4.5 Article

X-ray structure and inhibition of the feline infectious peritonitis virus 3C-like protease: Structural implications for drug design

期刊

BIOORGANIC & MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY LETTERS
卷 25, 期 22, 页码 5072-5077

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2015.10.023

关键词

Coronavirus; 3CLpro; Feline infectious peritonitis; Structure-based drug design; Peptidomimetics

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health via the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [AI085089, AI26603]
  2. Purdue University
  3. Walther Cancer Foundation
  4. NIH Grant [P30 CA023168]
  5. U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  6. Michigan Economic Development Corporation
  7. Michigan Technology Tri-Corridor [085P1000817]
  8. Purdue Center for Cancer Research Macromolecular Crystallography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a deadly disease that effects both domestic and wild cats and is caused by a mutation in feline coronavirus (FCoV) that allows the virus to replicate in macrophages. Currently, there are no treatments or vaccines available for the treatment of FIP even though it kills approximately 5% of cats in multi-cat households per year. In an effort to develop small molecule drugs targeting FIP for the treatment of cats, we screened a small set of designed peptidomimetic inhibitors for inhibition of FIPV-3CL(pro), identifying two compounds with low to sub-micromolar inhibition, compound 6 (IC50 = 0.59 +/- 0.06 mu M) and compound 7 (IC50 = 1.3 +/- 0.1 mu M). We determined the first X-ray crystal structure of FIPV-3CL(pro) in complex with the best inhibitor identified, compound 6, to a resolution of 2.10 angstrom to better understand the structural basis for inhibitor specificity. Our study provides important insights into the structural requirements for the inhibition of FIPV-3CL(pro) by peptidomimetic inhibitors and expands the current structural knowledge of coronaviral 3CL(pro) architecture. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
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