We describe a (19)F NMR method for detecting bromodomain-ligand interactions using fluorine-labeled aromatic amino acids due to the conservation of aromatic residues in the bromodomain binding site. We test the sensitivity, accuracy, and speed of this method with small molecule ligands (+)-JQ1, BI2536, Dinaciclib, TG101348, and acetaminophen using three bromodomains Brd4, BrdT, and BPTF. Simplified (19)F NMR spectra allowed for simultaneous testing of multiple bromodomains to assess selectivity and identification of a new BPTF ligand. Fluorine labeling only modestly affected the Brd4 structure and function assessed by isothermal titration calorimetry, circular dichroism, and X-ray crystallography. The speed, ease of interpretation, and low concentration of protein needed for binding experiments affords a new method to discover and characterize both native and new ligands.
We describe a (19)F NMR method for detecting bromodomain-ligand interactions using fluorine-labeled aromatic amino acids due to the conservation of aromatic residues in the bromodomain binding site. We test the sensitivity, accuracy, and speed of this method with small molecule ligands (+)-JQ1, BI2536, Dinaciclib, TG101348, and acetaminophen using three bromodomains Brd4, BrdT, and BPTF. Simplified (19)F NMR spectra allowed for simultaneous testing of multiple bromodomains to assess selectivity and identification of a new BPTF ligand. Fluorine labeling only modestly affected the Brd4 structure and function assessed by isothermal titration calorimetry, circular dichroism, and X-ray crystallography. The speed, ease of interpretation, and low concentration of protein needed for binding experiments affords a new method to discover and characterize both native and new ligands.
Bromodomains
are epigenetic
“reader” proteins that are the only known structural
modules for recognizing the acetylated ε-nitrogen of lysine
on histones and play essential roles in diverse diseases, particularly
in cancer.[1] Structural biology efforts
in NMR[2,3] and particularly X-ray crystallography have
accelerated chemical probe development with more than 150 X-ray structures
of 43 different bromodomains reported.[4] The BET (bromodomain and extraterminal) subfamily of proteins, Brd2,
-3, -4, and -T are the most intensely studied due to the discovery
of tool compounds including pan-BET inhibitors such as (+)-JQ1, first
used to validate Brd4 inhibition for treating NUT midline carcinoma.[5,6] Selective targeting of BET bromodomains is one of the most significant
challenges for this emerging therapeutic class.[1] Discovery of new binding modes can yield insight into selective
inhibitor designs. While BET research is developing rapidly, the majority
of the remaining bromodomains are not as well-characterized due to
a lack of both small molecule inhibitors and optimal screening methods.[7] Here, we describe a new ligand discovery and
characterization method for bromodomains using 19F NMR,
and highlight the value of fluorine-labeled aromatic side-chains for
selectivity and binding analyses.Protein-observed NMR has proven
to be a powerful ligand discovery
method since the original reports from Abbott laboratories.[8] In these experiments, a protein is labeled with
NMR active nuclei, typically on the backbone amides. Small molecule
induced changes in protein chemical shifts are used to characterize
a binding event. This method can be used to elucidate the binding
site, discriminate specific from nonspecific interactions, and quantify
weak affinities of low molecular weight compounds (MW < 300) termed
fragments, commonly used for NMR screening. Fragments can be missed
in the current ligand discovery methods for bromodomains.[9] This is particularly challenging in the absence
of an initial ligand for competition studies, which is the case for
many bromodomains.[7] However, in amide detected,
protein-observed NMR, the need for a high concentration of protein,
detailed resonance assignments, and speed of experiment can be limiting.[10]We described the use of protein-observed 19F NMR (PrOF
NMR) for fragment screening using fluorinated aromatic amino acid
side chains demonstrated by a 50 compound fragment pilot screen on
a nonbromodomain containing protein.[11] Here,
we first test the PrOF NMR approach on the N-terminal bromodomain
of Brd4 (Brd4(1)), using known ligands and include a small molecule
whose binding affinity was too weak to characterize by prior methods.
