4.7 Article

Comprehensive TCM molecular networking based on MS/MS in silico spectra with integration of virtual screening and affinity MS screening for discovering functional ligands from natural herbs

期刊

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 411, 期 22, 页码 5785-5797

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-019-01962-4

关键词

Molecular networking; Virtual screening; Affinity MS screening; Natural herbs; Ligand discovery

资金

  1. International Cooperation and Exchange of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [81761168039]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC1704800, 2018YFC1704805, 2018YFC1704500, 2018YFC1704505]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81673616]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accessing the rich source of compounds from natural herbs for use in the pharmaceutical industry using conventional bioassay-based screening platforms has low efficiency and is cost-prohibitive. In this study, we developed a new method involving traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) molecular networking and virtual screening coupled with affinity mass spectrometry (MN/VS-AM) for the efficient discovery of herb-derived ligands. The in silico MS/MS fragmentation database (ISDB) generated by molecular networking of TCM can rapidly identify compounds in complex herb extracts and perform compound activity mapping. Additionally, the pre-virtual screening conveniently includes candidate herbs with potential bioactivity, while affinity MS screening completely eliminates the requirement for a tedious pure compound preparation at the initial screening phase. After applying this approach, two types of compounds, isoamylene flavanonols and 20(s)-protopanoxadio saponins, which were confirmed to interact with the small GTPase of Ras, were successfully identified from a dozen anti-cancer TCM herbs. The results demonstrate that the modified screening strategy dramatically improved the accuracy and throughput sensitivity of ligand screening from herbal extracts.

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

4.7
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