4.6 Article

Structural Analysis of the Complex of Human Transthyretin with 3′,5′-Dichlorophenylanthranilic Acid at 1.5 Å Resolution

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 27, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27217206

关键词

human transthyretin; TTR; binding affinity; molecular structure; halogen bonding

资金

  1. NHMRC [2009564]
  2. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science [CE200100012]
  3. CASS Foundation [9840]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human transthyretin (hTTR) amyloid deposits can disrupt cellular function, but the molecule VCP-6 can bind to and stabilize hTTR, reducing amyloid formation.
Human transthyretin (hTTR) can form amyloid deposits that accumulate in nerves and organs, disrupting cellular function. Molecules such as tafamidis that bind to and stabilize the TTR tetramer can reduce such amyloid formation. Here, we studied the interaction of VCP-6 (2-((3,5-dichlorophenyl)amino)benzoic acid) with hTTR. VCP-6 binds to hTTR with 5 times the affinity of the cognate ligand, thyroxine (T-4). The structure of the hTTR:VCP-6 complex was determined by X-ray crystallography at 1.52 angstrom resolution. VCP-6 binds deeper in the binding channel than T-4 with the 3 ',5 '-dichlorophenyl ring binding in the 'forward' mode towards the channel centre. The dichlorophenyl ring lies along the 2-fold axis coincident with the channel centre, while the 2-carboxylatephenylamine ring of VCP-6 is symmetrically displaced from the 2-fold axis, allowing the 2-carboxylate group to form a tight intermolecular hydrogen bond with N zeta of Lys15 and an intramolecular hydrogen bond with the amine of VCP-6, stabilizing its conformation and explaining the greater affinity of VCP-6 compared to T-4. This arrangement maintains optimal halogen bonding interactions in the binding sites, via chlorine atoms rather than iodine of the thyroid hormone, thereby explaining why the dichloro substitution pattern is a stronger binder than either the diiodo or dibromo analogues.

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