Sequence analyses of 61 bromodomains identified moderate to high conservation
of multiple aromatic amino acids, many positioned near the histone
binding site.[4] For example, aromatic side
chains in the histone binding site are found at positions 81, 97,
and 139 of Brd4(1) and are conserved across bromodomains 31%, 97%,
and 92% of the time, respectively. Therefore, for new selectivity
studies, we apply this method to a second BET bromodomain BrdT, as
well as a non-BET, BPTF, for which no small molecule probes are known.
The hyper-responsiveness of the fluorine chemical shift to ligand
binding and simplicity of the rapidly acquired NMR spectrum[11,12] provides the speed and structural information necessary for developing
potential inhibitors. These studies lead us to propose PrOF NMR as
a structure-based tool for characterizing new and native ligands for
the aromatic-rich bromodomains.We analyzed the crystal structure
of Brd4(1) in complex with inhibitor
(+)-JQ1 (Figure 1) to determine a fluorine-labeling
strategy. The aromatic side chains of W81, Y97, and Y139 are within
3–5 Å of (+)-JQ1. Y98 and Y137 are within 10 Å of
the thiophene ring of (+)-JQ1. Although W75 is not in close contact,
it is located on the dynamic Z helix of Brd4(1) (Figures 1 and 2A). Fewer phenylalanine
side chains were in close proximity.[13] For
these reasons, we decided to investigate the ligand detection ability
of PrOF NMR using either 3-fluorotyrosine (3FY) or 5-fluorotryptophan
(5FW)-labeled Brd4(1). High labeling efficiency with 3FY (>95%)
and
5FW (78–90%) was achieved with good to high protein yields
(10–60 mg/L).
Figure 1
Aromatic amino acids are in close proximity to the bromodomain
binding site. Ribbon diagram of Brd4(1) bound to (+)-JQ1 (PDB ID 3MXF). Tyrosine and tryptophan
are indicated as sticks. Red and yellow indicate side-chains within
5 and 10 Å, respectively. (Right) (+)-JQ1 and fluorinated amino
acids used in this study.
Figure 2
Structure and function of 3FY-Brd4(1): (A) Cartoon representation
of a 3FY-labeled (purple) Brd4(1) crystal structure complexed with
(+)-JQ1 (green). Four of the seven 3FY residues adopt well-defined
alternate conformations. Fluorine atoms are shown for both cases.
PDB ID 4QZS.
(B) Isothermal titration calorimetric analysis of binding of (+) JQ1
binding to 3FY-Brd4(1) at 25 °C. Kd = 89 ± 5 nM.
Aromatic amino acids are in close proximity to the bromodomain
binding site. Ribbon diagram of Brd4(1) bound to (+)-JQ1 (PDB ID 3MXF). Tyrosine and tryptophan
are indicated as sticks. Red and yellow indicate side-chains within
5 and 10 Å, respectively. (Right) (+)-JQ1 and fluorinated amino
acids used in this study.Structure and function of 3FY-Brd4(1): (A) Cartoon representation
of a 3FY-labeled (purple) Brd4(1) crystal structure complexed with
(+)-JQ1 (green). Four of the seven 3FY residues adopt well-defined
alternate conformations. Fluorine atoms are shown for both cases.
PDB ID 4QZS.
