Literature DB >> 18826206

Differences between high- and low-affinity complexes of enzymes and nonenzymes.

Heather A Carlson1, Richard D Smith, Nickolay A Khazanov, Paul D Kirchhoff, James B Dunbar, Mark L Benson.   

Abstract

Physical differences in small molecule binding between enzymes and nonenzymes were found through mining the protein-ligand database, Binding MOAD (Mother of All Databases). The data suggest that divergent approaches may be more productive for improving the affinity of ligands for the two classes of proteins. High-affinity ligands of enzymes are much larger than those with low affinity, indicating that the addition of complementary functional groups is likely to improve the affinity of an enzyme inhibitor. However, this process may not be as fruitful for ligands of nonenzymes. High- and low-affinity ligands of nonenzymes are nearly the same size, so modest modifications and isosteric replacement might be most productive. The inherent differences between enzymes and nonenzymes have significant ramifications for scoring functions and structure-based drug design. In particular, nonenzymes were found to have greater ligand efficiencies than enzymes. Ligand efficiencies are often used to indicate druggability of a target, and this finding supports the feasibility of nonenzymes as drug targets. The differences in ligand efficiencies do not appear to come from the ligands; instead, the pockets yield different amino acid compositions despite very similar distributions of amino acids in the overall protein sequences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18826206      PMCID: PMC2692211          DOI: 10.1021/jm8006504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Chem        ISSN: 0022-2623            Impact factor:   7.446


  39 in total

1.  The maximal affinity of ligands.

Authors:  I D Kuntz; K Chen; K A Sharp; P A Kollman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-08-31       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Fragment-based lead discovery.

Authors:  David C Rees; Miles Congreve; Christopher W Murray; Robin Carr
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 3.  Docking: successes and challenges.

Authors:  Venkatraman Mohan; Alan C Gibbs; Maxwell D Cummings; Edward P Jaeger; Renee L DesJarlais
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.116

4.  Comprehensive identification of "druggable" protein ligand binding sites.

Authors:  Jianghong An; Maxim Totrov; Ruben Abagyan
Journal:  Genome Inform       Date:  2004

Review 5.  Understanding noncovalent interactions: ligand binding energy and catalytic efficiency from ligand-induced reductions in motion within receptors and enzymes.

Authors:  Dudley H Williams; Elaine Stephens; Dominic P O'Brien; Min Zhou
Journal:  Angew Chem Int Ed Engl       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 15.336

6.  Druggability indices for protein targets derived from NMR-based screening data.

Authors:  Philip J Hajduk; Jeffrey R Huth; Stephen W Fesik
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2005-04-07       Impact factor: 7.446

Review 7.  Between a rock and a hard place?

Authors:  Adrian Whitty; Gnanasambandam Kumaravel
Journal:  Nat Chem Biol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 15.040

8.  Structure-based prediction of binding affinities and molecular design of peptide ligands.

Authors:  I Luque; E Freire
Journal:  Methods Enzymol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 1.600

Review 9.  Anatomy of hot spots in protein interfaces.

Authors:  A A Bogan; K S Thorn
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1998-07-03       Impact factor: 5.469

10.  Reconciling the magnitude of the microscopic and macroscopic hydrophobic effects.

Authors:  K A Sharp; A Nicholls; R F Fine; B Honig
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-04-05       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  12 in total

1.  Lessons for fragment library design: analysis of output from multiple screening campaigns.

Authors:  I-Jen Chen; Roderick E Hubbard
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Exploiting conformational dynamics in drug discovery: design of C-terminal inhibitors of Hsp90 with improved activities.

Authors:  Elisabetta Moroni; Huiping Zhao; Brian S J Blagg; Giorgio Colombo
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2014-01-15       Impact factor: 4.956

3.  Fragment-based drug discovery.

Authors:  Wendy A Warr
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  ChemTreeMap: an interactive map of biochemical similarity in molecular datasets.

Authors:  Jing Lu; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Residue preference mapping of ligand fragments in the Protein Data Bank.

Authors:  Lirong Wang; Zhaojun Xie; Peter Wipf; Xiang-Qun Xie
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-03-18       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  Biophysical limits of protein-ligand binding.

Authors:  Richard D Smith; Alaina L Engdahl; James B Dunbar; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  Non-peptidic thrombospondin-1 mimics as fibroblast growth factor-2 inhibitors: an integrated strategy for the development of new antiangiogenic compounds.

Authors:  Giorgio Colombo; Barbara Margosio; Laura Ragona; Marco Neves; Silvia Bonifacio; Douglas S Annis; Matteo Stravalaci; Simona Tomaselli; Raffaella Giavazzi; Marco Rusnati; Marco Presta; Lucia Zetta; Deane F Mosher; Domenico Ribatti; Marco Gobbi; Giulia Taraboletti
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 5.157

8.  Structural properties of non-traditional drug targets present new challenges for virtual screening.

Authors:  Ragul Gowthaman; Eric J Deeds; John Karanicolas
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  CSAR benchmark exercise of 2010: combined evaluation across all submitted scoring functions.

Authors:  Richard D Smith; James B Dunbar; Peter Man-Un Ung; Emilio X Esposito; Chao-Yie Yang; Shaomeng Wang; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-08-29       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  Exploring the composition of protein-ligand binding sites on a large scale.

Authors:  Nickolay A Khazanov; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.