pe
pep-10615 v1 CC-BY-SA-4.0

Gut-hormone fragment for digestion research (Gastrin-34 [1-10])

A short lab-made piece of the gut hormone gastrin, used in research to study how the stomach and gut signal fullness; not a drug, used only as a lab research tool.

statussynthesized targetCCKAR length9 aa refs3
status 4 / 5
prediction metrics boltz-2 1.0
ipTM0.965
pTM0.888
avg pLDDT76.8
ranking score0.807
STRUCTURE · PEP-10615 × CCKAR
ranking0.807
target interface 4.5Å peptide drag rotate · ctrl+scroll zoom · right-click pan
boltz-2 1.0 · mmCIF ↓ download
sequence9 aa
159
LGPQGPPHL
overview readme

What this is

Gastrin-34 [1-10] is a synthetic nine-residue peptide corresponding to the first nine amino acids at the N-terminal end of gastrin-34 (also called "big gastrin"), one of the naturally occurring forms of the gut hormone gastrin. Unlike the full gastrin-34 molecule, this short fragment does not carry the C-terminal sequence that drives classical gastrin biology. It is used in research settings to study how different parts of the gastrin precursor interact with cholecystokinin receptors — particularly the cholecystokinin A receptor (CCKAR, also called CCK1R).

History

Gastrin-34 was established as a distinct molecular form of gastrin in the early 1980s, when Boel and colleagues (1983) reported the molecular cloning of human gastrin cDNA from a gastrin-producing pancreatic tumor (gastrinoma), revealing a 101-residue preprogastrin precursor. Their sequence data showed that the precursor encodes big gastrin (gastrin-34) as one post-translational product, and provided evidence that the gastrin gene evolved through gene duplication (Boel and colleagues, 1983). The N-terminal region of gastrin-34 — which contains the sequence making up this fragment — had already been the subject of immunochemical mapping studies by that time, with antisera raised against synthetic N-terminal peptides used to localize distinct antigenic determinants within the first 1–15 residues of big gastrin.

What it does

Gastrin-34 [1-10] encompasses the unique N-terminal segment that distinguishes big gastrin (34 residues) from its shorter relative, little gastrin (gastrin-17). The full gastrin-34 molecule acts principally via the cholecystokinin B receptor (CCK2R / CCKBR) to stimulate gastric acid secretion from parietal cells, promote growth of the gastric mucosa, and release histamine from enterochromaffin-like cells (Zeng and colleagues, 2020). However, the bioactive core of gastrin is confined to the C-terminal pentapeptide sequence — the N-terminal portion of gastrin-34 does not itself mediate these classical actions.

This N-terminal fragment is used experimentally to probe the ligand-interaction surface of the cholecystokinin A receptor (CCKAR). CCK1R and CCK2R are structurally related class A GPCRs that are approximately 50% identical overall, with the greatest divergence in the binding-pocket regions that determine their very different selectivity profiles (Miller and colleagues, 2008). CCK1R strongly prefers cholecystokinin, which carries a sulfated tyrosine in its extended C-terminal heptapeptide; gastrin-derived fragments lacking this sulfated extension are low-affinity ligands at CCK1R. Fragments such as Gastrin-34 [1-10] can be used to examine which portions of the receptor's extracellular and transmembrane surfaces are engaged by different structural features of the gastrin/CCK ligand family.

Evidence

  • Human: No human clinical data for this fragment. It is a research tool, not a therapeutic compound.
  • Animal: Not reported for this fragment specifically. Pharmacological studies of the gastrin/CCK receptor family in rat and other models have characterized the structural requirements for CCK1R versus CCK2R activation (Miller and colleagues, 2008).
  • In vitro: Used in receptor-binding and competition studies to map ligand–receptor contacts at CCKAR. The broader gastrin family literature has characterized that the C-terminal tetrapeptide amide is the minimal CCK2R-active unit, while CCK1R requires the full sulfated heptapeptide (Miller and colleagues, 2008).

Known effects

  • CCKAR ligand interaction probe — Research tool; used to characterize binding-pocket interactions at the cholecystokinin A receptor.
  • No endocrine agonist activity — The N-terminal 1–10 fragment of gastrin-34 lacks the C-terminal pharmacophore required for classical gastrin signaling at CCK2R (Zeng and colleagues, 2020).

