-1 mice were used in this study together with NOP(+/+) and NOP(-/-) mice. The elevated plus maze (EPM) was used to evaluate the effects of compounds on anxiety-like behaviors. Diazepam and the NOP agonists, N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570, were used as positive controls in the EPM. NOP(+/+) and NOP(-/-) mice were used to evaluate the selectivity of those compounds that induced anxiolytic-like behaviors. The forced swim test (FST) was used to evaluate the effects of compounds on depressive-like behaviors. Nortriptyline and the NOP antagonists, UFP-101 and SB-612111, were used as positive controls in the FST. The effects of N/OFQ, UFP-101, SB-612111, UFP-113, [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2, and AT-090 were assessed in the methylphenidate-induced hyperlocomotion (MIH) test; in this assay valproate was used as positive control. The G protein and β-arrestin 2 transduction pathways of NOP receptor agonists (N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570), antagonist (UFP-101), and partial agonists (UFP-113, [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2, and AT-090) were also evaluated using an innovative assay that measures a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer process. For this, cell lines permanently co-expressing the NOP receptor coupled to luciferase (energy donor), and green fluorescent protein (energy acceptor) coupled to one of the effector proteins (G protein or β-arrestin 2) were used. Results: Diazepam (1 mg/kg), N/OFQ (1 nmol), Ro 65-6570 (0.1 mg/kg), and AT-090 (0.01 mg/kg) induced anxiolytic-like effect in mice in the EPM. The effects of Ro 65-6570 and AT-090 were selective to NOP receptor. UFP-113 (0.01-1 nmol) and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (0.1-3 nmol) were inactive in the EPM. In the FST, nortriptyline (30 mg/kg), UFP-101 (10 nmol), SB-612111 (10 mg/kg), UFP-113 (0.01 and 0.1 nmol), and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (0.3 and 1 nmol) induced antidepressant-like effects, while AT-090 (0.001-0.1 mg/kg) was inactive in this assay. The effects of UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 were selective to NOP receptor. Valproate (400 mg/kg) counteracted methylphenidate (MPH, 10 mg/kg)-induced hyperlocomotion in mice in the open field. N/OFQ (1 nmol), UFP-113 (0.01-0.1 nmol), and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 (1 nmol) were also able to reduce the MPH-induced hyperlocomotion, without changing the locomotor activity per se. The effect of UFP-113 was selective to NOP receptor. The UFP-101 (10 nmol), SB-612111 (10 mg/kg), and AT-090 (0.001-0.03 mg/kg) did not change the hyperlocomotor effect of methylphenidate. In vitro, N/OFQ and Ro 65-6570 behaved as NOP full agonists for G-protein and β-arrestin 2 pathways. AT-090 behaved as NOP receptor partial agonist for both transduction pathways, while UFP-113 and [F/G]N/OFQ(1-13)NH2 behaved as partial agonists and antagonists of NOP receptor for NOP/G protein and NOP/β-arrestin 2, respectively. UFP-101 behaved as NOP receptor antagonist for both transduction pathways. Conclusion: NOP ligands producing same effects on NOP/G protein interaction (partial agonism), but with opposite effects on β-arrestin 2 recruitment (partial agonism vs antagonism), can promote different in vivo effects on anxiety and mood as it was observed in the behavioral tests. This work corroborates the potential of NOP receptor as an innovative pharmacological target for the treatment of emotional disorders.

