4.6 Article

Toolbox of Diverse Linkers for Navigating the Cellular Efficacy Landscape of Stapled Peptides

期刊

ACS CHEMICAL BIOLOGY
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 526-533

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acschembio.9b00063

关键词

-

资金

  1. ERC
  2. EPSRC
  3. BBSRC
  4. MRC [G1002329]
  5. Royal Society
  6. Cambridge Trusts
  7. Cancer Research UK
  8. Department of Chemistry at the University of Cambridge
  9. Cambridge Cancer Centre
  10. AstraZeneca
  11. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico
  12. Senior Fellowship from the Medical Research Foundation
  13. School of the Physical Sciences
  14. Cancer Research UK [27225, 22676] Funding Source: researchfish
  15. Medical Research Council [G1002329] Funding Source: researchfish
  16. Medical Research Foundation [C0385] Funding Source: researchfish
  17. EPSRC [1800602, EP/P020291/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  18. MRC [G1002329] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stapled peptides have great potential as modulators of protein protein interactions (PPIs). However, there is a vast landscape of chemical features that can be varied for any given peptide, and identifying a set of features that maximizes cellular uptake and subsequent target engagement remains a key challenge. Herein, we present a systematic analysis of staple functionality on the peptide bioactivity landscape in cellular assays. Through application of a toolbox of diversified dialkynyl linkers to the stapling of MDM2-binding peptides via a double-click approach, we conducted a study of cellular uptake and p53 activation as a function of the linker. Minor changes in the linker motif and the specific pairing of linker with peptide sequence can lead to substantial differences in bioactivity, a finding which may have important design implications for peptide-based inhibitors of other PPIs. Given the complexity of the structure activity relationships involved, the toolbox approach represents a generalizable strategy for optimization when progressing from in vitro binding assays to cellular efficacy studies.

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