Mechanism

Gastrin bioactivity is encoded entirely in its C-terminal region. All biologically active gastrin and CCK peptides share an amidated C-terminal pentapeptide motif (Gly-Trp-Met-Asp-Phe-NH₂) that is the minimal pharmacophoric unit for CCK2R activation (Zeng and colleagues, 2020). The CCK2R requires only this C-terminal tetrapeptide amide for high-affinity binding and signaling; it couples via phospholipase C (PLC), generating diacylglycerol and inositol trisphosphate, leading to protein kinase C activation and downstream proliferative and secretory responses (Zeng and colleagues, 2020). The N-terminal extension present in gastrin-34 — which this fragment represents — does not contact the CCK2R binding pocket in a way that contributes to activation. Its primary pharmacological contribution to the intact G-34 molecule is to extend plasma half-life, from roughly 7 minutes for gastrin-17 to approximately 38 minutes for gastrin-34.

The CCK1R (CCKAR) is structurally related but differs in ligand selectivity: it requires the carboxyl-terminal heptapeptide amide including a sulfated tyrosine found in CCK peptides, making gastrin a low-affinity, weakly potent agonist at this receptor — roughly 500- to 1,000-fold less potent than CCK (Miller and colleagues, 2008). Gastrin-34 [1-10], as the N-terminal fragment of big gastrin, is applied in binding studies to dissect which contacts along the CCKAR extracellular surface are engaged by different portions of gastrin-family ligands.

Open questions

  • No specific receptor has been identified for N-terminal progastrin processing fragments; whether short N-terminal gastrin peptides engage any distinct receptor or binding site remains unresolved.
  • The precise structural determinants within the N-terminal 1–10 region of gastrin-34 that distinguish CCK1R from CCK2R engagement have not been fully mapped with this isolated fragment.
  • Proteolytic stability and plasma half-life of the isolated Gastrin-34 [1-10] nonapeptide have not been reported.

Related peptides

  • Gastrin signaling and receptor biology are reviewed in the context of the broader CCK/gastrin family; see also related cards for the full gastrin forms and CCK receptor ligands on this platform.
Hypotheses3 directions▾ collapse

Research directions for this peptide, selected from the current sources — hypotheses you can explore and model. None of it is proven yet; tap any one to see the full thinking.

openupdated 2026-06-05

Can this short peptide really bind and activate the CCKAR receptor, or is the computer model giving a false positive?

If the docking score is a false positive, researchers could avoid wasting time testing this fragment as a CCKAR drug lead. It would also flag a potential flaw in how structure-prediction tools score short peptides against large receptors.

The hypothesis
The high ipTM (0.965) for LGPQGPPHL binding to CCKAR reflects crystal-packing or scoring artefact rather than genuine agonist-competent docking, because the fragment lacks the C-terminal tetrapeptide (-WMDF or -YGWMDF) that is obligatory for CCKAR activation.
Why it’s plausible
CCKAR activation by gastrin and CCK peptides is universally dependent on the C-terminal amidated Phe and the preceding Asp residue. LGPQGPPHL contains neither. A high ipTM score without this pharmacophore is mechanistically paradoxical and more likely reflects a non-specific interface captured by the model. This makes the annotated target questionable at the functional level.
Why it matters
If confirmed, the CCKAR annotation is misleading: this fragment cannot be an agonist or competitive antagonist at the canonical orthosteric site, and its reported CCKAR interactions must be reinterpreted as allosteric, non-productive, or artifactual.
Plausibility.90
Novelty.50
Impact.70
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
paper
N-terminal CCKAR mutagenesis table shows Q40A and Q44A substitutions minimally affect binding, but the canonical pharmacophore is at the C-terminus of CCK/gastrin peptides, not the N-terminal arm.
doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2008.05.001
[2]
sequenceLGPQGPPHL contains no Asp-Phe-NH2 or Trp-Met-Asp-Phe motif; the C-terminal residue is Leu, not an amidated Phe.
[3]
structureipTM=0.9648 is unusually high for a 9-residue peptide lacking the known pharmacophore, suggesting the score may reflect non-specific interface geometry.
openupdated 2026-06-05

Does the absence of the natural protective cap at one end of this fragment change its shape enough to produce misleading results?

If the cap matters for shape, clinical tests that use this fragment to measure gastrin levels in blood could be systematically inaccurate, affecting diagnosis of gastrin-producing tumors (gastrinomas) in patients.