Daple is a novel non-receptor GEF required for trimeric G protein activation in Wnt signaling

Peer reviewed

Type 1 ryanodine receptor interactions

Excitation-contraction coupling is an essential part of skeletal muscle contraction. It encompasses the sensing of depolarisation of the plasma membrane coupled with the release of Ca2+ from intracellular stores. The channel responsible for this release is called the Ryanodine receptor (RyR), and forms a hub of interacting proteins which work in concert to regulate the release of Ca2+ through this channel. The aim of this work was to characterise possible novel interactions with a proline-rich region of the RyR1, to characterise a monoclonal antibody (mAb VF1c) raised against a junctional sarcoplasmic reticulum protein postulated to interact with RyR1, and to characterise the protein recognised by this antibody in models of skeletal muscle disease such as Duchenne Muscular dystrophy (DMD) and sarcopenia. These experiments were performed using cell culture, protein purification via immunoprecipitation, affinity purification, low pressure chromatography and western blotting techniques. It was found that the RyR1 complex isolated from rat skeletal muscle co-purifies with the Growth factor receptor bound protein 2 (GRB2), very possibly via an interaction between the proline rich region of RyR1 and one of the SH3 domains located on the GRB2 protein. It was also found that Pleiotrophin and Phospholipase Cγ1, suggested interactors of the proline rich region of RyR1, did not co-purify with the RyR1 complex. Characterisation of mAb VF1c determined that this monoclonal antibody interacts with junctophilin 1, and binds to this protein between the region of 369-460, as determined by western blotting of JPH1 fragments expressed in yeast. It was also found that JPH1 and JPH2 are differentially regulated in different muscles of rabbit, where the highest amount of both proteins was found in the extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscle. JPH1 and 2 levels were also examined in three rodent models of disease: the mdx mouse (a model of DMD), chronic intermittent hypoxia (CIH)-treated rat, and aged and adult mice, a model of sarcopenia. In the EDL and soleus muscle of CIH treated rats, no difference in either JPH1 or JPH2 abundance was detected in either muscle. An examination of JPH1 and 2 expression in mdx and wild type controls diaphragm, vastus lateralis, soleus and gastrocnemius muscle found no major differences in JPH1 abundance, while JPH2 was decreased in mdx gastrocnemius compared to wild type. In a mouse model of sarcopenia, JPH1 abundance was found to be increased in aged soleus but not in aged quadriceps, while in exercised quadriceps, JPH2 abundance was decreased compared to unexercised controls. Taken together, these results have implications for the regulation of RyR1 and JPH1 and 2 in skeletal muscle in both physiological and pathological states, and provide a newly characterised antibody to expand the field of JPH1 research.

Immune proteins in neurons : towards an understanding of the neuronal role of the immune protein CD3[Zeta] in NMDA receptor signaling and cytoskeleton remodeling

Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Fakultät für Naturwissenschaften, Dissertation, 2016

Microfluidic platforms for the characterization of in meso membrane protein crystallization

Membrane proteins, which reside in the membranes of cells, play a critical role in many important biological processes including cellular signaling, immune response, and material and energy transduction. Because of their key role in maintaining the environment within cells and facilitating intercellular interactions, understanding the function of these proteins is of tremendous medical and biochemical significance. Indeed, the malfunction of membrane proteins has been linked to numerous diseases including diabetes, cirrhosis of the liver, cystic fibrosis, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, hypertension, epilepsy, cataracts, tubulopathy, leukodystrophy, Leigh syndrome, anemia, sensorineural deafness, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.1-3 However, the structure of many of these proteins and the changes in their structure that lead to disease-related malfunctions are not well understood. Additionally, at least 60% of the pharmaceuticals currently available are thought to target membrane proteins, despite the fact that their exact mode of operation is