Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) play important roles in embryonic development, angiogenesis, wound healing, and cell proliferation and differentiation. In search of inhibitors of FGFR1 kinase, 2.2 million compounds were docked into the ATP binding site of the protein. A co-crystal structure, which shows two alternative conformations for the nucleotide binding loop, is reported. Docking was performed on both conformations and, ultimately, 23 diverse compounds were purchased and assayed. Following hit validation, two compounds 10 and 16, a benzylidene derivative of pseudothiohydantoin and a thienopyrimidinone derivative, respectively, were discovered that inhibit FGFR1 kinase with IC(50) values of 23 and 50 microM. Initial optimization of 16 led to the more unsaturated 40, which has significantly enhanced potency, 1.9 microM. The core structures represent new structural motifs for FGFR1 kinase inhibitors. The study also illustrates complexities associated with the choice of protein structures for docking, possible use of multiple kinase structures to seek selectivity, and hit identification.
Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) play important roles in embryonic development, angiogenesis, wound healing, and cell proliferation and differentiation. In search of inhibitors of n class="Gene">FGFR1n> kinase, 2.2 million compounds were docked into the ATP binding site of the protein. A co-crystal structure, which shows two alternative conformations for the nucleotide binding loop, is reported. Docking was performed on both conformations and, ultimately, 23 diverse compounds were purchased and assayed. Following hit validation, two compounds 10 and 16, a benzylidene derivative of pseudothiohydantoin and a thienopyrimidinone derivative, respectively, were discovered that inhibit FGFR1 kinase with IC(50) values of 23 and 50 microM. Initial optimization of 16 led to the more unsaturated 40, which has significantly enhanced potency, 1.9 microM. The core structures represent new structural motifs for FGFR1 kinase inhibitors. The study also illustrates complexities associated with the choice of protein structures for docking, possible use of multiple kinase structures to seek selectivity, and hit identification.
Authors: F Penault-Llorca; F Bertucci; J Adélaïde; P Parc; F Coulier; J Jacquemier; D Birnbaum; O deLapeyrière Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1995-04-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Y A Luqmani; C Mortimer; C Yiangou; C L Johnston; G S Bansal; D Sinnett; M Law; R C Coombes Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1995-08-22 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Anil R Ekkati; Valsan Madiyan; Krishna P Ravindranathan; Jae H Bae; Joseph Schlessinger; William L Jorgensen Journal: Tetrahedron Lett Date: 2011-04-27 Impact factor: 2.415
Authors: Sudharshan Eathiraj; Rocio Palma; Marscha Hirschi; Erika Volckova; Enkeleda Nakuci; Jennifer Castro; Chang-Rung Chen; Thomas C K Chan; Dennis S France; Mark A Ashwell Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Francesca Curreli; Spreeha Choudhury; Ilya Pyatkin; Victor P Zagorodnikov; Anna Khulianova Bulay; Andrea Altieri; Young Do Kwon; Peter D Kwong; Asim K Debnath Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2012-05-10 Impact factor: 7.446