PRKAR1A (P10644) - a PKA regulatory subunit in the pan-MLL-fusion core with no catalytic subunit anywhere in the network, and a fusion oncogene in variant APL
also called PRKAR1A · PKR1 · PRKAR1 · TSE1 · RIalpha · R1A · cAMP-dependent protein kinase type I-alpha regulatory subunit · Tissue-specific extinguisher 1 · KAP0_HUMAN · P10644
PRKAR1A is the brake on protein kinase A, one of the cell's main signalling switches: it holds the enzyme off until a chemical messenger arrives. It came out of a fishing experiment attached to all seven MLL fusion proteins - and, strikingly, the enzyme it normally holds is nowhere to be found in the same experiment, so whatever it is doing there it is not doing as part of the kinase.
The same thing, for a scientist
PRKAR1A (P10644, 381 aa) is the type I-alpha regulatory subunit of cAMP-dependent protein kinase. It co-purified with all seven Strep-HA-tagged MLL fusions in Skucha 2018 (MLL-AF4 p = 0.048, 3|3, negative control 0|0, rank 35 of 42). Two measurements made here change how the row reads. **First, there is no PKA holoenzyme in this network:** PRKACA and PRKACB - both catalytic subunits - are completely absent from the 960, PRKAR2B is absent, and PRKAR1B and PRKAR2A appear at n = 1 each with no MLL-AF4 value. PRKAR1A is the only PKA subunit with all seven baits. **Second, the two nuclear A-kinase anchoring proteins ARE there:** AKAP8/AKAP95 at n = 4 and AKAP8L/HA95 at n = 5, the latter inside the post-filter 128 - but neither has an MLL-AF4 value at all, and AKAP95 is a type-II anchor while PRKAR1A is type I, so the subtype does not match and the module reading is weaker than it first appears. UniProt is also surprising: P10644's ONLY location comment is 'Cell membrane', on two experimental citations, with no nucleus and no cytoplasm - so a protein with no annotated nuclear or even cytoplasmic address was recovered from nuclear lysate by all seven baits. Separately, PRKAR1A is a genuine leukaemia fusion oncogene: PRKAR1A-RARA is the fifth-identified variant APL fusion and transforms mouse bone marrow progenitors in a manner critically dependent on RXR-alpha recruitment.
The Skucha row, stated in full
7 of 7 fusions. MLL-AF1p 0.0139 (8|3), MLL-AF4 0.048 (3|3), MLL-AF9 0.00601 (10|8), MLL-CBP 0.02 (3|5), MLL-EEN 0.0361 (10|5), MLL-ENL 0.000321 (14|17), MLL-GAS7 0.0208 (11|6); negative control 0|0 1. Rank 35 of 42 by MLL-AF4 p - it clears 0.05 by 4%. Only one of the seven baits (MLL-ENL) is below 0.006. The MLL-AF4 spectral total of 6 is rank 7 of the seven baits against 31 under MLL-ENL.
No holoenzyme: the regulatory subunit without its kinase
Measured against the full 960-row table on 2026-09-21:
| protein | in the 960 | MLL-AF4 |
|---|---|---|
| PRKAR1A (RI-alpha) | n = 7 | 0.048 (3|3) |
| PRKAR1B (RI-beta) | n = 1 | absent from column |
| PRKAR2A (RII-alpha) | n = 1 | absent from column |
| PRKAR2B (RII-beta) | absent | - |
| PRKACA (catalytic alpha) | absent | - |
| PRKACB (catalytic beta) | absent | - |
So whatever is happening, it is not a PKA holoenzyme co-purifying. A regulatory subunit without a catalytic subunit is either (a) a genuinely kinase-independent interaction, which is a real and documented class for RI-alpha, or (b) an abundant acidic dimeric protein being recovered non-specifically. Nothing in the table distinguishes them 1.
The nuclear AKAPs are present, and the subtype does not match
AKAP8 (AKAP95) at n = 4 and AKAP8L (HA95) at n = 5 are both in the network, and AKAP8L is inside the post-filter 128. These are the nuclear/chromatin A-kinase anchoring proteins, not the membrane or mitochondrial ones - AKAP1 and AKAP9 are absent. That looks like a nuclear PKA-anchoring module and it is the best pro-interaction story available for PRKAR1A.
