4.5 Review

NADPH oxidase inhibitors: a patent review

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON THERAPEUTIC PATENTS
Volume 21, Issue 8, Pages 1147-1158

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1517/13543776.2011.584870

Keywords

NADPH oxidases; Nox inhibitors; pyrazolopyridine derivatives; siRNA; triazolopyrimidine derivatives

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) [2010-0017517, 2011-0001170]
  2. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [핵C6B3407, 2007-0056420] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: NADPH oxidases, a family of multi-subunit enzyme complexes, catalyze the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which may contribute to the pathogenesis of a variety of diseases. In addition to the first NADPH oxidase found in phagocytes, four non-phagocytic NADPH oxidase isoforms have been identified, which all differ in their catalytic subunit (Nox1-5) and tissue distribution. Areas covered: This paper provides a comprehensive review of the patent literature on NADPH oxidase inhibitors, small molecule Nox inhibitors, peptides and siRNAs. Expert opinion: Since each member of the NADPH oxidase family has great potential as a therapeutic target, several different compounds have been registered as NADPH oxidase inhibitors in the patent literature. As yet, none have gone through clinical trials, and some have not completed preclinical trials, including safety and specificity evaluation. Recently, small molecule pyrazolopyridine and triazolopyrimidine derivatives have been submitted as potent NADPH oxidase inhibitors and reported as first-in-class inhibitors for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and acute stroke, respectively. Further clinical efficacy and safety data are warranted to prove their actual clinical utility.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available