(B) Isothermal titration calorimetric analysis of binding of (+) JQ1
binding to 3FY-Brd4(1) at 25 °C. Kd = 89 ± 5 nM.We used circular dichroism
(CD), isothermal titration calorimetry
(ITC), and X-ray crystallography to assess the structural and functional
effects on fluorine incorporation into Brd4(1). Far UV CD spectra
of the fluorinated proteins show similar levels of secondary structure
but a slightly lower thermal stability (Tm = 50 °C vs 52 °C).[13] We used
ITC to assess how these effects may alter binding. (+)-JQ1 binds to
Brd4(1) with a Kd of 49 nM at 15 °C.[5] We detect a similar binding affinity of 75 ±
4 nM for unlabeled Brd4(1),[13] 89 ±
5 nM for 3FY-Brd4(1) (Figure 2B), and 78 ±
2 nM for 5FW-Brd4(1)[13] at 25 °C. We
solved the crystal structure of 3FY-Brd4(1) bound to (+)-JQ1 (Figure 2A). Aligning this structure onto the unlabeled protein
complex with (+)-JQ1 yielded an RMSD of 0.089 Å. These results
lead us to conclude that fluorine incorporation had only a modest
effect on structure and function. Crystallization of 3FY-Brd4(1) is
itself significant as less than 20 fluorinated protein crystal structures
have been reported.19F NMR spectra of 3FY and 5FW-labeled
Brd4(1) display
well-dispersed resonances indicative of folded proteins. From the 19F NMR spectrum of 5FW-Brd4(1), resonances for W75, W81, and
W120 were clearly resolved (Figure 3A). The
seven 3FY resonances in 3FY-Brd4(1) span over 12 ppm, suggesting a
diverse environment of the aromatic side chains (Figure 3B). Two of the resonances at −136.6 ppm are partially
overlapping. To our knowledge, this is the largest chemical shift
range reported for a fluorinated protein but it remains to be tested
if this range is similar in other bromodomains, which have similar
arrangements of aromatic amino acids.
Figure 3
PrOF NMR titration of (+)-JQ1 with Brd4(1).
(A) Bottom to top:
5FW-Brd4(1) (25 μM), with 1 eq. (+)-JQ1, with 5FW-BPTF (25 μM),
with 5FW-BPTF (25 μM) and 1 eq. (+)-JQ1, with unlabeled BrdT(1)
(50 μM) and 1 eq. (+)-JQ1. (B) Bottom to top: 3FY-Brd4(1) (47
μM) titrated with 2 eq. (+)-JQ1.
PrOF NMR titration of (+)-JQ1 with Brd4(1).
(A) Bottom to top:
5FW-Brd4(1) (25 μM), with 1 eq. (+)-JQ1, with 5FW-BPTF (25 μM),
with 5FW-BPTF (25 μM) and 1 eq. (+)-JQ1, with unlabeled BrdT(1)
(50 μM) and 1 eq. (+)-JQ1. (B) Bottom to top: 3FY-Brd4(1) (47
μM) titrated with 2 eq. (+)-JQ1.Resonance assignments were made via a combination of site-directed
mutagenesis and ligand binding experiments (explained below). For
site-directed mutagenesis, a single tryptophan or tyrosine to phenylalanine
mutant was expressed, and the disappearance of a single resonance
was used to assign the side-chain in the parent 19F NMR
spectrum.[13] Complete resonance assignments
enabled us to test the sensitivity of our 19F NMR method
for characterizing binding footprints and quantifying the affinity
of weak binding molecules for fragment-based screens.Crystallographic
evidence supports the role of W81 for determining
the specificity of (+)-JQ1 for binding BET bromodomains in a region
termed the WPF shelf (Figure 2A).[4,5] W81 was first tested as a diagnostic residue for binding studies.
Slow exchange binding was readily detected upon titrating (+)-JQ1
from an ethylene glycol stock solution, in which case the intensity
of the W81 resonance at −126.3 ppm disappeared as a new downfield
resonance at −124.0 ppm grew in (Figure 3A). The observed slow exchange of bound and free protein is consistent
with submicromolar binding. Closer inspection of the spectrum revealed
a small 0.14 ppm upfield shift of the W75 resonance located underneath
W81 on the Z-helix of Brd4(1), but outside the binding site (Figures 3A, 4A). DMSO can also be
used in these experiments but is a known bromodomain ligand so was
avoided to only show (+)-JQ1 effects.[14]
Figure 4
Binding
footprint and affinity determination with Brd4(1) and various
ligands. (A–C) Residues with fluorinated resonances not significantly
perturbed are blue, resonances perturbed 0.05–0.1 ppm are light
pink, and resonances perturbed greater than 0.1 ppm or broadened significantly
in a dose dependent fashion are red. Acetaminophen was overlaid on
Brd4(1) based on the crystal structure with Brd2(1) (PDB IDs 3MXF, 4O70, 4A9J). (D) Binding isotherms
for acetaminophen titration with 3FY-and 5FW-Brd4(1).
