Distinct Functional Conformations of von Willebrand Factor A1 Domain in Support of Platelet-Surface or Platelet-Platelet Interactions.
Authors: Podda Gianmarco , Roberts James R. , McClintock Richard A. , Ruggeri Zaverio M. 
Published: October 2019

The adhesive protein, von Willebrand factor (VWF), is generally considered a key substrate for platelet adhesion to the vessel wall, yet its role in platelet cohesion (aggregation) may be equally important for normal thrombus formation. In either case, the function of VWF is mediated by the primary interaction of the VWF A1 domain (VWF-A1) with glycoprotein (GP) Ibα, a component of the GPIb-IX-V receptor complex on the platelet membrane. Because normal plasma VWF in solution and GPIb coexist in circulating blood without any appreciable interaction, it has been postulated that conformational changes occur when VWF becomes immobilized and/or under the effect of pathologically elevated shear stress, such that binding to the receptor becomes possible and resultis in platelet tethering to a surface and shear-induced aggregation. Changes of the molecular shape of VWF, from coiled to extended, have been shown under the effect of hemodynamic forces, but evidence for conformational changes within VWF-A1 has remained elusive. The crystal structure of VWF-A1 in complex with a GPIbα amino terminal fragment has revealed that the VWF-A1 residues involved in the interaction are comprised between positions 544–614 and, in particular, do not include several positively charged Arg and Lys residues located in helices α4 and 5 (residues 627–668). The latter appear as likely candidates to interact with negatively charged residues in GPIbα as a consequence of potential conformational changes induced by tensile stress on the bond following an initial ligand-receptor contact. We tested this hypothesis by evaluating the ability of selected VWF-A1 mutants to support platelet adhesion or aggregation, respectively, under controlled flow conditions.

Methods. We expressed in insect cells and purified a series of VWF-A1 fragments comprising residues 445–733. One fragment had native sequence and 8 had single or multiple substitutions of positively charged amino acid residues in helices α4 and/or α5. None of the substituted residues contribute to contacts with GP Ibα in the known crystal structures of the corresponding complex, and all except one were between 8 and 20 angstroms away from the closest GPIbα residue. All the fragments were dimeric (d) owing to the presence of interchain disulfide bond(s).

Results: Native dVWF-A1 in solution supported platelet aggregation in a laminar flow field. Of the 8 mutants, 5 had variably decreased function (up to 95% less aggregation) and 2 had increased function (up to 200% increase in aggregation). The same results were observed with platelet-rich plasma in suspension or by measuring platelet aggregate formation with blood cells perfused over immobilized VWF-A1 at wall shear rates as high as 10,000 1/s. In contrast, as judged by the number of tethered platelets and their rolling velocities, all mutants supported adhesion as well as or better that the native VWFA-1 at all shear rates tested (500–25,000 1/s).

Conclusions: These results provide structural evidence for the existence of different VWF-A1 conformers that can modulate adhesive properties with distinct effects on platelet adhesion to a surface or platelet aggregation.