Two measurements weaken it, and both are recorded rather than skipped. Neither AKAP8 nor AKAP8L has an MLL-AF4 p-value at all - they are recovered by other baits, not by the index fusion, so there is no module in the column this project cares about. And AKAP95 is characterised as anchoring the type II regulatory subunit, while PRKAR1A is type I-alpha; the type-II subunits in this network are PRKAR2A at n = 1 and PRKAR2B absent. The anchor and the subunit present here are not a matched pair. This entry states the observation and refuses the inference 1.
PRKAR1A is a leukaemia fusion oncogene in a different disease
In a patient with hypergranular promyelocytic marrow, negative for PML-RARA by RT-PCR, sequencing of an atypical product identified a PRKAR1A-RARA fusion, confirmed by FISH with PRKAR1A and RARA probes - the fifth variant APL in which the RARA partner had been identified, and the second known rearrangement of PRKAR1A in a malignancy 2. The fusion protein transforms mouse bone-marrow progenitor/stem cells; it binds retinoic acid response elements both as a homodimer and as an RXR-alpha heterodimer. The precise result is the useful one: the RIIa protein-interaction domain within PRKAR1A is responsible for homodimeric DNA binding and for interaction with wild-type PRKAR1A protein - but deleting it did not compromise transformation, whereas eliminating RXR-alpha interaction, RXR-alpha shRNA or an RXR-alpha agonist all reduced it 3.
So PRKAR1A's dimerisation domain, the part one would expect to matter by analogy with the coiled-coil KMT2A partners, is dispensable in the one fusion it is known to form. That is a genuine negative result about this protein in leukaemia, and it is evidence against reading PRKAR1A's dimerisation as a general oncogenic module.
Verdict
Undecidable, leaning artefact. The p-value is 0.048 - it clears the line by 4% and ranks 35 of 42. UniProt gives it no nuclear or cytoplasmic address at all, only cell membrane. There is no holoenzyme. The nuclear-AKAP observation is real but is subtype-mismatched and absent from the index column. And no experiment outside this AP-MS has ever put PRKAR1A near a KMT2A fusion - the bounded query returns 0. What keeps it from a confident dismissal is that PRKAR1A is a documented leukaemia fusion oncoprotein with nuclear function, so a nuclear pool of the wild-type protein is not implausible; it is simply unannotated.
| uniprot | P10644 |
|---|---|
| length AA | 381 |
| accession resolution | Resolved live 2026-09-21: `gene_exact:PRKAR1A AND organism_id:9606 AND reviewed:true` returns exactly ONE reviewed row; gene_primary PRKAR1A, P10644, entry name KAP0_HUMAN, 381 aa, protein name 'cAMP-dependent protein kinase type I-alpha regulatory subunit (Tissue-specific extinguisher 1) (TSE1)', synonyms PKR1 PRKAR1 TSE1. Matches the accession in Skucha's own table. |
| identifier hazard | NOT IN data/symbol-collisions.json AS OF 2026-09-21 (registry read before searching, per rule 88). Three hazards. (1) Rule 65 READBACK FAILS, DPF2/LMO2 class: the recommended protein name is 'cAMP-dependent protein kinase type I-alpha regulatory subunit' and contains neither 'PRKAR1A' nor 'RIalpha', so a reader applying the readback test concludes a correct lookup failed. (2) `PRKAR1` is a retired form of the symbol and `RIalpha`, `RI-alpha` and `R1A` are the forms the biochemistry and APL literature use - the Qiu 2010 paper writes 'R1A-RARalpha' throughout - so a current-symbol-only search splits the literature by era and by field. (3) `TSE1` (tissue-specific extinguisher 1) is a curated synonym that also appears as an unrelated abbreviation. Length is a usable defence within the PKA family: PRKAR1A 381, PRKAR1B 381 (NOT a defence against that one), PRKAR2A 404, PRKAR2B 418 - so RI-alpha versus RI-beta must be separated on the primary gene name alone. |