Binding
footprint and affinity determination with Brd4(1) and various
ligands. (A–C) Residues with fluorinated resonances not significantly
perturbed are blue, resonances perturbed 0.05–0.1 ppm are light
pink, and resonances perturbed greater than 0.1 ppm or broadened significantly
in a dose dependent fashion are red. Acetaminophen was overlaid on
Brd4(1) based on the crystal structure with Brd2(1) (PDB IDs 3MXF, 4O70, 4A9J). (D) Binding isotherms
for acetaminophen titration with 3FY-and 5FW-Brd4(1).Titrating (+)-JQ1 with 3FY-Brd4(1) provided further
binding information.
Y97, Y98, and Y139 are located within the binding site for (+)-JQ1.
All three resonances shifted (slow exchange) and broadened upon titration
(Figure 3B).[13] The
most upfield resonance was assigned to Y97, which forms a bridging
hydrogen bond to (+)-JQ1 via a structurally conserved water molecule.
Y137, on the outside of the binding site, moved downfield but remained
sharp. The BC loop near Y137 is highly dynamic.[5] Our observations are consistent with a protein conformational
change with considerable flexibility at this site.Fragment
screening is a promising method for early stage ligand
discovery and is well-suited for NMR analyses due to the ability to
characterize protein ligand interactions at the high concentrations
needed to detect small molecule binding.[10] Acetaminophen represented an ideal test case as it was shown to
bind BET bromodomains via X-ray crystallography, but its affinity
for its target was reported as too weak for characterizing Brd4(1)
binding by fluorescence anisotropy or TR-FRET.[9] The small size of this molecule (MW = 160 g/mol) is representative
of many compounds in fragment libraries. Using 3FY-Brd4(1), we detect
binding at ligand concentrations as low as 47 μM with chemical
shift changes >0.6 ppm when fully bound (Figure 4B,D). Based on the crystal structure with Brd2[9] and site directed mutant analysis,[13] we assigned this shifted resonance to Y139. Y97, which is expected
to make a water-mediated hydrogen bond, also broadens. Titration of
acetaminophen yielded a Kd of 290 ±
40 μM. This results in a high ligand efficiency (0.44 kcal/mol/non-hydrogen
atom) for acetaminophen as a bromodomain inhibitor scaffold. Titration
with 5FW-Brd4(1) yielded a similar Kd based
on the chemical shift perturbation of W81 (230 ± 30 μM,
Figure 4D). The two Kd’s are within error, arguing against a specific fluorine
perturbing binding. Due to the speed of data collection (chemical
shift information can be acquired in <5 min),[13] low protein concentration (40–50 μM), and
conserved aromatic contacts, we anticipate this method will be well-suited
for bromodomain fragment screening. This is especially useful where
there is a lack of suitable ligands for competition-based experiments
or affinities are weak (Kd > 100 μM).[13]BET bromodomains are also inhibited by
several classes of kinase
inhibitors affording molecules with dual modes of actions and a new
source of ligand diversity for screening against bromodomains.[15] We chose three inhibitors covering a wide range
of IC50 values, BI2536 (0.025 μM), TG101348 (0.29
μM), and Dinaciclib (19 μM), to compare their binding
footprints to X-ray structures with Brd4. During Dinaciclib titration,
the resonance for W81 broadened significantly. Perturbation of the
fluorine resonance for W75 was in fast exchange. We used this perturbation
to estimate a Kd of 70 μM ±
20.[13] BI2536 and TG101348 have nanomolar
binding affinity. In both cases, W81 was highly perturbed (Δδ
= 0.4–1 ppm). With BI2536, a new resonance in slow exchange
grows in upfield and is consistent with ring current effects based
on analysis of the cocrystal structure and the reported nanomolar
affinity.[13] Similar to (+)-JQ1 binding,
