4.6 Article

The p97 Inhibitor UPCDC-30245 Blocks Endo-Lysosomal Degradation

期刊

PHARMACEUTICALS
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ph15020204

关键词

proteomics; p97 inhibitor; lysomotropic agents; endo-lysosomal degradation; coronavirus

资金

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01NS100815, R01NS102279]
  2. Merkin Institute for Translational Research at Caltech

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The diverse modes of action of small molecule inhibitors provide versatile tools for research and therapeutics. This article focuses on two classes of inhibitors for the p97 ATPase: ATP competitive and allosteric. It shows that the allosteric p97 inhibitor UPCDC-30245 can alter autophagic pathways by increasing the lipidated form of LC3-II, and it blocks endo-lysosomal degradation by inhibiting early endosome formation and reducing lysosome acidity.
The diverse modes of action of small molecule inhibitors provide versatile tools to investigate basic biology and develop therapeutics. However, it remains a challenging task to evaluate their exact mechanisms of action. We identified two classes of inhibitors for the p97 ATPase: ATP competitive and allosteric. We showed that the allosteric p97 inhibitor, UPCDC-30245, does not affect two well-known cellular functions of p97, endoplasmic-reticulum-associated protein degradation and the unfolded protein response pathway; instead, it strongly increases the lipidated form of microtubule-associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3B (LC3-II), suggesting an alteration of autophagic pathways. To evaluate the molecular mechanism, we performed proteomic analysis of UPCDC-30245 treated cells. Our results revealed that UPCDC-30245 blocks endo-lysosomal degradation by inhibiting the formation of early endosome and reducing the acidity of the lysosome, an effect not observed with the potent p97 inhibitor CB-5083. This unique effect allows us to demonstrate UPCDC-30245 exhibits antiviral effects against coronavirus by blocking viral entry.

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