| localization | CELL MEMBRANE ONLY, WHICH IS THE PROBLEM. UniProt P10644, fetched live 2026-09-21 with per-location evidence codes read individually: 'Cell membrane' ECO:0000269 PubMed:23115245 and 27028580. That is the ENTIRE subcellular location comment - there is no nucleus, no cytoplasm and no cytoskeleton line, coded or uncoded. Per rule 91 the record was read in full rather than filtered, and there is nothing else there. This is the weakest localisation basis of any protein in this tranche: the frankly cytoskeletal members at least have a compartment consistent with being somewhere in a cell lysate, while this protein's only annotated address is a membrane that a nuclear preparation is meant to remove. The counterweight is not a database row but a disease: PRKAR1A-RARA is a DNA-binding nuclear oncoprotein, so PRKAR1A sequence can function in a nucleus. |
| subnuclear localization | NOT APPLICABLE for wild-type PRKAR1A - there is no nuclear annotation of any kind in UniProt, so there is no nuclear compartment to subdivide. Recorded as not applicable rather than as an unmeasured absence, following the HLA-A / NRAS / B2M / PROM1 / CD33 / ELOVL1 precedent, so it does not enter the denominator of unmeasured subnuclear compartments. NOTE the tension, which is sharper here than anywhere else in this tranche: the protein was recovered from nuclear lysate by all seven baits and its only annotated compartment is the plasma membrane. If a nuclear pool is ever demonstrated this field becomes a genuine gap and must be reclassified. |
| localization shown for fusion | NO - nobody has imaged or fractionated PRKAR1A in any cell expressing any KMT2A fusion. |
| shown for fusion | Two separate things. (1) INTERACTION: co-purification with all seven MLL fusions including MLL-AF4 in Jurkat (p = 0.048); shRNA-screened in MLL-AF9 MOLM-13, score unpublished; no independent experiment ties PRKAR1A to any KMT2A fusion. (2) FUSION PARTNER, DIFFERENT GENE: PRKAR1A-RARA in variant APL, transforming and RXRalpha-dependent - nothing to do with KMT2A. |
| selectivity | UNKNOWN, and BARRED from any target list on the evidence here. Not named among the paper's controls and not known to be among the 40 re-screened. PRKAR1A is the tumour suppressor of Carney complex - germline loss causes a multiple-neoplasia syndrome - so it is a gene whose loss is oncogenic in humans, which makes it an especially poor candidate for inhibition. Note the paper's own SF3A3 precedent that pan-fusion membership is compatible with being a named NON-selectivity control. |
| absence class | never-measured |
| absence class note | No instrument has been pointed at PRKAR1A in a KMT2A-rearranged cell outside the two screen hosts, and no nuclear localisation of wild-type PRKAR1A has been measured in any human cell - the UniProt record has only a plasma-membrane comment. The MOLM-13 shRNA score is measured-not-reported. Whether PRKACA appears in PXD009338 below the rank cutoff is measured-not-analysed; the spectra are public. PRIDE checked: PXD009338 is the only relevant deposition. |