the resonance for W75 showed a small perturbation. W75 shows the most
pronounced effect for TG101348 binding (Δδ > 0.25 ppm).[13] Inspection of crystal structure overlays reveals
very minor perturbations to the residues and neighboring side-chains
highlighting the sensitivity of 19F NMR for identifying
small conformational effects. 3FY-Brd4(1) was used to further characterize
the kinase inhibitor binding modes for Dinaciclib (Figure 4C), BI2536,[13] and TG101348.[13] The results were consistent with X-ray data
and induced conformational effects along the Z-helix.On the
basis of the Brd4(1) results, we tested the generality of
using PrOF NMR with a second BET bromodomain, BrdT, of interest as
a male contraception target,[16] and a non-BET
bromodomain, BPTF, for which no small molecule screens nor small molecule
X-ray complexes have been reported. Both proteins contain a WPF shelf;
therefore, we labeled these proteins with 5FW. BI2536 and (+)-JQ1
bind to BrdT. We detect a perturbation of the fluorinated protein
resonances in slow exchange, consistent with their reported nanomolar
affinity. (+)-JQ1 is selective for BETs, and thus in the presence
of 5FW-BPTF, we do not detect binding. Surprisingly, PrOF NMR reveals
that BI2536 binds to 5FW-BPTF,[13] which
went undetected in existing selectivity screens using BROMOscanSM and thermal shift assays,[15,17] highlighting the sensitivity of 19F NMR. Deconstruction
of the BI2536 ligand may lead to a useful starting point for BPTF
chemical probe development to study its role in cancer.[18]Finally, screening in the presence of
other BET proteins can increase
the stringency and binding information for finding selective BET inhibitors.
Binding induced shifts from pan-BET inhibitor (+)-JQ1 were reversed
by 46% in the presence of excess unlabeled BrdT(1) (Figure 3A). The 19F NMR spectrum with BI2536
is similarly perturbed.[13] The non-BET,
BPTF bromodomain has one tryptophan in the WPF shelf. As a new experiment,
due to the significant chemical shift dispersion and simplified 19F NMR spectra, we decided to simultaneously test two fluorinated
proteins. Consistent with single protein binding studies, the addition
of (+)-JQ1 to 5FW-Brd4(1) and 5FW-BPTF shows selectivity for Brd4(1)
(Figure 3A), whereas BI2536 exhibits binding
to both bromodomains.[13]Using a validated
therapeutic epigenetic protein, we evaluated
fluorinated bromodomains as sensitive tools for detecting ligand binding
modes via 19F NMR. By labeling two different aromatic amino
acids, we characterized variations in binding modes of (+)-JQ1 and
new ligands repurposed from the kinase field. We further showed that
our method can detect protein binding with weak fragments, DMSO and
acetaminophen. This is encouraging due to the success of developing
fragments into lead molecules in drug discovery campaigns. On the
basis of the high number of aromatic amino acids across 61 bromodomains
and enrichment of aromatics at protein–protein interaction
sites in general,[19] we anticipate that
our method should be generalizable for bromodomains, many lacking
specific tool compounds to study their biology such as BPTF. We further
demonstrate that fluorine incorporation was only modestly perturbing
for Brd4(1), by solid and solution state methods. Future studies will
use PrOF NMR in a full fragment screen. This side-chain labeling technique
has been employed for studying small- to medium-sized proteins (10
to 60 kDa),[12,20] as well as G-protein coupled
receptors.[21,22] Here, we apply it to bromodomains
both in isolation and in mixtures. Due to the speed of PrOF NMR, ease
of interpretation, and availability of 19F-tuned NMR probes
in academic and industrial settings, this approach should be of broad
appeal for early stage ligand discovery.
