4.6 Article

Inhibitor Recognition Specificity of MERS-CoV Papain-like Protease May Differ from That of SARS-CoV

Journal

ACS CHEMICAL BIOLOGY
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages 1456-1465

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cb500917m

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R56 AI089535]
  2. NIDCR, UIC College of Dentistry, MOST program [T32-DE018381]
  3. National Science Foundation [OCI-1053575]
  4. U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-06CH11357]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Middle East, Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) papain-like protease (PLpro) blocking loop 2 (BL2) structure differs significantly from that of SARS-CoV PLpro, where it has been proven to play a crucial role in SARS-CoV PLpro inhibitor binding. Four SARS-CoV PLpro lead inhibitors were tested against MERS-COV PLpro, none of which were effective against MERS-CoV PLprO. Structure and, sequence alignments revealed that two residues, Y269 and Q270, responsible for inhibitor binding to SARS-CoV PLpro, were replaced by T274 and A275 in MERS-CoV PLpro, making critical binding interactions difficult to form for similar types of inhibitors. High throughput screening (HTS) of 25 000 compounds against both PLpro enzyme identified a small fragment-like non-covalent dual inhibitor. Mode of inhibition studies by enzyme kinetics and competition surface plasmon resonance, (SPR) analyses suggested that this compound. acts as a competitive inhibitor, with an IC50 of 6 mu M against MERS-CoV PLpro, indicating that it-binds to the active site, whereas it acts as an allosteric inhibitor against SARS-CoV PLpro With an IC50 of 11 mu M. These results raised the possibility that inhibitor recognition specificity of MERS-CoV PLpto may differ from that of SARS-CoV PLpro. In addition, inhibitory activity of this compound was selective for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV PLpro enzymes over two human homologues, the ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolases 1 and 3 (hUCH-L1 and hUCH-L3).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available