| graph context | PRKAR1A appears in ZERO of this graph's 1,924 node files before this entry, and so does the PRKAR1A-RARA variant APL fusion, although this graph holds `fusion-pml-rara`. |
| verdict | UNDECIDABLE, LEANING ARTEFACT. p = 0.048, rank 35 of 42, weak across six of seven baits, no holoenzyme, an anchor pair of the wrong PKA subtype that is absent from the index column, a UniProt record whose only compartment is the plasma membrane, and no independent KMT2A tie. Held back from dismissal only by the fact that PRKAR1A demonstrably functions in a nucleus when fused to RARA. |
skucha 2018
{
"bait": "MLL-AF4 (= KMT2A::AFF1)",
"p_value": 0.048,
"spectral_counts": "3|3",
"n_fusions_of_seven": 7,
"negative_control_counts": "0|0",
"per_bait": {
"MLL-AF1p": "0.0139 (8|3)",
"MLL-AF4": "0.048 (3|3)",
"MLL-AF9": "0.00601 (10|8)",
"MLL-CBP": "0.02 (3|5)",
"MLL-EEN": "0.0361 (10|5)",
"MLL-ENL": "0.000321 (14|17)",
"MLL-GAS7": "0.0208 (11|6)"
},
"af4_spectral_rank_of_seven": 7,
"af4_p_rank_within_the_42_pan_fusion": 35,
"index_bait_note": "0.048 clears the conventional line by four percent. Six of seven baits are above 0.006, so this is a broadly weak row across the whole panel, not just in the index column - which distinguishes it from ZNF512 and LUZP1, where the index column alone is weak.",
"source": "analyses/skucha-mll-fusion-interactome/results.json, re-derived from the cached MOESM4 xlsx 2026-09-21; run.py re-run, both controls PASS"
}is itself a leukaemia fusion partner
{
"answer": "YES, but to RARA and not to KMT2A",
"fusion": "PRKAR1A-RARA, variant acute promyelocytic leukaemia",
"n_published_cases": "1 index case (Catalano 2007); the fifth variant APL with an identified RARA partner",
"functional_validation": "transforms mouse bone-marrow progenitor/stem cells; binds RAREs as homodimer and RXRalpha heterodimer; transformation depends on RXRalpha and NOT on the RIIa dimerisation domain (Qiu 2010)",
"why_it_is_recorded_here": "It establishes that PRKAR1A has a nuclear, DNA-associated capability when fused, which is the only thing making a nuclear pool of the wild-type protein plausible - UniProt annotates none. It is NOT evidence for the MLL-fusion interaction and must not be cited as such.",
"the_negative_that_matters": "The PRKAR1A dimerisation domain is DISPENSABLE for transformation in the one fusion it forms. A graph that reasons about coiled-coil and dimerisation partners should carry that."
}complex membership
{
"complex": "cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA) holoenzyme; A-kinase anchoring",
"partners_in_the_960": {
"AKAP8 (AKAP95)": "n=4, NO MLL-AF4 value, neg 0|0 - a nuclear/chromatin AKAP",
"AKAP8L (HA95)": "n=5, NO MLL-AF4 value, neg 0|0 - inside the post-filter 128",
"PRKAR1B": "n=1, MLL-AF9 only",
"PRKAR2A": "n=1, MLL-EEN only"
},
"absent_from_the_960": [
"PRKACA (catalytic alpha)",
"PRKACB (catalytic beta)",
"PRKAR2B",
"AKAP1",
"AKAP9"
],
"reading": "NO HOLOENZYME, AND A SUBTYPE-MISMATCHED ANCHOR. Neither catalytic subunit is in the network, so this is not PKA co-purifying. The two nuclear AKAPs are present while the membrane and mitochondrial ones are absent, which is the strongest pro-interaction observation available - but neither appears in the MLL-AF4 column, and AKAP95 is a type II anchor while PRKAR1A is type I-alpha. No PKA or AKAP module was tested in analyses/mll-fusion-interactome-complexes/, and this pairing has NOT been tested against a background, so it is an observation and not an enrichment claim (rule 84)."
