A range of chemically modified heparins was examined for their ability to bind heparin-binding growth factor 1 (HBGF-1; acidic fibroblast growth factor) and potentiate the in vitro mitogenic and neurotrophic activity of HBGF-1. It was found that carboxyl-reduced heparin bound HBGF-1 as effectively as the native heparin molecule. Totally desulfated heparin and N-desulfated heparin lack HBGF-1-binding capacity, and substitution of the exposed amino group with acetyl or acetoacetyl groups only partially restored binding capacity, indicating that N-sulfates only play a limited role in growth factor binding. However, the failure of totally desulfated, N-resulfated heparin to interact with HBGF-1 demonstrated that N-sulfates alone are insufficient and ester sulfates are absolutely essential for HBGF-1 binding. In contrast, the ability of the modified heparins to potentiate the mitogenic activity of HBGF-1 correlated only to a limited extent with their affinity for HBGF-1. Thus, the carboxyl-reduced molecule which displayed similar affinity for HBGF-1 as native heparin was consistently less potent in augmenting mitogenesis. Similarly, the N-acetylated and the N-acetoacetylated species, which had much lower affinity for HBGF-1 than the carboxyl-reduced molecule, conferred similar biological activity to HBGF-1 whereas N-desulfated heparin, which was unable to bind growth factor, potentiated the mitogenic activity of HBGF-1 for both 3T3 and HUVE cells. In contrast, the neurotrophic activity of HBGF-1 was potentiated by modified heparin species which failed to bind HBGF-1 and were without activity in the mitogenic assays.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Belford et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: