↓ Skip to main content

A Novel Regulator of Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase/APOBECs in Immunity and Cancer: Schrödinger’s CATalytic Pocket

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Novel Regulator of Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase/APOBECs in Immunity and Cancer: Schrödinger’s CATalytic Pocket
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00351
Pubmed ID
Authors

Justin J. King, Mani Larijani

Abstract

Activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) and its relative APOBEC3 cytidine deaminases boost immune response by mutating immune or viral genes. Because of their genome-mutating activities, AID/APOBECs are also drivers of tumorigenesis. Due to highly charged surfaces, extensive non-specific protein-protein/nucleic acid interactions, formation of polydisperse oligomers, and general insolubility, structure elucidation of these proteins by X-ray crystallography and NMR has been challenging. Hence, almost all available AID/APOBEC structures are of mutated and/or truncated versions. In 2015, we reported a functional structure for AID using a combined computational-biochemical approach. In so doing, we described a new regulatory mechanism that is a first for human DNA/RNA-editing enzymes. This mechanism involves dynamic closure of the catalytic pocket. Subsequent X-ray and NMR studies confirmed our discovery by showing that other APOBEC3s also close their catalytic pockets. Here, we highlight catalytic pocket closure as an emerging and important regulatory mechanism of AID/APOBEC3s. We focus on three sub-topics: first, we propose that variable pocket closure rates across AID/APOBEC3s underlie differential activity in immunity and cancer and review supporting evidence. Second, we discuss dynamic pocket closure as an ever-present internal regulator, in contrast to other proposed regulatory mechanisms that involve extrinsic binding partners. Third, we compare the merits of classical approaches of X-ray and NMR, with that of emerging computational-biochemical approaches, for structural elucidation specifically for AID/APOBEC3s.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 27%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Chemistry 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 15 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#24,755
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,676
of 324,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#379
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.