not known.4-6 Developing a detailed understanding of the function of a protein is achieved by coupling biochemical experiments with knowledge of the structure of the protein. Currently the most common method for obtaining three-dimensional structure information is X-ray crystallography. However, no a priori methods are currently available to predict crystallization conditions for a given protein.7-14 This limitation is currently overcome by screening a large number of possible combinations of precipitants, buffer, salt, and pH conditions to identify conditions that are conducive to crystal nucleation and growth.7,9,11,15-24 Unfortunately, these screening efforts are often limited by difficulties associated with quantity and purity of available protein samples. While the two most significant bottlenecks for protein structure determination in general are the (i) obtaining sufficient quantities of high quality protein samples and (ii) growing high quality protein crystals that are suitable for X-ray structure determination,7,20,21,23,25-47 membrane proteins present additional challenges. For crystallization it is necessary to extract the membrane proteins from the cellular membrane. However, this process often leads to denaturation. In fact, membrane proteins have proven to be so difficult to crystallize that of the more than 66,000 structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank,48 less than 1% are for membrane proteins, with even fewer present at high resolution (< 2Å)4,6,49 and only a handful are human membrane proteins.49 A variety of strategies including detergent solubilization50-53 and the use of artificial membrane-like environments have been developed to circumvent this challenge.43,53-55 In recent years, the use of a lipidic mesophase as a medium for crystallizing membrane proteins has been demonstrated to increase success for a wide range of membrane proteins, including human receptor proteins.54,56-62 This in meso method for membrane protein crystallization, however, is still by no means routine due to challenges related to sample preparation at sub-microliter volumes and to crystal harvesting and X-ray data collection. This dissertation presents various aspects of the development of a microfluidic platform to enable high throughput in meso membrane protein crystallization at a level beyond the capabilities of current technologies. Microfluidic platforms for protein crystallization and other lab-on-a-chip applications have been well demonstrated.9,63-66 These integrated chips provide fine control over transport phenomena and the ability to perform high throughput analyses via highly integrated fluid networks. However, the development of microfluidic platforms for in meso protein crystallization required the development of strategies to cope with extremely viscous and non-Newtonian fluids. A theoretical treatment of highly viscous fluids in microfluidic devices is presented in Chapter 3, followed by the application of these strategies for the development of a microfluidic mixer capable of preparing a mesophase sample for in meso crystallization at a scale of less than 20 nL in Chapter 4. This approach was validated with the successful on chip in meso crystallization of the membrane protein bacteriorhodopsin. In summary, this is the first report of a microfluidic platform capable of performing in meso crystallization on-chip, representing a 1000x reduction in the scale at which mesophase trials can be prepared. Once protein crystals have formed, they are typically harvested from the droplet they were grown in and mounted for crystallographic analysis. Despite the high throughput automation present in nearly all other aspects of protein structure determination, the harvesting and mounting of crystals is still largely a manual process. Furthermore, during mounting the fragile protein crystals can potentially be damaged, both from physical and environmental shock. To circumvent these challenges an X-ray transparent microfluidic device architecture was developed to couple the benefits of scale, integration, and precise fluid control with the ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis (Chapter 5). This approach was validated successfully by crystallization and subsequent on-chip analysis of the soluble proteins lysozyme, thaumatin, and ribonuclease A and will be extended to microfluidic platforms for in meso membrane protein crystallization. The ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis was shown to provide extremely high quality diffraction data, in part as a result of not being affected by damage due to physical handling of the crystals. As part of the work described in this thesis, a variety of data collection strategies for in situ data analysis were also tested, including merging of small slices of data from a large number of crystals grown on a single chip, to allow for diffraction analysis at biologically relevant temperatures. While such strategies have been applied previously,57,59,61,67 they are potentially challenging when applied via traditional methods due to the need to grow and then mount a large number of crystals with minimal crystal-to-crystal variability. The integrated nature of microfluidic platforms easily enables the generation of a large number of reproducible crystallization trials. This, coupled with in situ analysis capabilities has the potential of being able to acquire high resolution structural data of proteins at biologically relevant conditions for which only small crystals, or crystals which are adversely affected by standard cryocooling techniques, could be obtained (Chapters 5 and 6). While the main focus of protein crystallography is to obtain three-dimensional protein structures, the results of typical experiments provide only a static picture of the protein. The use of polychromatic or Laue X-ray diffraction methods enables the collection of time resolved structural information. These experiments are very sensitive to crystal quality, however, and often suffer from severe radiation damage due to the intense polychromatic X-ray beams. Here, as before, the ability to perform in situ X-ray analysis on many small protein crystals within a microfluidic crystallization platform has the potential to overcome these challenges. An automated method for collecting a "single-shot" of data from a large number of crystals was developed in collaboration with the BioCARS team at the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory (Chapter 6). The work described in this thesis shows that, even more so than for traditional structure determination efforts, the ability to grow and analyze a large number of high quality crystals is critical to enable time resolved structural studies of novel proteins. In addition to enabling X-ray crystallography experiments, the development of X-ray transparent microfluidic platforms also has tremendous potential to answer other scientific questions, such as unraveling the mechanism of in meso crystallization. For instance, the lipidic mesophases utilized during in meso membrane protein crystallization can be characterized by small angle X-ray diffraction analysis. Coupling in situ analysis with microfluidic platforms capable of preparing these difficult mesophase samples at very small volumes has tremendous potential to enable the high throughput analysis of these systems on a scale that is not reasonably achievable using conventional sample preparation strategies (Chapter 7). In collaboration with the LS-CAT team at the Advanced Photon Source, an experimental station for small angle X-ray analysis coupled with the high quality visualization capabilities needed to target specific microfluidic samples on a highly integrated chip is under development. Characterizing the phase behavior of these mesophase systems and the effects of various additives present in crystallization trials is key for developing an understanding of how in meso crystallization occurs. A long term goal of these studies is to enable the rational design of in meso crystallization experiments so as to avoid or limit the need for high throughput screening efforts. In summary, this thesis describes the development of microfluidic platforms for protein crystallization with in situ analysis capabilities. Coupling the ability to perform in situ analysis with the small scale, fine control, and the high throughput nature of microfluidic platforms has tremendous potential to enable a new generation of crystallographic studies and facilitate the structure determination of important biological targets. The development of platforms for in meso membrane protein crystallization is particularly significant because they enable the preparation of highly viscous mixtures at a previously unachievable scale. Work in these areas is ongoing and has tremendous potential to improve not only current the methods of protein crystallization and crystallography, but also to enhance our knowledge of the structure and function of proteins which could have a significant scientific and medical impact on society as a whole. The microfluidic technology described in this thesis has the potential to significantly advance our understanding of the structure and function of membrane proteins, thereby aiding the elucidation of human biology, the development of pharmaceuticals with fewer side effects for a wide range of diseases. References (1) Quick, M.; Javitch, J. A. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2007, 104, 3603. (2) Trubetskoy, V. S.; Burke, T. J. Am Lab 2005, 37, 19. (3) Pecina, P.; Houstkova, H.; Hansikova, H.; Zeman, J.; Houstek, J. Physiol Res 2004, 53, S213. (4) Arinaminpathy, Y.; Khurana, E.; Engelman, D. M.; Gerstein, M. B. Drug Discovery Today 2009, 14, 1130. (5) Overington, J. P.; Al-Lazikani, B.; Hopkins, A. L. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006, 5, 993. (6) Dauter, Z.; Lamzin, V. S.; Wilson, K. S. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 1997, 7, 681. (7) Hansen, C.; Quake, S. R. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2003, 13, 538. (8) Govada, L.; Carpenter, L.; da Fonseca, P. C. A.; Helliwell, J. R.; Rizkallah, P.; Flashman, E.; Chayen, N. E.; Redwood, C.; Squire, J. M. J Mol Biol 2008, 378, 387. (9) Hansen, C. L.; Skordalakes, E.; Berger, J. M.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2002, 99, 16531. (10) Leng, J.; Salmon, J.-B. Lab Chip 2009, 9, 24. (11) Zheng, B.; Gerdts, C. J.; Ismagilov, R. F. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2005, 15, 548. (12) Lorber, B.; Delucas, L. J.; Bishop, J. B. J Cryst Growth 1991, 110, 103. (13) Talreja, S.; Perry, S. L.; Guha, S.; Bhamidi, V.; Zukoski, C. F.; Kenis, P. J. A. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2010, 114, 4432. (14) Chayen, N. E. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2004, 14, 577. (15) He, G. W.; Bhamidi, V.; Tan, R. B. H.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Zukoski, C. F. Cryst Growth Des 2006, 6, 1175. (16) Zheng, B.; Tice, J. D.; Roach, L. S.; Ismagilov, R. F. Angew Chem Int Edit 2004, 43, 2508. (17) Li, L.; Mustafi, D.; Fu, Q.; Tereshko, V.; Chen, D. L. L.; Tice, J. D.; Ismagilov, R. F. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103, 19243. (18) Song, H.; Chen, D. L.; Ismagilov, R. F. Angew Chem Int Edit 2006, 45, 7336. (19) van der Woerd, M.; Ferree, D.; Pusey, M. Journal of Structural Biology 2003, 142, 180. (20) Ng, J. D.; Gavira, J. A.; Garcia-Ruiz, J. M. Journal of Structural Biology 2003, 142, 218. (21) Talreja, S.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Zukoski, C. F. Langmuir 2007, 23, 4516. (22) Hansen, C. L.; Quake, S. R.; Berger, J. M. US, 2007. (23) Newman, J.; Fazio, V. J.; Lawson, B.; Peat, T. S. Cryst Growth Des 2010, 10, 2785. (24) Newman, J.; Xu, J.; Willis, M. C. Acta Crystallographica Section D 2007, 63, 826. (25) Collingsworth, P. D.; Bray, T. L.; Christopher, G. K. J Cryst Growth 2000, 219, 283. (26) Durbin, S. D.; Feher, G. Annu Rev Phys Chem 1996, 47, 171. (27) Talreja, S.; Kim, D. Y.; Mirarefi, A. Y.; Zukoski, C. F.; Kenis, P. J. A. J Appl Crystallogr 2005, 38, 988. (28) Yoshizaki, I.; Nakamura, H.; Sato, T.; Igarashi, N.; Komatsu, H.; Yoda, S. J Cryst Growth 2002, 237, 295. (29) Anderson, M. J.; Hansen, C. L.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103, 16746. (30) Hansen, C. L.; Sommer, M. O. A.; Quake, S. R. P Natl Acad Sci USA 2004, 101, 14431. (31) Lounaci, M.; Rigolet, P.; Abraham, C.; Le Berre, M.; Chen, Y. Microelectron Eng 2007, 84, 1758. (32) Zheng, B.; Roach, L. S.; Ismagilov, R. F. J Am Chem Soc 2003, 125, 11170. (33) Zhou, X.; Lau, L.; Lam, W. W. L.; Au, S. W. N.; Zheng, B. Anal. Chem. 2007. (34) Cherezov, V.; Caffrey, M. J Appl Crystallogr 2003, 36, 1372. (35) Qutub, Y.; Reviakine, I.; Maxwell, C.; Navarro, J.; Landau, E. M.; Vekilov, P. G. J Mol Biol 2004, 343, 1243. (36) Rummel, G.; Hardmeyer, A.; Widmer, C.; Chiu, M. L.; Nollert, P.; Locher, K. P.; Pedruzzi, I.; Landau, E. M.; Rosenbusch, J. P. Journal of Structural Biology 1998, 121, 82. (37) Gavira, J. A.; Toh, D.; Lopez-Jaramillo, J.; Garcia-Ruiz, J. M.; Ng, J. D. Acta Crystallogr D 2002, 58, 1147. (38) Stevens, R. C. Current Opinion in Structural Biology 2000, 10, 558. (39) Baker, M. Nat Methods 2010, 7, 429. (40) McPherson, A. In Current Topics in Membranes, Volume 63; Volume 63 ed.; DeLucas, L., Ed.; Academic Press: 2009, p 5. (41) Gabrielsen, M.; Gardiner, A. T.; Fromme, P.; Cogdell, R. J. In Current Topics in Membranes, Volume 63; Volume 63 ed.; DeLucas, L., Ed.; Academic Press: 2009, p 127. (42) Page, R. In Methods in Molecular Biology: Structural Proteomics - High Throughput Methods; Kobe, B., Guss, M., Huber, T., Eds.