Purposely engineered drug-target mismatches for entropy-based drug optimization

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-7

  Fernández, Ariel ^a,b   Fraser, Christopher ^a   Scott, L Ridgway ^a  

^a THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b INSTITUTO ARGENTINO DE MATEMÁTICA   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BINDING MODES; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DYNAMIC INFORMATION; DYNAMIC OBJECTS; ENTROPY OPTIMIZATION; LIGAND BINDING; STRUCTURAL CHANGE; STRUCTURE-BASED DRUG DESIGN;

BINDING ENERGY; ENTROPY; LIGANDS;

OPTIMIZATION;

6 (2,6 DICHLOROPHENYL) 8 METHYL 2 (3 METHYLTHIOANILINO) 8H PYRIDO[2,3 D]PYRIMIDIN 7 ONE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR KINASE; GEFITINIB; IMATINIB; SORAFENIB; SUNITINIB;

BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING KINETICS; CONFORMATIONAL TRANSITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG BINDING; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG STRUCTURE; DRUG TARGETING; ENTHALPY; ENTROPY; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; PHARMACEUTICAL ENGINEERING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; REVIEW; THERMODYNAMICS;

DRUG DESIGN; ENTROPY; LIGANDS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR TARGETED THERAPY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN ENGINEERING;

EID: 84355166690     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2011.07.003     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Greer J., et al. Application of the three-dimensional structures of protein target molecules in structure-based drug design. J. Med. Chem. 1994, 37:1035-1054.
2. Drug Design: Structure and Ligand-Based Approaches 2010, Cambridge University Press. K.M. Merz (Ed.).
3. Whitesides G.M., Krishnamurthy V.M. Designing ligands to bind proteins. Quart. Rev. Biophys. 2005, 38:385-395.
4. Freire E. Do enthalpy and entropy distinguish first in class from best in class?. Drug Discov. Today 2008, 13:869-874.
5. Huse M., Kuriyan J. The conformational plasticity of protein kinases. Cell 2002, 109:275-282.
6. Fernández A., et al. Taming the induced folding of drug-targeted kinases. Trends Pharm. Sci. 2008, 30:66-71.
7. Fernández A., et al. An anticancer C-Kit inhibitor is re-engineered to make it more active and less cardiotoxic. J. Clin. Invest. 2007, 117:4044-4054.
8. Frederick K.K., et al. Conformational entropy in molecular recognition by proteins. Nature 2007, 448:325-330.
9. Teague S.J. Implications of protein flexibility for drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2003, 2:527-541.
10. Gajiwala K.S., et al. KIT kinase mutants show unique mechanisms of drug resistance to imatinib and sunitinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor patients. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:1542-1547.
11. Simard J.R., et al. Development of a fluorescent-tagged kinase assay system for the detection and characterization of allosteric kinase inhibitors. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131:13286-13296.
12. Mueller K., et al. Fluorine in pharmaceuticals: looking beyond intuition. Science 2007, 317:1881-1886.
13. Nagar B., et al. Crystal structures of the kinase domain of c-Abl in complex with the small molecule inhibitors PD173955 and Imatinib (STI-571). Cancer Res. 2002, 62:4236-4243.
14. Peng J.W. Communication breakdown: protein dynamics and drug design. Structure 2009, 17:319-320.
15. Diehl C., et al. Protein flexibility and conformational entropy in ligand design targeting the carbohydrate recognition domain of galectin-3. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132:14577-14589.
16. Stone M.J. NMR relaxation studies of the role of conformational entropy in protein stability and ligand binding. Acc. Chem. Res. 2001, 34:379-388.
17. Piepenbrink K.H., et al. Fluorine substitutions in an antigenic peptide selectively modulate T-cell receptor binding in a minimally perturbing manner. Biochem. J. 2009, 423:353-361.
18. Knox A.J., et al. Considerations in compound database preparation: 'hidden' impact on virtual screening results. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45:1908-1919.
19. Kwon O., et al. Hydration dynamic at fluorinated protein surfaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:17101-17106.
20. Case D.A., et al. The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J. Comp. Chem. 2005, 26:1668-1688.
21. Wang J., et al. Development and testing of a general Amber force field. J. Comput. Chem. 2004, 25:1157-1174.
22. Fernández A. Conformation-dependent environments in folding proteins. J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 114:2489-2502.
23. Fernández A., Lynch M. Nonadaptive origins of interactome complexity. Nature 2011, 474:502-505.
24. Crespo A., Fernández A. Induced disorder in protein-ligand complexes as a drug design strategy. Mol. Pharm. 2008, 5:430-437.
25. Schindler T., et al. Structural mechanism for STI-571 inhibition of Abelson tyrosine kinase. Science 2000, 289:1938-1942.
26. Mol C.D., et al. Structural basis for the autoinhibition and STI-571 inhibition of c-Kit tyrosine kinase. J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279:31655-31663.
27. Donato N.J., Talpaz M. Clinical use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors: therapy for chronic myelogenous leukemia and other cancers. Clin. Cancer Res. 2000, 6:2965-2966.
28. Force T., et al. Molecular mechanisms of cardiotoxicity of tyrosine kinase inhibition. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2007, 7:332-344.
29. Yun C.H., et al. Structures of lung cancer-derived EGFR mutants and inhibitor complexes: mechanism of activation and insights into differential inhibitor sensitivity. Cancer Cell 2007, 11:217-223.
30. Carroll M.J., et al. Direct detection of structurally resolved dynamics in a multiconformation receptor-ligand complex. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133:6422-6428.
31. Daly N.L., et al. NMR and protein structure in drug design: application to cyclotides and conotoxins. Eur. Biophys. J. 2011, 40:359-370.
32. Bajaj C., et al. A dynamic data structure for flexible molecular maintenance and informatics. Bioinformatics 2011, 27:55-62.
33. Lill M.A., Danielson M.L. Computer-aided drug design platform using PyMOL. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2011, 25:13-19.
34. Durrant J.D., et al. Including receptor flexibility and induced fit effects into the design of MMP-2 inhibitors. J. Mol. Recognit. 2010, 23:173-182.
35. Lumry R., Rajender S. Enthalpy-entropy compensation phenomena in water solutions of proteins and small molecules: a ubiquitous property of water. Biopolymers 1970, 9:1125-1227.
36. Reynolds C.H., Holloway M.K. Thermodynamics of ligand binding and efficiency. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 2:433-437.
37. DeLorbe J.E., et al. Thermodynamic and structural effects of conformational constraints in protein-ligand interactions. Entropic paradoxy associated with ligand preorganization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131:16758-16770.
38. Chong L.T., et al. Molecular dynamics and free-energy calculations applied to affinity maturation in antibody 48G7. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96:14330-14335.
39. Weggler S., et al. A new numerical method for nonlocal electrostatics in biomolecular simulations. J. Comput. Phys. 2010, 229:4059-4074.
40. Fernández A., Scott L.R. Modulating drug impact by wrapping target proteins. Exp. Opin. Drug Discov. 2007, 2:249-259.