}cell types and states
[ "Jurkat (human T-ALL) - the AP-MS host, nuclear lysate, tagged single-copy transgene", "MOLM-13 (human MLL-AF9 AML) - shRNA screen host, six shRNAs, per-gene score unpublished", "human adult APL marrow - the PRKAR1A-RARA index patient, 88% hypergranular promyelocytes", "mouse bone marrow, retroviral transduction/transformation - the PRKAR1A-RARalpha functional work", "no B-lineage cell, no infant cell, and no KMT2A::AFF1 cell of any kind" ]
functionally screened in the source paper
{
"screened": true,
"shrnas_for_this_gene": 6,
"design": "Supplementary Table 6 / MOESM5 is the shRNA library for the negative-selection screen: 768 data rows, 128 unique gene symbols, EXACTLY 6 shRNAs each - counted with openpyxl by this beat on 2026-09-21. Host is MLL-AF9-expressing MOLM-13, a human myeloid line.",
"set_identity_measured_by_this_beat": "The 128 symbols in the shRNA library are the SAME SET as the 128 rows of MOESM4 with n_fusions >= 5, checked by set difference on 2026-09-21: the only four mismatches are alias spellings (JADE2/PHF15, JADE3/PHF16, KMT2A/MLL, NIFK/MKI67IP). This matters for the contamination question. The paper says 'Seven proteins were manually removed as these were either frequently observed contaminants or were not detected in human hematopoietic cell lines. The final set was comprised of 128 proteins.' Because the table's >=5 set is already exactly 128, those seven are NOT recoverable from Supplementary Table 5 - and every protein in this tranche is in the post-removal 128 and was carried into the functional screen.",
"what_this_does_NOT_establish": "A per-gene result. Scores are presented only as heatmaps (Fig. 2c/2d); no per-gene depletion value is tabulated anywhere in the paper or its supplementary files, so for any individual gene the outcome is measured-not-reported. It is also MLL-AF9 MOLM-13, a myeloid line, not the index fusion and not B-lineage.",
"the_filter_is_leaky_and_here_is_the_proof": "'Survived the authors' manual contaminant removal' is weaker than it sounds. CCT3 is also in the 128 and was also screened, and the CCT/TRiC chaperonin is the canonical AP-MS contaminant - the companion analysis analyses/mll-fusion-interactome-complexes/ uses it as its NEGATIVE control and it is still significant against a nuclear background (q = 2.7e-05, 8 of 9 subunits in the MLL-AF4 column). The authors' own named essentiality controls were RFC1, SF3A3 and CCT3. So the manual removal did not remove a canonical contaminant complex, and membership in the 128 is not the authors certifying a protein as a real partner.",
"absence_class_for_the_per_gene_score": "measured-not-reported",
"library_symbol": "PRKAR1A"
}bounded literature
{
"query": "PRKAR1A[tiab] AND (KMT2A[tiab] OR MLL[tiab] OR \"MLL-AF4\"[tiab] OR \"MLL-AF9\"[tiab] OR \"t(4;11)\"[tiab])",
"querytranslation": "\"PRKAR1A\"[Title/Abstract] AND (\"KMT2A\"[Title/Abstract] OR \"MLL\"[Title/Abstract] OR \"MLL-AF4\"[Title/Abstract] OR \"MLL-AF9\"[Title/Abstract] OR \"t 4 11\"[Title/Abstract])",
"count": 0,
"date": "2026-09-21",
"tool": "NCBI esearch db=pubmed",
"names_tried": [
"PRKAR1A",
"RIalpha (run separately, unscoped, 24 records - none in a KMT2A context)"
],
"bare_operand_control": "PRKAR1A[tiab] AND leukemia[tiab] returns 6, all APL/variant-RARA or thyroid; PRKAR1A[tiab] AND \"Carney complex\"[tiab] returns 350. So the gene clause reaches a large literature and the zero against the KMT2A clause is a real zero.",
"positive_control": "MEN1[tiab] AND the identical five-term KMT2A clause returns 85.",
"complex_level_query_not_run": "The complex/pathway forms - 'protein kinase A', 'cAMP signalling' - were NOT run against the KMT2A clause, and rule 64 says a complex subunit's absence needs the complex form. This bound is therefore incomplete and a later beat should close it.",
"bound": "Titles and abstracts only; supporting figures not searched (rule 80). Cytogenetic term quoted, querytranslation read back with no injected [UID] term (rule 95). One tag per term (rule 94)."
}what would settle it
[ "Search PXD009338 for PRKACA and PRKACB peptides below the 300-per-bait rank cutoff. Public data. If the catalytic subunits are there sub-threshold this is PKA carryover; if they are genuinely absent, a kinase-independent RI-alpha interaction becomes the interesting hypothesis.", "Nuclear/cytoplasmic fractionation blot of PRKAR1A in any human haematopoietic cell. There is no published one, which is remarkable for a protein this well studied, and it is one gel.", "Do AKAP8 and AKAP8L have MLL-AF4 values below the rank cutoff? Their absence from the index column is the single fact that kills the nuclear-anchoring story, and it may be a cutoff artefact rather than a real absence." ]
- PRKAR1A must not reach a target list. It is the Carney complex tumour suppressor - germline loss causes a multiple-neoplasia syndrome - so inhibiting it is oncogenic by human genetics, quite apart from the interaction being undecided.
