4.1 Review

Overcoming Chemical, Biological, and Computational Challenges in the Development of Inhibitors Targeting Protein-Protein Interactions

期刊

CHEMISTRY & BIOLOGY
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 689-703

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2015.04.019

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Union
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  4. Medical Research Council [ML/L007266/1]
  5. Wellcome Trust
  6. Higher Education Funding Council for England
  7. EPSRC [EP/F032773/1, EP/J017639/1]
  8. EPSRC [EP/J016012/1, EP/J017639/1, EP/F032773/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  9. MRC [MR/L007266/1, MC_UU_12022/1, MC_UU_12022/8, G1001522] Funding Source: UKRI
  10. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/F032773/1, EP/J016012/1, EP/J017639/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  11. Medical Research Council [G1001522, MR/L007266/1, MC_UU_12022/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Protein-protein interactions (PPIs) underlie the majority of biological processes, signaling, and disease. Approaches to modulate PPIs with small molecules have therefore attracted increasing interest over the past decade. However, there are a number of challenges inherent in developing small-molecule PPI inhibitors that have prevented these approaches from reaching their full potential. From target validation to small-molecule screening and lead optimization, identifying therapeutically relevant PPIs that can be successfully modulated by small molecules is not a simple task. Following the recent review by Arkin et al., which summarized the lessons learnt from prior successes, we focus in this article on the specific challenges of developing PPI inhibitors and detail the recent advances in chemistry, biology, and computation that facilitate overcoming them. We conclude by providing a perspective on the field and outlining four innovations that we see as key enabling steps for successful development of small-molecule inhibitors targeting PPIs.

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

4.1
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