Methods
Brd4(1)(42–168),
BrdT(1)(29–134), and BPTF (2793–2911)
Protein Expression
The pNIC28-BSA4 plasmids containing the
Brd4(1) and BPTF genes were a kind gift from the laboratory of Stefan
Knapp. For protein expression, either the E. coli Rosetta (DE3) strain (Novagen) was first transformed with the respective
expression plasmid or the BL21(DE3) strain was cotransformed along
with the pRARE (Novagen) plasmid and plated onto agar plates containing
kanamycin (100 mg/L) and chloramphenicol (35 mg/L). Following overnight
incubation at 37 °C, a single colony was selected from the agar
plate and inoculated in 50 mL of LB media containing kanamycin (100
mg/L) and chloramphenicol (35 mg/L). The primary culture was grown
overnight at 25 °C while shaking at 250 rpm. For secondary culture
growth, 1 L of LB media containing kanamycin (100 mg/L) was inoculated
with the primary culture and cultured at 37 °C while shaking
at 250 rpm. When the O.D. of culture at 600 nm reached 0.6, the shaker
temperature was reduced to 20 °C. After 30 min, the expression
was induced with 1 mM IPTG overnight for 12–16 h. Cells were
harvested by centrifugation.
Expression of 3FY and 5FW Labeled Brd4(1),
5FW-BrdT(1), and
5FW-BPTF
3FY and 5FW labeled Brd4(1) were expressed based
on established methods[11,23] using E. coli DL39(DE3) + pRARE and E. coli Bl21(DE3) + pRARE
strains, respectively. To express the labeled protein, the secondary
culture in LB media was grown until an O.D. at 600 nm of 0.6 was reached
followed by harvesting and washing the cells with PBS. Washed cells
were resuspended in defined media of Muchmore et al.[24] containing either 3FY (70 mg/L) in place of tyrosine or
5-fluoroindole (60 mg/L) in place of tryptophan. The resuspended E. coli were incubated at 37 °C while shaking for 1
h followed by the cooling to 20 °C and media temperature equilibration
for 30 min. Protein expression was induced with 1 mM IPTG overnight
(14–16 h) at 20 °C. The cells were harvested and stored
at −20 °C. 5FW-BrdT(1) and 5FW-BPTF were expressed by
the same protocol. Cell pellets were thawed at RT followed by the
addition of lysis buffer (50 mM Tris pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl and 10% v/v
glycerol) containing protease inhibitor PMSF (5 mM) and purified according
to methods described in the Supporting Information using Ni-affinity chromatography. Yields following purification
are 60 mg/L Brd4(1), 60 mg/L 5FW-Brd4(1) (78–90% 5FW incorporation)
and 10 mg/L 3FY-Brd4(1) (>95% 3FY incorporation), 26 mg/L 5FW-BPTF
(94%, incorporation) and 22 mg/L BrdT, and 11 mg/L 5FW-BrdT(1) (91%,
incorporation). Purity of proteins was assessed by SDS-PAGE. Fluorinated
amino acid incorporation efficiency in proteins was measured by mass
spectrometry as described in the Supporting Information. Concentration was determined via absorbance at 280 nm.[11]
1D 19F NMR Parameters
19F NMR
spectra were acquired at 470 MHz on a Bruker 500 spectrometer with
a 5 mm Prodigy TCI Cryoprobe without proton decoupling. Samples containing
40–50 μM bromodomains were labeled in 50 mM TRIS, 100
mM NaCl, 1 mM CHAPS, 2 mM DTT, and 5% D2O, pH 7.4 for binding
assays unless otherwise stated. Spectra were referenced to trifluoroacetate
(−76.55 ppm). Measurement parameters included a relaxation
delay time of 0.7 s for 5FW-Brd4(1) and a 90° flip angle and
a relaxation delay of 0.2 s for 3FY-Brd4(1) containing a 30°
flip angle. An acquisition time of 0.05 s was used for all experiments.
A sweepwidth of 10 ppm was used for 5FW-Brd4(1) spectra and 18 ppm
for 3FY-Brd4(1). A 20 Hz line-broadening was applied after 500–3000
transients unless otherwise stated.
