Citations

The deubiquitinating enzyme (DUB) UCHL1 is implicated in various disease states including neurodegenerative disease and cancer. However, there is a lack of quality probe molecules to gain a better understanding on UCHL1 biology. To this end a study was carried out to fully characterize and optimize the irreversible covalent UCHL1 inhibitor VAEFMK. Structure-activity relationship studies identified modifications to improve activity versus the target and a full cellular characterization was carried out for the first time with this scaffold. The studies produced a new inhibitor, 34, with an IC50 value of 7.7 µM against UCHL1 and no observable activity versus the closest related DUB UCHL3. The molecule was also capable of selectively inhibiting UCHL1 in cells and did not demonstrate any discernible off-target toxicity. Finally, the molecule was used for initial probe studies to assess the role of UCHL1 role in proliferation of myeloma cells and migration behavior in small cell lung cancer cells making 34 a new tool to be used in the biological evaluation of UCHL1.

AbstractThe deubiquitinase (DUB) ubiquitin C‐terminal hydrolase L1 (UCHL1) is expressed primarily in the central nervous system under normal physiological conditions. However, UCHL1 is overexpressed in various aggressive forms of cancer with strong evidence supporting UCHL1 as an oncogene in lung, glioma, and blood cancers. In particular, the level of UCHL1 expression in these cancers correlates with increased invasiveness and metastatic behavior, as well as poor patient prognosis. Although UCHL1 is considered an oncogene with potential as a therapeutic target, there remains a significant lack of useful small‐molecule probes to pharmacologically validate in vivo targeting of the enzyme. Herein, we describe the characterization of a new covalent cyanopyrrolidine‐based UCHL1 inhibitory scaffold in biochemical and cellular studies to better understand the utility of this inhibitor in elucidating the role of UCHL1 in cancer biology.

An analysis of the cement mantle obtained with the Exeter impaction allografting system at one centre showed that it was either deficient or absent in almost 47% of Gruen zones. We therefore examined the mantle obtained using this system at another hospital and compared the results with those from the CPT and Harris Precoat Systems at other centres. The surgical indications for the procedure and the patient details were broadly similar in all four hospitals. There was some variation in the frequency of use of cortical strut allografts, cerclage wires and wire mesh to supplement the impaction allograft. Analysis of the cement mantles showed that when uncertain Gruen zones were excluded, the incidence of zones with areas of absence or deficiency of the cement was 47% and 50%, respectively, for the two centres using the Exeter system, 21% for the CPT system and 18% for the Harris Precoat system. We measured the difference in size between the proximal allograft impactors and the definitive prosthesis for each system. The Exeter system impactors are shorter than the definitive prosthesis and taper sharply so that the cavity created is inadequate, especially distally. The CPT proximal impactors are considerably longer than the definitive prosthesis and are designed to give a mantle of approximately 2 mm medially and laterally and 1.5 mm anteriorly and posteriorly. The Harris Precoat proximal impactors allow for a mantle with a circumference of 0.75 mm in the smaller sizes and 1 mm in the larger. Many reports link the longevity of a cemented implant to the adequacy of the cement mantle. For this reason, femoral impaction systems require careful design to achieve a cement mantle which is uninterrupted in its length and adequate in its thickness. Our results suggest that some current systems require modification.

This conversation represents an attempt by several arthroplasty surgeons to critique several abstracts presented over the last year as well as to use them as a jumping off point for trying to figure out where they fit in into our current understanding of multiple issues in modern hip and knee arthroplasty.