Cited by 641Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsTrace Elements in HealthDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Characterization of Copper Interactions with Alzheimer Amyloid β Peptides: Identification of an Attomolar‐Affinity Copper Binding Site on Amyloid β1‐42

Atwood, Craig S., Scarpa, Richard C., Huang, Xudong, Moir, Robert D., Jones, Walton D., Fairlie, David P., Tanzi, Rudolph E., Bush, Ashley I.·2000·Journal of Neurochemistry

Abstract

Abstract: Cu and Zn have been shown to accumulate in the brains of Alzheimer's disease patients. We have previously reported that Cu 2+ and Zn 2+ bind amyloid β (Aβ), explaining their enrichment in plaque pathology. Here we detail the stoichiometries and binding affinities of multiple cooperative Cu 2+‐binding sites on synthetic Aβ1‐40 and Aβ1‐42. We have developed a ligand displacement technique (competitive metal capture analysis) that uses metal‐chelator complexes to evaluate metal ion binding to Aβ, a notoriously self‐aggregating peptide. This analysis indicated that there is a very‐high‐affinity Cu 2+‐binding site on Aβ1‐42 (log Kapp = 17.2) that mediates peptide precipitation and that the tendency of this peptide to self‐aggregate in aqueous solutions is due to the presence of trace Cu 2+ contamination (customarily ∼0.1 μ M). In contrast, Aβ1‐40 has much lower affinity for Cu 2+ at this site (estimated log Kapp = 10.3), explaining why this peptide is less self‐aggregating. The greater Cu 2+‐binding affinity of Aβ1‐42 compared with Aβ1‐40 is associated with significantly diminished negative cooperativity. The role of trace metal contamination in inducing Aβ precipitation was confirmed by the demonstration that Aβ peptide (10 μ M) remained soluble for 5 days only in the presence of high‐affinity Cu 2+‐selective chelators.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1471-4159.2000.0751219.x

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Atwood, C. S., Scarpa, R. C., Huang, X., Moir, R. D., Jones, W. D., Fairlie, D. P., Tanzi, R. E., & Bush, A. I.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurochemistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-09
Volume
75
Issue
3
Pages
1219-1233
ISSN
  • 0022-3042 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-4159
OpenAlex
W1966618264
Cited by
641
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 41
FWCI
14.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurochemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1r29ag012686-01a1)
  • National Institute on Aging (R29AG12686)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Trace Elements in Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
copper binding, amyloid-beta, Alzheimer's disease, Aβ40, amyloid-beta 42, metal-peptide interactions, metal chelators, peptide self-aggregation, binding stoichiometry, negative cooperativity, trace metal contamination
MeSH terms
Animals, Binding Sites, Chelating Agents, Copper, Dogs, Humans, Kinetics, Peptide Fragments, Regression Analysis, Serum Albumin, Zinc, Amyloid beta-Peptides

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review