Differential Inhibitor Sensitivity between Human Kinases VRK1 and VRK2

Human vaccinia-related kinases (VRK1 and VRK2) are atypical active Ser-Thr kinases implicated in control of cell cycle entry, apoptosis and autophagy, and affect signalling by mitogen activated protein kinases (MAPK). The specific structural differences in VRK catalytic sites make them suitable candidates for development of specific inhibitors. In this work we have determined the sensitivity of VRK1 and VRK2 to kinase inhibitors, currently used in biological assays or in preclinical studies, in order to discriminate between the two proteins as well as with respect to the vaccinia virus B1R kinase. Both VRK proteins and vaccinia B1R are poorly inhibited by inhibitors of different types targeting Src, MEK1, B-Raf, JNK, p38, CK1, ATM, CHK1/2 and DNA-PK, and most of them have no effect even at 100 µM. Despite their low sensitivity, some of these inhibitors in the low micromolar range are able to discriminate between VRK1, VRK2 and B1R. VRK1 is more sensitive to staurosporine, RO-31-8220 and TDZD8. VRK2 is more sensitive to roscovitine, RO 31–8220, Cdk1 inhibitor, AZD7762, and IC261. Vaccinia virus B1R is more sensitive to staurosporine, KU55933, and RO 31–8220, but not to IC261. Thus, the three kinases present a different pattern of sensitivity to kinase inhibitors. This differential response to known inhibitors can provide a structural framework for VRK1 or VRK2 specific inhibitors with low or no cross-inhibition. The development of highly specific VRK1 inhibitors might be of potential clinical use in those cancers where these kinases identify a clinical subtype with a poorer prognosis, as is the case of VRK1 in breast cancer

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Consensus guidelines for the use and interpretation of angiogenesis assays

The formation of new blood vessels, or angiogenesis, is a complex process that plays important roles in growth and development, tissue and organ regeneration, as well as numerous pathological conditions. Angiogenesis undergoes multiple discrete steps that can be individually evaluated and quantified by a large number of bioassays. These independent assessments hold advantages but also have limitations. This article describes in vivo, ex vivo, and in vitro bioassays that are available for the evaluation of angiogenesis and highlights critical aspects that are relevant for their execution and proper interpretation. As such, this collaborative work is the first edition of consensus guidelines on angiogenesis bioassays to serve for current and future reference