Cargando…
Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine SAA1.1 and SAA2.2
[Image: see text] Persistently high plasma levels of serum amyloid A (SAA) may induce AA amyloidosis in various organs causing their dysfunction. Although SAA isoforms share a high degree of homology, only the SAA1.1 isoform is found in amyloid deposits. SAA1.1 misfolding is a nucleation-dependent p...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Chemical Society
2019
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6704436/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31460467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.9b01590 |
_version_ | 1783445506216689664 |
---|---|
author | Jin, Lu Syrovets, Tatiana Scheller, Judith S. Zhang, Xinlei Simmet, Thomas |
author_facet | Jin, Lu Syrovets, Tatiana Scheller, Judith S. Zhang, Xinlei Simmet, Thomas |
author_sort | Jin, Lu |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] Persistently high plasma levels of serum amyloid A (SAA) may induce AA amyloidosis in various organs causing their dysfunction. Although SAA isoforms share a high degree of homology, only the SAA1.1 isoform is found in amyloid deposits. SAA1.1 misfolding is a nucleation-dependent process with dimer and trimer formation playing a major role in SAA fibril formation through self-catalyzed recruitment of native SAA molecules. Yet, a structural model of initial SAA oligomerization is still missing. In this study, we constructed a loosely associated model for murine SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 dimers in the presence or absence of hyaluronic acid as an exemplary glycosaminoglycan, a factor known to facilitate SAA fibril formation. Molecular dynamics simulations predicted that hyaluronic acid finally stabilized in a different binding pocket of the pathogenic SAA1.1 dimer compared to the nonpathogenic SAA2.2 dimer. Besides, Markov state modeling points to dynamic behavioral differences between the linker region of SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 and identifies a state unique to pathogenic SAA1.1 while bound to hyaluronic acid. The presence or absence of hyaluronic acid, as well as the dimer interface switch, affects dynamic behavior and possible oligomeric states, proposing a conceivable clue to the deviant pathogenicity of the two SAA isoforms. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6704436 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American Chemical Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67044362019-08-27 Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 Jin, Lu Syrovets, Tatiana Scheller, Judith S. Zhang, Xinlei Simmet, Thomas ACS Omega [Image: see text] Persistently high plasma levels of serum amyloid A (SAA) may induce AA amyloidosis in various organs causing their dysfunction. Although SAA isoforms share a high degree of homology, only the SAA1.1 isoform is found in amyloid deposits. SAA1.1 misfolding is a nucleation-dependent process with dimer and trimer formation playing a major role in SAA fibril formation through self-catalyzed recruitment of native SAA molecules. Yet, a structural model of initial SAA oligomerization is still missing. In this study, we constructed a loosely associated model for murine SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 dimers in the presence or absence of hyaluronic acid as an exemplary glycosaminoglycan, a factor known to facilitate SAA fibril formation. Molecular dynamics simulations predicted that hyaluronic acid finally stabilized in a different binding pocket of the pathogenic SAA1.1 dimer compared to the nonpathogenic SAA2.2 dimer. Besides, Markov state modeling points to dynamic behavioral differences between the linker region of SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 and identifies a state unique to pathogenic SAA1.1 while bound to hyaluronic acid. The presence or absence of hyaluronic acid, as well as the dimer interface switch, affects dynamic behavior and possible oligomeric states, proposing a conceivable clue to the deviant pathogenicity of the two SAA isoforms. American Chemical Society 2019-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6704436/ /pubmed/31460467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.9b01590 Text en Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society This is an open access article published under an ACS AuthorChoice License (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_termsofuse.html) , which permits copying and redistribution of the article or any adaptations for non-commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Jin, Lu Syrovets, Tatiana Scheller, Judith S. Zhang, Xinlei Simmet, Thomas Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title | Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine
SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title_full | Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine
SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title_fullStr | Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine
SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine
SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title_short | Comparative Study on Hyaluronic Acid Binding to Murine
SAA1.1 and SAA2.2 |
title_sort | comparative study on hyaluronic acid binding to murine
saa1.1 and saa2.2 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6704436/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31460467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.9b01590 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jinlu comparativestudyonhyaluronicacidbindingtomurinesaa11andsaa22 AT syrovetstatiana comparativestudyonhyaluronicacidbindingtomurinesaa11andsaa22 AT schellerjudiths comparativestudyonhyaluronicacidbindingtomurinesaa11andsaa22 AT zhangxinlei comparativestudyonhyaluronicacidbindingtomurinesaa11andsaa22 AT simmetthomas comparativestudyonhyaluronicacidbindingtomurinesaa11andsaa22 |