Functional implications of O-GlcNAcylation-dependent phosphorylation at a proximal site on keratin 18

Keratins 8/18 (K8/18) are phosphoglycoproteins and form the major intermediate filament network of simple epithelia. The three O-GlcNAcylation (Ser , Ser , and Ser ) and two phosphorylation (Ser and Ser ) serine sites on K18 are well characterized. Both of these modifications have been reported to increase K18 solubility and regulate its filament organization. In this report, we investigated the site-specific interplay between these two modifications in regulating the functional properties of K18, like solubility, stability, and filament organization. An immortalized hepatocyte cell line (HHL-17) stably expressing site-specific single, double, and triple O-GlcNAc and phosphomutants of K18 were used to identify the site(s) critical for regulating these functions. Keratin 18 mutants where O-GlcNAcylation at Ser was abolished (K18-S30A) exhibited reduced phosphorylation induced solubility, increased stability, defective filament architecture, and slower migration. Interestingly, K18-S30A mutants also showed loss of phosphorylation at Ser , a modification known to regulate the solubility of K18. Further to this, the K18 phosphomutant (K18-S33A) mimicked K18-S30A in its stability, filament organization, and cell migration. These results indicate that O-GlcNAcylation at Ser promotes phosphorylation at Ser to regulate the functional properties of K18 and also impact cellular processes like migration. O-GlcNAcylation and phosphorylation on the same or adjacent sites on most proteins antagonize each other in regulating protein functions. Here we report a novel, positive interplay between O-GlcNAcylation and phosphorylation at adjacent sites on K18 to regulate its fundamental properties

Proceedings of National Conference on Relevance of Engineering and Science for Environment and Society

This conference proceedings contains articles on the various research ideas of the academic community and practitioners presented at the National Conference on Relevance of Engineering and Science for Environment and Society (R{ES}2 2021). R{ES}2 2021 was organized by Shri Pandurang Pratishthan’s, Karmayogi Engineering College, Shelve, Pandharpur, India on July 25th, 2021. Conference Title: National Conference on Relevance of Engineering and Science for Environment and SocietyConference Acronym: R{ES}2 2021Conference Date: 25 July 2021Conference Location: Online (Virtual Mode)Conference Organizers: Shri Pandurang Pratishthan’s, Karmayogi Engineering College, Shelve, Pandharpur, India

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline