3.9 Article

Biological and conformational evaluation of angiotensin II lactam bridge containing analogues

期刊

REGULATORY PEPTIDES
卷 172, 期 1-3, 页码 1-7

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.regpep.2011.05.015

关键词

Angiotensin II; Lactam bridge; SAR; Microphysiometer; SPPS; Circular dichroism

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo/FAPESP
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico/CNPq
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior/CAPES

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Angiotensin II (All) is the active octapeptide product of the renin enzymatic cascade, which is responsible for sustaining blood pressure. In an attempt to establish the All-receptor-bound conformation of this octapeptide, we designed conformationally constrained analogues by scanning the entire All sequence with an i-(i+2) and i-(i + 3) lactam bridge consisting of an Asp-(Xaa)(n)-Lys scaffold. Most analogues presented low agonistic activity when compared to All in the different bioassays tested. The exceptions are cyclo(0-1a) [Asp(0), endo-(Lys(1a))]-All (1) and [Asp(0), endo-(Lys(1a))]-All (2), both of which showed activity similar to All. Based on peptide 1 and the analogue cyclo(3-5)[Sar(1), Asp(3), Lys(5)]-All characterized by Matsoukas et al., we analyzed the agonistic and antagonistic activities, respectively, through a new monocyclic peptide series synthesized by using the following combinations of residues as bridgehead elements for the lactam bond formation: D- or L-Asp combined with D- or L-Lys or L-Glu combined with L-Orn. Six analogues showed an approximately 20% increase in biological activity when compared with peptide (1) and were equipotent to All. In contrast, six analogues presented antagonistic activity. These results suggest that the position of the lactam bridge is more important than the bridge length or chirality for recognition of and binding to the angiotensin 11 AT1-receptor. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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