3.9 Article

Identification of Ligand-Selective Peptide Antagonists of the Mineralocorticoid Receptor Using Phage Display

期刊

MOLECULAR ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 32-43

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/me.2010-0193

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [494835, 338518]
  2. Royal Australasian College of Physicians
  3. Victorian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) is a member of the nuclear receptor superfamily. Pathological activation of the MR causes cardiac fibrosis and heart failure, but clinical use of MR antagonists is limited by the renal side effect of hyperkalemia. The glucocorticoid cortisol binds the MR with equivalent affinity to that of the mineralocorticoids aldosterone and deoxycorticosterone. In nonepithelial tissues, including the myocardium, which do not express the cortisol-inactivating enzyme 11 beta hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 2, cortisol has been implicated in the activation of MR. The mechanisms for ligand- and tissue-specific actions of the MR are undefined. Over the past decade, it has become clear that coregulator proteins are critical for nuclear receptor-mediated gene expression. A subset of these coregulators may confer specificity to MR-mediated responses. To evaluate whether different physiological ligands can induce distinct MR conformations that underlie differential coregulator recruitment and ligand- specific gene regulation, we utilized phage display technology to screen 10(8) 19mer peptides for their interaction with the MR in the presence of agonist ligands. We identified ligand- selective MR-interacting peptides that acted as potent antagonists of MR-mediated transactivation. This represents a novel mechanism of MR antagonism that may be manipulated in the rational design of a ligand- or tissue-selective MR modulator to treat diseases like heart failure without side effects such as hyperkalemia. (Molecular Endocrinology 25: 32-43, 2011)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据