4.7 Article

Identification of proteasome inhibitors using analysis of gene expression profiles

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 889, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2020.173709

关键词

Drug discovery; Proteasome; Michael acceptors; BCI-Cl; Manumycin A; CMap

资金

  1. Cancerfonden
  2. Vetenskapsradet
  3. Radiumhemmets forskningsfonder
  4. Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inhibitors of the 20S proteasome such as bortezomib (Velcade((R))) and carfilzomib (Kypriolis((R))) are in clinical use for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma. In an attempt to identify novel inhibitors of the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) we used the connectivity map (CMap) resource, based on alterations of gene expression profiles by perturbagens, and performed COMPARE analyses of drug sensitivity patterns in the NCI60 panel. Cmap analysis identified a large number of small molecules with strong connectivity to proteasome inhibition, including both well characterized inhibitors of the 20S proteasome and molecules previously not described to inhibit the UPS. A number of these compounds have been reported to be cytotoxic to tumor cells and were tested for their ability to decrease processing of proteasome substrates. The antibiotic thiostrepton and the natural products celastrol and curcumin induced strong accumulation of polyubiquitinated proteasome substrates in exposed cells. Other compounds elicited modest increases of proteasome substrates, including the protein phosphatase inhibitor BCI-Cl and the farnesyltransferase inhibitor manumycin A, suggesting that these compounds inhibit proteasome function. Induction of chaperone expression in the absence of proteasome inhibition was observed by a number of compounds, suggesting other effects on the UPS. We conclude that the combination of bioinformatic analyses and cellular assays resulted in the identification of compounds with potential to inhibit the UPS.

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