4.8 Article

Structure-Based Virtual Screening Protocol for in Silico Identification of Potential Thyroid Disrupting Chemicals Targeting Transthyretin

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 50, 期 21, 页码 11984-11993

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b02771

关键词

-

资金

  1. MiSSE project through Swedish Research Council for the Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas) [210-2012-131]
  2. Swedish Research Council (VR) [521-2011-6427]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thyroid disruption by xenobiotics is associated with a broad spectrum of severe adverse outcomes. One possible molecular target of thyroid hormone disrupting chemicals (THDCs) is transthyretin (TTR), a thyroid hormone transporter in vertebrates. To better understand the interactions between TTR and THDCs, we determined the crystallographic structures of human TTR in complex with perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and 2,2',4,4'-tetrahydroxybenzophenone (BP2). The molecular interactions between the ligands and TTR were further characterized using molecular dynamics simulations. A structure-based virtual screening (VS) protocol was developed with the intention of providing an efficient tool for the discovery of novel TTR-binders from the Tox21 inventory. Among the 192 predicted binders, 12 representatives were selected, and their TTR binding affinities were studied with isothermal titration calorimetry, of which seven compounds had binding affinities between 0.26 and 100 mu M. To elucidate structural details in their binding to TTR, crystal structures were determined of TTR in complex with four of the identified compounds including 2,6-dinitro-p-cresol, bisphenol S, clonixin, and triclopyr. The compounds were found to bind in the TTR hormone binding sites as predicted. Our results show that the developed VS protocol is able to successfully identify potential THDCs, and we suggest that it can be used to propose THDCs for future toxicological evaluations.

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

4.8
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