Cited by 213Cholesterol and Lipid MetabolismLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior

Rate and equilibrium constants for binding of apo-E HDL c (a cholesterol-induced lipoprotein) and low density lipoproteins to human fibroblasts: Evidence for multiple receptor binding of apo-E HDL c

Open access
Pitas, R. E., Innerarity, T. L., Arnold, K. S., Mahley, R. W.·1979·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Competitive binding assays have demonstrated that a cholesterol-induced canine lipoprotein containing only the E apoprotein (apo-E HDL c ) binds to the same cell surface receptors of human fibroblasts as human low density lipoproteins (LDL). However, the apo-E HDL c have a much greater binding activity than LDL. Equilibrium and kinetic binding studies were conducted at 4°C to determine the mechanism for this enhanced receptor binding activity. Based on the data, the binding of both LDL and apo-E HDL c appears to be a simple bimolecular receptor interaction, and no heterogeneity of binding sites or cooperative effects among the receptor sites were observed. Equilibrium dissociation constants determined by Scatchard analysis of the equilibrium binding data for apo-E HDL c ( K d = 0.12 × 10 -9 M) and LDL ( K d = 2.8 × 10 -9 M) revealed a 23-fold greater affinity of HDL c for the receptors. Association and dissociation rate constants for the lipoprotein-receptor complex were determined from the time course of binding at various lipoprotein concentrations. The equilibrium dissociation constants calculated from these kinetic data confirmed that apo-E HDL c had a much higher affinity for the receptor than LDL. Furthermore, the kinetic studies indicated that apo-E HDL c bound more rapidly than LDL with rates of association of 18.0 × 10 4 and 5.5 × 10 4 M -1 sec -1 , respectively. The rate of dissociation of the apo-E HDL c -receptor complex (1.7 × 10 -5 sec -1 ) was slower than that of the LDL receptor complex (6.3 × 10 -5 sec -1 ). An additional important difference between the binding of apo-E HDL c and LDL was that 4 times (3.6 ± 0.4) as many LDL particles as HDL c particles were required for saturation of the receptors at maximal binding. These data indicate that each HDL c particle binds to multiple cell surface receptors at a ratio of 4:1 for LDL receptor binding.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.76.5.2311

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The apo B,E or LDL receptor is present in most tissues, and apo E has much higher affinity than apo B for it because apo E-containing particles can form multiple interactions with several sites on the receptor.

    “The first of these, apo B,E or low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor, is present in most tissues.Apo E has a much higher affinity than apolipoprotein B for this receptor because of the potential of apo E-containing particles to form multiple interactions with several sites on the receptor (15)(16)(17).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [4]Mahley, R. W. & Innerarity, T. L. (1978) in Sixth International Symposium on Drugs Affecting Lipid Metabolism, eds. Kritchevsky, D., Paoletti, R. & Holmes, W. L. (Plenum, New York), pp. 99-127.
  2. [7]Mahley, R. W. (1978) in Disturbances in Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism, eds. Dietschy, J. M., Gotto, A. M., Jr. & Ontko, J. A, (American Physiological Society, Bethesda, MD), pp. 181– 197.
  3. [13]Innerarity, T. L., Pitas, R. E. & Mahley, R. W. (1979) J. Biol. Chem., in press.
  4. [17]Kahn, C. R. (1975) in Methods in Membrane Biology, ed. Korn, E. D. (Plenum, New York), Vol. 3, pp. 81–146.
  5. [16]Brown, M. S. & Goldstein, J. L. (1974) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71, 788–792.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pitas, R. E., Innerarity, T. L., Arnold, K. S., & Mahley, R. W.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1979-05
Volume
76
Issue
5
Pages
2311-2315
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2092107425
Cited by
213
References
0
Citations by year
2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 3
FWCI
32.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Lipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Keywords
low-density lipoprotein, human fibroblasts, receptor binding kinetics, equilibrium dissociation constant, receptor saturation
MeSH terms
Apolipoproteins, Binding Sites, Binding, Competitive, Cell Membrane, Fibroblasts, Kinetics, Lipoproteins, HDL, Lipoproteins, LDL, Receptors, Drug

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