- The seductive move here is to run the pathway backwards: PKA signalling is druggable, therefore a PKA subunit in the MLL-fusion interactome is an opportunity. There is no catalytic subunit in the network, no nuclear annotation for the protein, and a p-value that clears the line by four percent.
- If a nuclear PKA-anchoring module ever is established here, note that the anchor present (AKAP95, type II) does not match the subunit present (RI-alpha, type I). Building on that pairing without resolving the mismatch would be the same class of error as reading an antibody label as a gene.
- Is there a nuclear pool of wild-type PRKAR1A in a human haematopoietic cell? UniProt annotates only the plasma membrane, and the AP-MS row requires a nuclear pool to be possible at all.
- Are AKAP8 and AKAP8L present in the MLL-AF4 column below the rank cutoff? They are pan-ish (n = 4 and 5) and both are nuclear anchors; their absence from the index column is what stops this being a module claim.
- Is PRKAR1A's recovery kinase-independent? No catalytic subunit is anywhere in the 960, which if real is the interesting version of this row and is testable in public data.
- This graph holds `fusion-pml-rara` and nothing on the variant RARA fusions. PRKAR1A-RARA is one of six, and the observation that its dimerisation domain is dispensable for transformation is a live counterpoint to this project's dimerisation-partner reasoning. That is a gap outside this beat.
- E1weak confidence 2 of 5: Preliminary, small, indirect, or not yet peer reviewed.paper
PRKAR1A co-purified with all seven Strep-HA-tagged MLL fusions from nuclear lysates of isogenic human Jurkat T-ALL cells; for MLL-AF4 (= KMT2A::AFF1) the combined p-value is 0.048 with spectral counts 3|3 and a negative control of 0|0, and it is in the paper's final post-filter set of 128 that entered the MOLM-13 shRNA screen. No PKA catalytic subunit is present anywhere in the 960-protein network.
MLL-fusion-driven leukemia requires SETD2 to safeguard genomic integrity. · Skucha A, Ebner J, Schmoellerl J, Roth M, Eder T, Cesar-Razquin A, Stukalov A, Vittori S, Muhar M, Lu B, Aichinger M, Jude J, Mueller AC, Gyorffy B, Vakoc CR, Valent P, Bennett KL, Zuber J, Superti-Furga G, Grebien F · Nature Communications 2018What this evidence cannot show
SYSTEM: the AP-MS host is JURKAT, a human T-ALL line, while KMT2A::AFF1 disease is B-lineage infant leukaemia; a partner requiring a B-cell or infant proteome cannot appear here and a T-lineage partner can appear spuriously. The bait is a Strep-HA-tagged, SINGLE-COPY, doxycycline-induced transgene at an FRT/Flp cassette, not the endogenous fusion. Prey came from bulk nuclear lysate after a single STREP-Tactin step, so co-purification is NOT evidence of a direct contact and is not evidence that the two proteins are ever in the same complex. INCLUSION RULE: the paper kept a fixed number of top-ranked interactions per bait rather than applying a p threshold. Methods, read verbatim from the PMC full text by this beat on 2026-09-21: "All the identified bait-prey pairs were ranked by the combined p-value. The 300 most significant interactions per bait were retained." Measured by this beat from the cached MOESM4 xlsx: within the MLL-AF4 column 186 of 291 listed p-values (63.9%) exceed 0.05, and that column's maximum p is 0.175. BAIT DEPTH: for all nine proteins in this tranche the MLL-AF4 spectral total is rank 7 of the seven baits - measured protein by protein - so a low MLL-AF4 count is a bait property (transgene expression, purification depth, or the GLM normalisation) and must not be read as a weaker association than the same protein's count under another bait. HOW TO READ THE NEGATIVE CONTROL, measured by this beat on 2026-09-21 over all 960 rows of MOESM4: the Spearman correlation between a protein's neg_ctrl spectral total and its maximum per-bait spectral total is +0.461, and the median maximum per-bait spectral count is 42 for the 145 proteins (15.1%) with a non-zero negative control against 8 for the 815 with 0|0. A dirty negative