| Literature DB >> 16679046 |
Marco Betz1, Krishna Saxena, Harald Schwalbe.
Abstract
Biomolecular NMR now contributes routinely to every step in the development of new chemical entities ahead of clinical trials. The versatility of NMR--from detection of ligand binding over a wide range of affinities and a wide range of drug targets with its wealth of molecular information, to metabolomic profiling, both ex vivo and in vivo--has paved the way for broadly distributed applications in academia and the pharmaceutical industry. Proteomics and initial target selection both benefit from NMR: screenings by NMR identify lead compounds capable of inhibiting protein-protein interactions, still one of the most difficult development tasks in drug discovery. NMR hardware improvements have given access to the microgram domain of phytochemistry, which should lead to the discovery of novel bioactive natural compounds. Steering medicinal chemists through the lead optimisation process by providing detailed information about protein-ligand interactions has led to impressive success in the development of novel drugs. The study of biofluid composition--metabonomics--provides information about pharmacokinetics and helps toxicological safety assessment in animal model systems. In vivo, magnetic resonance spectroscopy interrogates metabolite distributions in living cells and tissues with increasing precision, which significantly impacts the development of anticancer or neurological disorder therapeutics. An overview of different steps in recent drug discovery is presented to illuminate the links with the most recent advances in NMR methodology.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16679046 PMCID: PMC7185745 DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2006.04.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Opin Chem Biol ISSN: 1367-5931 Impact factor: 8.822
Figure 1Flow scheme of the contributions of biomolecular NMR to the drug discovery phases.
Figure 2To predict potential druggability, the first step is to identify possible binding sites on the protein surface. Next, characteristics of the putative sites such as hydrophobicity, shape and charge are calculated and submitted to a numerical equation. The weight coefficients bi are known from a statistical analysis of previous screening trials.
Some examples: recent NMR-based approaches to pharmaceutically relevant targets
| Protein–protein interaction | NMR applications | Refs |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrophobic BH3-binding groove of Bcl-XL | Fragment screening, SAR-by-NMR, fragment linkage led to small molecule ABT-737 | [ |
| HIV-1 envelope protein: gp41 | Solution structure, mapping interaction of human antibody epitope D5 | [ |
| HIV-1: capsid domain | Mapping interactions with peptide inhibitors | [ |
| Bid (Bcl-2 family member) | Fragment screening, SAR by ILOE (in detail see below) | [ |
| P53–MDM2 | Binding studies with small-molecule inhibitor RITA | [ |
| Malaria surface protein-1 with monoclonal antibody | NMR cross saturation | [ |
| SARS coronavirus nucleocapsid | Solution structure, characterisation of the dimer interface | [ |
| Ubiquitin-related modifier SUMO with E2 | NMR restrained docking complex by HADDOCK approach | [ |
| P38 MAP kinase | Binding studies and protein dynamics in the presence of small-molecule inhibitors ( | [ |
| HCV NS3 protease with substrate-based hexapeptide | SAR optimisation guided by molecular modelling and NMR led to a clinical phase macrocyclic inhibitor | [ |
| HIV-1: TAR RNA with a cyclic peptidomimetic | Solution structure | [ |
| VEGF165 with aptamer | NMR binding studies with the nucleic acid-based inhibitor Macugen | [ |
| HIV-1: integrase with DNA quadruplex | Solution structure of DNA quadruplex, Docking to tetrameric model of HIV-1 integrase | [ |
NMR methods for the detection of ligand binding and its derived informationa
| Effect | Observation | Used for | Information |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chemical shift perturbation | Ligand/target | Structural information | Identifies binding epitope, delivers restraints for 3D structure calculation |
| Screening/hit validation | Identifies binders, SAR-by-NMR | ||
| Saturation transfer difference (STD) NMR | Ligand | Primary screening | Identifies weak binders, build-up curve identifies interacting functional groups |
| (Reverse) NOE pumping | Ligand | Characterisation | Identifies binders, alternative to the more robust STD method |
| WaterLOGSY | Ligand | Primary screening | Identifies weak binders |
| SLAPSTICK (requires spin-labeled protein) | Ligand | Primary screening | Highly sensitive detection of binders |
| SAR by ILOE [ | Ligand-to-ligand | Compound optimisation | Detects protein-mediated ligand–ligand interactions (competition for the same binding site) |
| INPHARMA method [ | Ligand-to-ligand | Compound optimisation | Detects protein mediated ligand–ligand interactions (competition for the same binding site) |
| T2 relaxation, T1ρ, Line broadening | Ligand | Characterisation, primary screening | Binding enhances relaxation, affinity estimation, build-up curve identifies interacting functional groups |
| Sign of transferred intramol. NOE | Ligand | Characterisation | Interaction of tight binders with the target |
| H2O/D2O exchange rates | Target | Characterisation | Identifies binding epitope |
| DOSY | Ligand | Characterisation | Binding slows diffusion rates |
| Residual dipolar couplings | Ligand/target | Structure determination | Delivers restraints for 3D structure calculation |
For more detailed descriptions of general NMR methods see [24, 43].