4.8 Article

Dissociation of antibacterial activity and aminoglycoside ototoxicity in the 4-monosubstituted 2-deoxystreptamine apramycin

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1204073109

关键词

antibiotic; translation; misreading; deafness; mycobacteria

资金

  1. University of Zurich
  2. European Community (PAR) [FP-7 HEALTH-2009-241476]
  3. National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health [DC-003685]
  4. Medical Research Council UK
  5. Wellcome Trust
  6. MRC [MC_U105184332] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Medical Research Council [MC_U105184332] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aminoglycosides are potent antibacterials, but therapy is compromised by substantial toxicity causing, in particular, irreversible hearing loss. Aminoglycoside ototoxicity occurs both in a sporadic dose-dependent and in a genetically predisposed fashion. We recently have developed a mechanistic concept that postulates a key role for the mitochondrial ribosome (mitoribosome) in aminoglycoside ototoxicity. We now report on the surprising finding that apramycin, a structurally unique aminoglycoside licensed for veterinary use, shows little activity toward eukaryotic ribosomes, including hybrid ribosomes which were genetically engineered to carry the mitoribosomal aminoglycoside-susceptibility A1555G allele. In ex vivo cultures of cochlear explants and in the in vivo guinea pig model of chronic ototoxicity, apramycin causes only little hair cell damage and hearing loss but it is a potent antibacterial with good activity against a range of clinical pathogens, including multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. These data provide proof of concept that antibacterial activity can be dissected from aminoglycoside ototoxicity. Together with 3D structures of apramycin-ribosome complexes at 3.5-angstrom resolution, our results provide a conceptual framework for further development of less toxic aminoglycosides by hypothesis-driven chemical synthesis.

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

4.8
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