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, 2008; Vol. 426, p 345. (43) Caffrey, M. Ann Rev Biophys 2009, 38, 29. (44) Doerr, A. Nat Methods 2006, 3, 244. (45) Brostromer, E.; Nan, J.; Li, L.-F.; Su, X.-D. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2009, 386, 634. (46) Li, G.; Chen, Q.; Li, J.; Hu, X.; Zhao, J. Anal Chem 2010, 82, 4362. (47) Jia, Y.; Liu, X.-Y. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 2006, 110, 6949. (48) RCSB Protein Data Bank. http://www.rcsb.org/ (July 11, 2010). (49) Membrane Proteins of Known 3D Structure. http://blanco.biomol.uci.edu/Membrane_Proteins_xtal.html (July 11, 2010). (50) Michel, H. Trends Biochem Sci 1983, 8, 56. (51) Rosenbusch, J. P. Journal of Structural Biology 1990, 104, 134. (52) Garavito, R. M.; Picot, D. Methods 1990, 1, 57. (53) Kulkarni, C. V. 2010; Vol. 12, p 237. (54) Landau, E. M.; Rosenbusch, J. P. P Natl Acad Sci USA 1996, 93, 14532. (55) Pebay-Peyroula, E.; Rummel, G.; Rosenbusch, J. P.; Landau, E. M. Science 1997, 277, 1676. (56) Cherezov, V.; Liu, W.; Derrick, J. P.; Luan, B.; Aksimentiev, A.; Katritch, V.; Caffrey, M. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 2008, 71, 24. (57) Cherezov, V.; Rosenbaum, D. M.; Hanson, M. A.; Rasmussen, S. G. F.; Thian, F. S.; Kobilka, T. S.; Choi, H. J.; Kuhn, P.; Weis, W. I.; Kobilka, B. K.; Stevens, R. C. Science 2007, 318, 1258. (58) Cherezov, V.; Yamashita, E.; Liu, W.; Zhalnina, M.; Cramer, W. A.; Caffrey, M. J Mol Biol 2006, 364, 716. (59) Jaakola, V. P.; Griffith, M. T.; Hanson, M. A.; Cherezov, V.; Chien, E. Y. T.; Lane, J. R.; IJzerman, A. P.; Stevens, R. C. Science 2008, 322, 1211. (60) Rosenbaum, D. M.; Cherezov, V.; Hanson, M. A.; Rasmussen, S. G. F.; Thian, F. S.; Kobilka, T. S.; Choi, H. J.; Yao, X. J.; Weis, W. I.; Stevens, R. C.; Kobilka, B. K. Science 2007, 318, 1266. (61) Wacker, D.; Fenalti, G.; Brown, M. A.; Katritch, V.; Abagyan, R.; Cherezov, V.; Stevens, R. C. J Am Chem Soc 2010, 132, 11443. (62) Höfer, N.; Aragão, D.; Caffrey, M. Biophys J 2010, 99, L23. (63) Li, L.; Ismagilov, R. F. Ann Rev Biophys 2010. (64) Pal, R.; Yang, M.; Lin, R.; Johnson, B. N.; Srivastava, N.; Razzacki, S. Z.; Chomistek, K. J.; Heldsinger, D. C.; Haque, R. M.; Ugaz, V. M.; Thwar, P. K.; Chen, Z.; Alfano, K.; Yim, M. B.; Krishnan, M.; Fuller, A. O.; Larson, R. G.; Burke, D. T.; Burns, M. A. Lab Chip 2005, 5, 1024. (65) Jayashree, R. S.; Gancs, L.; Choban, E. R.; Primak, A.; Natarajan, D.; Markoski, L. J.; Kenis, P. J. A. J Am Chem Soc 2005, 127, 16758. (66) Wootton, R. C. R.; deMello, A. J. Chem Commun 2004, 266. (67) McPherson, A. J Appl Crystallogr 2000, 33, 397.

Urothelial Carcinogen Resistance Driven By Stronger Toll-like Receptor 2 (tlr2) And Uroplakin Iii (up Iii) Defense Mechanisms: A New Model.

The objective of the study was to illustrate the applicability and significance of the novel Lewis urothelial cancer model compared to the classic Fisher 344. Fischer 344 and Lewis females rats, 7 weeks old, were intravesical instilled N-methyl-N-nitrosourea 1.5 mg/kg every other week for a total of four doses. After 15 weeks, animals were sacrificed and bladders analyzed: histopathology (tumor grade and stage), immunohistochemistry (apoptotic and proliferative indices) and blotting (Toll-like receptor 2-TLR2, Uroplakin III-UP III and C-Myc). Control groups received placebo. There were macroscopic neoplastic lesions in 20 % of Lewis strain and 70 % of Fischer 344 strain. Lewis showed hyperplasia in 50 % of animals, normal bladders in 50 %. All Fischer 344 had lesions, 20 % papillary hyperplasia, 30 % dysplasia, 40 % neoplasia and 10 % squamous metaplasia. Proliferative and apoptotic indices were significantly lower in the Lewis strain (p < 0.01). The TLR2 and UP III protein levels were significantly higher in Lewis compared to Fischer 344 strain (70.8 and 46.5 % vs. 49.5 and 16.9 %, respectively). In contrast, C-Myc protein levels were significantly higher in Fischer 344 (22.5 %) compared to Lewis strain (13.7 %). The innovative Lewis carcinogen resistance urothelial model represents a new strategy for translational research. Preservation of TLR2 and UP III defense mechanisms might drive diverse urothelial phenotypes during carcinogenesis in differently susceptible individuals.