Meizhen Lou
Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Meizhen Lou.
Cell | 2002
Thomas P. J. Garrett; Neil M. McKern; Meizhen Lou; Thomas C. Elleman; Timothy E. Adams; George O. Lovrecz; Hong-Jian Zhu; Francesca Walker; Morry J. Frenkel; Peter A. Hoyne; Robert N. Jorissen; Edouard C. Nice; Antony W. Burgess; Colin W. Ward
We report the crystal structure, at 2.5 A resolution, of a truncated human EGFR ectodomain bound to TGFalpha. TGFalpha interacts with both L1 and L2 domains of EGFR, making many main chain contacts with L1 and interacting with L2 via key conserved residues. The results indicate how EGFR family members can bind a family of highly variable ligands. In the 2:2 TGFalpha:sEGFR501 complex, each ligand interacts with only one receptor molecule. There are two types of dimers in the asymmetric unit: a head-to-head dimer involving contacts between the L1 and L2 domains and a back-to-back dimer dominated by interactions between the CR1 domains of each receptor. Based on sequence conservation, buried surface area, and mutagenesis experiments, the back-to-back dimer is favored to be biologically relevant.
Molecular Cell | 2003
Thomas P. J. Garrett; Neil M. McKern; Meizhen Lou; Thomas C. Elleman; Timothy E. Adams; George O. Lovrecz; Michael Kofler; Robert N. Jorissen; Edouard C. Nice; Antony W. Burgess; Colin W. Ward
ErbB2 does not bind ligand, yet appears to be the major signaling partner for other ErbB receptors by forming heteromeric complexes with ErbB1, ErbB3, or ErbB4. The crystal structure of residues 1-509 of ErbB2 at 2.5 A resolution reveals an activated conformation similar to that of the EGFR when complexed with ligand and very different from that seen in the unactivated forms of ErbB3 or EGFR. The structure explains the inability of ErbB2 to bind known ligands and suggests why ErbB2 fails to form homodimers. Together, the data suggest a model in which ErbB2 is already in the activated conformation and ready to interact with other ligand-activated ErbB receptors.
Nature | 1998
Thomas P. J. Garrett; Neil M. McKern; Meizhen Lou; Maurice J. Frenkel; John D. Bentley; George O. Lovrecz; Thomas C. Elleman; Leah J. Cosgrove; Colin W. Ward
The type-1 insulin-like growth-factor receptor (IGF-1R) and insulin receptor (IR) are closely related members of the tyrosine-kinase receptor superfamily. IR is essential for glucose homeostasis, whereas IGF-1R is involved in both normal growth and development and malignant transformation. Homologues of these receptors are found in animals as simple as cnidarians. The epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) family is closely related to the IR family and has significant sequence identity to the extracellular portion we describe here. We now present the structure of the first three domains of IGF-1R (L1–Cys-rich–L2) determined to 2.6 Å resolution. The L domains each consist of asingle-stranded right-handed β-helix. The Cys-rich region is composed of eight disulphide-bonded modules, seven of which form a rod-shaped domain with modules associated in an unusual manner. The three domains surround a central space of sufficient size to accommodate a ligand molecule. Although the fragment (residues 1–462) does not bind ligand, many of the determinants responsible for hormone binding and ligand specificity map to this central site. This structure therefore shows how the IR subfamily might interact with their ligands.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2006
Meizhen Lou; Thomas P. J. Garrett; Neil M. McKern; Peter A. Hoyne; V. Chandana Epa; John D. Bentley; George O. Lovrecz; Leah J. Cosgrove; Maurice J. Frenkel; Colin W. Ward
The insulin receptor (IR) and the type-1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF1R) are homologous multidomain proteins that bind insulin and IGF with differing specificity. Here we report the crystal structure of the first three domains (L1–CR–L2) of human IR at 2.3 Å resolution and compare it with the previously determined structure of the corresponding fragment of IGF1R. The most important differences seen between the two receptors are in the two regions governing ligand specificity. The first is at the corner of the ligand-binding surface of the L1 domain, where the side chain of F39 in IR forms part of the ligand binding surface involving the second (central) β-sheet. This is very different to the location of its counterpart in IGF1R, S35, which is not involved in ligand binding. The second major difference is in the sixth module of the CR domain, where IR contains a larger loop that protrudes further into the ligand-binding pocket. This module, which governs IGF1-binding specificity, shows negligible sequence identity, significantly more α-helix, an additional disulfide bond, and opposite electrostatic potential compared to that of the IGF1R.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2007
Trevor Huyton; Jian-Guo Zhang; Cindy S. Luo; Meizhen Lou; Douglas J. Hilton; Nicos A. Nicola; Thomas P. J. Garrett
Leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) receptor is a cell surface receptor that mediates the actions of LIF and other IL-6 type cytokines through the formation of high-affinity signaling complexes with gp130. Here we present the crystal structure of a complex of mouse LIF receptor with human LIF at 4.0 Å resolution. The structure is, to date, the largest cytokine receptor fragment determined by x-ray crystallography. The binding of LIF to its receptor via the central Ig-like domain is unlike other cytokine receptor complexes that bind ligand predominantly through their cytokine-binding modules. This structure, in combination with previous crystallographic studies, also provides a structural template to understand the formation and orientation of the high-affinity signaling complex between LIF, LIF receptor, and gp130.
Biochemistry | 2001
Thomas C. Elleman; Teresa Domagala; Neil M. McKern; Maureen Nerrie; Björn Lönnqvist; Timothy E. Adams; George O. Lovrecz; Peter A. Hoyne; Kim M. Richards; Geoffrey J. Howlett; Julie Rothacker; Robert N. Jorissen; Meizhen Lou; Thomas P. J. Garrett; Antony W. Burgess; Edouard C. Nice; Colin W. Ward
Protein Science | 2008
Neil M. McKern; Meizhen Lou; Maurice J. Frenkel; Amanda Verkuylen; John D. Bentley; George O. Lovrecz; Neva Ivancic; Thomas C. Elleman; Thomas P. J. Garrett; Leah J. Cosgrove; Colin W. Ward
Archive | 2002
Timothy E. Adams; Antony Wilks Burgess; Thomas C. Elleman; Thomas Peter John Garrett; Robert N. Jorissen; Meizhen Lou; George Oscar Lovrecz; Neil Moreton Mckern; Edouard C. Nice; Colin Wesley Ward
Archive | 2007
Timothy E. Adams; Thomas P. J. Garrett; Michael C. Lawrence; Meizhen Lou; George Oscar Lovrecz; Neil Moreton Mckern; Lindsay G. Sparrow; Victor Strelstov; Colin Wesley Ward
Archive | 2007
Thomas P. J. Garrett; Timothy E. Adams; George Oscar Lovrecz; Neil Moreton Mckern; Michael C. Lawrence; Lindsay G. Sparrow; Colin Wesley Ward; Meizhen Lou; Victor Strelstov
Collaboration
Dive into the Meizhen Lou's collaboration.
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
View shared research outputsCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
View shared research outputsCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
View shared research outputsCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
View shared research outputs