4.6 Review

Approaches to hepatitis C treatment and cure using NS5A inhibitors

期刊

INFECTION AND DRUG RESISTANCE
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 41-56

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S36247

关键词

HCV replication complex; direct acting antivirals (DAAs); clinical trials

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [5P30-AI-50409]
  2. Department of Veterans Affairs
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [P30AI050409] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent progress in the understanding of hepatitis C virus (HCV) biology and the availability of in vitro models to study its replication have facilitated the development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) that target specific steps in the viral replication cycle. Currently, there are three major classes of DAA in clinical development: NS3/4A protease inhibitors, NS5B polymerase inhibitors, and NS5A directed inhibitors. Several compounds thought to bind directly with NS5A are now in various clinical trial phases, including the most advanced, daclatasvir (BMS-790052), ledipasvir (GS-5885), and ABT-267. While many NS5A-targeted compounds demonstrate picomolar potency, the exact mechanism(s) of their action is still unclear. In the clinic, NS5A HCV inhibitors show promise as important components in DAA regimens and have multifunctionality. In addition to inhibiting viral replication, they may synergize with other DAAs, possibly by modulating different viral proteins, to help suppress the emergence of resistant viruses. Structure-based models have identified target interaction domains and spatial interactions that explain drug resistance for mutations at specific positions (eg, residues 93 and 31) within NS5A and potential binding partners. This review provides, insights into the unique complexity of NS5A as a central platform for multiple viral/host protein interactions, and possible mechanism(s) for the NS5A inhibitors currently undergoing clinical trials that target this nonstructural viral protein.

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

4.6
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