The hypothesis
The pyroglutamate (pGlu) cyclization at position 1 of native gastrin-34, absent from the stored LGPQGPPHL sequence, is required for the N-terminal arm to adopt the polyproline-II helix that gives big gastrin its distinct immunochemical identity relative to gastrin-17, and its absence in synthetic fragments systematically distorts structure-activity conclusions drawn from these tools.
Why it’s plausible
The readme notes that pGlu at position 1 is protective against aminopeptidase and is not represented in the single-letter sequence. Polyproline-II helices, common in Pro-rich sequences, are nucleated from the N-terminus. Removal of the pGlu cap and replacement with a free Leu (as in LGPQGPPHL) alters the phi/psi angles of the first residue and could disrupt helix propagation through the LGPQGPP core.
Why it matters
If pGlu is required for correct N-terminal arm geometry, then all structural and immunochemical data generated with the synthetic fragment (without pGlu) are systematically biased, affecting interpretation of epitope mapping studies used to distinguish gastrin-34 from gastrin-17 in clinical assays.
Plausibility.55
Novelty.50
Impact.60
Basis · grounding3 computed/notes
[1]
notereadme_excerpt explicitly states pGlu at position 1 cannot be encoded as a standard single-letter amino acid and is absent from the stored sequence.
[2]
sequenceLGPQGPPHL begins with Leu, not pGlu; the Pro-rich core (positions 3, 6, 7) is consistent with a polyproline-II tendency that may depend on N-terminal capping.
[3]
structurepLDDT=76.8 is moderate, consistent with a disordered or partially structured peptide, possibly reflecting the missing pGlu cap.
openupdated 2026-06-05

Does this fragment actually bind to the gastrin-type receptor rather than the CCK-type receptor it is listed under?

If the fragment has any preference for the gastrin receptor (CCK2R) over the CCK receptor (CCK1R), decades of experiments using it as a CCK1R probe would need reinterpretation, potentially changing our understanding of how big gastrin signals differently from little gastrin.

The hypothesis
Gastrin-34 [1-10] (LGPQGPPHL) binds CCKBR (CCK2R, the gastrin receptor) with lower affinity than CCKAR (CCK1R), contrary to its annotation, because the C-terminal His residue partially mimics the histidine found in some CCK2R-selective ligands, while the absence of the sulfated Tyr and Asp-Phe pharmacophore strips agonist activity at both receptor subtypes equally.
Why it’s plausible
CCK2R shows broader tolerance for N-terminal truncations of gastrin than CCK1R, which is highly sensitive to C-terminal integrity. The terminal His in LGPQGPPHL is chemically similar to the imidazole-containing pharmacophores of some CCK2R-selective compounds. The annotation to CCKAR may reflect a historical immunochemical tool-use context rather than true receptor preference.
Why it matters
Clarifying the receptor subtype preference of this fragment matters for its use as a research tool: if it has residual CCK2R activity rather than CCKAR activity, it could confound experiments designed to isolate CCKAR-specific signaling in gastric physiology.
Plausibility.50
Novelty.40
Impact.50
Basis · grounding1 paper · 2 computed/notes
[1]
paper
Pharmacology review documents the differential structural requirements of CCK1R vs CCK2R, with CCK1R being more stringent for C-terminal pharmacophore integrity.
doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2008.05.001
[2]
sequenceLGPQGPPHL C-terminus is His (imidazole side chain), not amidated Phe; His has a partial structural resemblance to imidazole-bearing CCK2R ligands.
[3]
notereadme_excerpt states the fragment is used to study 'how different parts of the gastrin precursor interact with cholecystokinin receptors, particularly CCKAR,' suggesting the CCKAR annotation is a study focus, not a proven selectivity finding.
details expand to inspect
full evidence table2 metrics
metricvaluetool
ipTM 0.9647589921951294 boltz-2
ranking score 0.8069562911987305 boltz-2
structural qualityopenfold3
metricvaluenote
gpde0.643global PDE — lower = better
disorderNaNfraction disordered
3-letter notation
Leu-Gly-Pro-Gln-Gly-Pro-Pro-His-Leu
recipeboltz-2 1.0
parametervalue
modelboltz-2 1.0
weights
hardwarenvidia_nim_api
mlx version
python
random seed
msa strategynone
diffusion samples1
runtime
predicted bymlx@peptide
predicted at2026-04-24
citationbibtex
peptidemodel (2026). Gut-hormone fragment for digestion research (Gastrin-34 [1-10]) (pep-10615, v1). PeptideModel. https://peptidemodel.com/card/pep-10615
@peptide{pep10615,
  sequence = {LGPQGPPHL},
  target   = {cckar},
  author   = {peptidemodel},
  year     = {2026},
  status   = {synthesized}
}
related peptides 5 by signal overlap
clinical trials 0 trials · checked 2026-05-09
0
no registered clinical trials as of 2026-05-09; we'll re-check periodically
references 3 papers
discussion no comments
sign in to comment
peptidemodel.com CC-BY-SA-4.0 research only · not for human use