control in this table is therefore substantially a statement about protein ABUNDANCE, not about specificity, and a clean 0|0 is substantially a statement that two control replicates were not deep enough to see the protein at all. Two consequences. (1) PSIP1/LEDGF - the one pan-fusion partner with a solved co-crystal against the KMT2A N-terminus - carries 0|5, the second-dirtiest control of the 42, so a non-zero control cannot be used to call a protein a contaminant. (2) A 0|0 control is not purity; it is an unestimated baseline. The paper's GLM estimates each prey's baseline abundance A0,j from the control purifications, so a prey the controls never saw has its baseline set by a floor rather than by data, which is the direction that inflates apparent specificity. WHERE THIS ROW SITS AMONG THE 42, measured by this beat on 2026-09-21: ranked by MLL-AF4 p-value the pan-fusion set runs from MEN1 at 9.75e-16 to SMC3 at 0.174. The three WEAKEST MLL-AF4 calls in the whole pan-fusion set - SMC3 0.174, NOLC1 0.134, TRIM28 0.129 - all already have entries in this graph, and gene-nolc1 and gene-trim28 both carry confidence_overall 'weak' with those p-values recorded. So p > 0.05 in the index-fusion column is not a disqualifier in this corpus; it is a confidence tier that two existing entries already occupy. SPECIFIC TO THIS PROTEIN, measured by this beat from the cached MOESM4 xlsx on 2026-09-21. (a) MLL-AF4 p = 0.048 is rank 35 of 42 and clears 0.05 by four percent; only MLL-ENL (0.000321) is below 0.006. (b) NO PKA HOLOENZYME: PRKACA, PRKACB and PRKAR2B are absent from the 960 at any n; PRKAR1B and PRKAR2A appear at n = 1 each with no MLL-AF4 value. PRKAR1A is the only PKA subunit with all seven baits. (c) The nuclear anchors AKAP8 (n = 4) and AKAP8L (n = 5, inside the 128) ARE present while the membrane and mitochondrial anchors AKAP1 and AKAP9 are absent - but NEITHER AKAP8 nor AKAP8L has an MLL-AF4 value, so there is no module in the index column, and AKAP95 anchors the type II regulatory subunit while this protein is type I-alpha, so the subtype does not match. (d) UniProt P10644's ONLY location comment is 'Cell membrane' - no nucleus, no cytoplasm - which is the weakest localisation basis of any protein in this tranche including the frankly cytoskeletal ones. SELECTIVITY: not named among the paper's controls (RFC1, SF3A3, CCT3 non-selective; MEN1 selective), not known to be among the unpublished 40 re-screened. Recorded as unknown. run.py re-run 2026-09-21, both controls PASS.
Evidence that argues against this (2)
- The clean 0|0 control is the base rate - 32 of 42 pan-fusion proteins have one - and over the 960 rows control counts track abundance at Spearman +0.461, with PRKAR1A's maximum per-bait total only 31, near the floor of what two control replicates could detect. IntAct has never curated this dataset and the raw spectra at PXD009338 have not been reanalysed here; a search of them for PRKACA peptides below the rank cutoff would decide whether a holoenzyme is present and truncated or genuinely absent. ProteomeXchange/PRIDE 2018
- PKA subunits are abundant, soluble and acidic, and the CRAPome authors state that a study's own limited negative controls do not capture a complete background protein set - the condition this row was scored under. No contaminant-repository frequency for P10644 was retrieved by this beat and is the cheapest external check available. Mellacheruvu D et al. 2013
- E2strong confidence 4 of 5: Replicated in peer-reviewed work by more than one group.paper
In a patient with 88% hypergranular promyelocytes and a karyotype of 47,XY,+22[5]/46,XY[30], FISH showed disruption and deletion of the 5' end of RARA and the marrow was negative for PML-RARA by RT-PCR; sequencing of an atypical RT-PCR product showed homology to PRKAR1A, and specific primers amplified two splice variants of a PRKAR1A-RARA fusion gene, confirmed by PRKAR1A and RARA FISH probes. This was the fifth variant APL with an identified RARA partner and the second known rearrangement of PRKAR1A in a malignant disease.