Ligand Binding Studies
Small molecules were titrated
into the protein solution from concentrated stock solutions of ethylene
glycol (10 mM for all small molecules except acetaminophen, which
was 50 mM). Final ethylene glycol concentrations were kept below 4%
ethylene glycol. For small molecule titrations, 500 scans were acquired
with 5FW-Brd4(1) and 3000 3FY-Brd4(1) to ensure good S/N resolution
for improved fitting of the data. However, good chemical shift estimates
can be readily acquired at 200–400 scans in under 5 min for
initial screening as described in the Supporting
Information. Stock solutions of kinase inhibitors were prepared
from preweighed 5 mg samples which were used to estimate final concentrations. Kd values were obtained using a one-site-binding
equation accounting for ligand depletion. Reported errors are from
the nonlinear regression fit of the data.
Structure Determination
Protein crystallization was
performed with the mosquito LCP (TTP Labtech) crystallization robot
at 18 °C using the sitting drop vapor diffusion method. Crystals
of 3FY-Brd4(1) were grown in the presence of 1 mM (+)-JQ1 and 10%
(v/v) DMSO from 0.2 M NH4C2H3O2, 0.1 M HEPES (pH 7.5), and 25% (w/v) PEG 3350; harvested
in cryoprotectant (reservoir containing 25% (v/v) ethylene glycol
and 0.5 mM ligand); and flash frozen in a stream of nitrogen gas.
X-ray diffraction data were collected at −180 °C using
station 22-ID, SER-CAT, Advanced Photon Source, Argonne National Laboratories.
Authors: William C Pomerantz; Ningkun Wang; Ashley K Lipinski; Rurun Wang; Tomasz Cierpicki; Anna K Mapp Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Tae Hun Kim; Ka Young Chung; Aashish Manglik; Alexandar L Hansen; Ron O Dror; Thomas J Mildorf; David E Shaw; Brian K Kobilka; R Scott Prosser Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Pietro Ciceri; Susanne Müller; Alison O'Mahony; Oleg Fedorov; Panagis Filippakopoulos; Jeremy P Hunt; Elisabeth A Lasater; Gabriel Pallares; Sarah Picaud; Christopher Wells; Sarah Martin; Lisa M Wodicka; Neil P Shah; Daniel K Treiber; Stefan Knapp Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Gabriella T Perell; Neeraj K Mishra; Babu Sudhamalla; Peter D Ycas; Kabirul Islam; William C K Pomerantz Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Noelle M Olson; Samantha Kroc; Jorden A Johnson; Huda Zahid; Peter D Ycas; Alice Chan; Jennifer R Kimbrough; Prakriti Kalra; Ernst Schönbrunn; William C K Pomerantz Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Clifford T Gee; Keith E Arntson; Andrew K Urick; Neeraj K Mishra; Laura M L Hawk; Andrea J Wisniewski; William C K Pomerantz Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Alex M Ayoub; Laura M L Hawk; Ryan J Herzig; Jiewei Jiang; Andrea J Wisniewski; Clifford T Gee; Peiliang Zhao; Jin-Yi Zhu; Norbert Berndt; Nana K Offei-Addo; Thomas G Scott; Jun Qi; James E Bradner; Timothy R Ward; Ernst Schönbrunn; Gunda I Georg; William C K Pomerantz Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Christopher D McCune; Matthew L Beio; Jill M Sturdivant; Roberto de la Salud-Bea; Brendan M Darnell; David B Berkowitz Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2017-09-28 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Andrew K Urick; Luis Pablo Calle; Juan F Espinosa; Haitao Hu; William C K Pomerantz Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Andrew K Urick; Laura M L Hawk; Melissa K Cassel; Neeraj K Mishra; Shuai Liu; Neeta Adhikari; Wei Zhang; Camila O dos Santos; Jennifer L Hall; William C K Pomerantz Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2015-07-28 Impact factor: 5.100