The PRKAR1A gene is fused to RARA in a new variant acute promyelocytic leukemia. · Catalano A, Dawson MA, Somana K, Opat S, Schwarer A, Campbell LJ, Iland H · Blood 2007What this evidence cannot show
n = 1 patient, ADULT acute promyelocytic leukaemia - a different disease, different lineage and different partner gene from anything this graph is otherwise about. The relevance here is narrow and should not be overstated: it establishes that PRKAR1A participates in a leukaemogenic fusion and therefore has a nuclear, DNA-associated role when fused, NOT that wild-type PRKAR1A binds KMT2A or any MLL fusion. The patient achieved cytogenetic complete remission on ATRA, idarubicin and arsenic trioxide. Read from the abstract.
Evidence that argues against this (1)
- A gene can be a fusion partner in one disease and irrelevant in another; RARA fusions work by recruiting corepressors to retinoic-acid response elements, a mechanism with nothing in common with an MLL fusion's. And the follow-up functional work showed that the part of PRKAR1A one would expect to matter - the RIIa dimerisation domain - is NOT required for transformation, so even within APL the partner's own biology is largely dispensable. Qiu JJ et al. 2010
- E3moderate confidence 3 of 5: One strong study, or several smaller consistent ones.paper
PRKAR1A-RARalpha transforms mouse bone-marrow progenitor/stem cells in a retroviral transduction/transformation assay and binds retinoic acid response elements both as a homodimer and as an RXRalpha heterodimer; the RIIa protein-interaction domain within PRKAR1A is responsible for homodimeric DNA binding and for interaction with wild-type PRKAR1A protein, but its deletion does NOT compromise transformation, whereas point mutations eliminating RXRalpha interaction, RXRalpha shRNA or an RXRalpha agonist all reduce transformation capability.
Leukemic transformation by the APL fusion protein PRKAR1A-RAR{alpha} critically depends on recruitment of RXR{alpha}. · Qiu JJ, Lu X, Zeisig BB, Ma Z, Cai X, Chen S, Gronemeyer H, Tweardy DJ, So CW, Dong S · Blood 2010What this evidence cannot show
MOUSE bone-marrow retroviral transduction/transformation assay and gel-shift assays; a myeloid/APL system, not B-lineage and not KMT2A. Nothing here concerns wild-type PRKAR1A's normal interactome. The result is included because it is a rare clean NEGATIVE about this protein - its dimerisation domain is dispensable for oncogenic function - which is the kind of finding a graph built on dimerisation-partner reasoning should carry. Read from the abstract.
Evidence that argues against this (1)
- This paper's one directly transferable observation actually cuts the other way for the interactome question: the RIIa domain mediates interaction of the fusion protein with WILD-TYPE PRKAR1A. So in a cell expressing a PRKAR1A-containing fusion, wild-type PRKAR1A is a genuine binding partner of the fusion - but none of Skucha's seven baits contains PRKAR1A, so that mechanism cannot explain the row in this table, and invoking it would be a category error. Skucha A et al. 2018
A PKA type I regulatory subunit exists to inhibit a catalytic subunit, and neither PRKACA nor PRKACB is in the network -- independently reaching this entry's own conclusion that no PKA catalytic subunit is present.
co-purified, all 7 MLL fusions, Jurkat nuclear-lysate AP-MS, MLL-AF4 p=0.048 (3|3), neg 0|0 - clears 0.05 by 4%; no PKA catalytic subunit anywhere in the network
- analogous to →PML::RARA, t(15;17)(q24;q21)
PRKAR1A-RARA is a variant APL fusion in the same X-RARA family; transformation depends on RXRalpha and NOT on PRKAR1A's dimerisation domain, a negative this graph's dimerisation-partner reasoning should carry
- related to →KMT2A / MLL1 — the gene that breaks
pan-MLL-fusion core prey; the shared bait is the KMT2A N-terminus
the two pan-fusion preys in this tranche recovered WITHOUT any member of their own obligate complex - no PKA catalytic subunit, no other eIF4F subunit - which removes the simplest contamination mechanism for both without establishing either