4.8 Article

Gambogic acid identifies an isoform-specific druggable pocket in the middle domain of Hsp90β

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1606655113

关键词

molecular chaperone; heat-shock protein 90; isoform-specific inhibitor; molecular docking; caged xanthone

资金

  1. Intramural Research Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute Grant [Z01 SC010074-12]
  2. National Institutes of Health Grants [CA 133002, GM101467]
  3. Cancer Research Coordinating Committee [CRC-15-380737]
  4. National Science Foundation [PHY-1427654, MCB-1214457]
  5. Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas
  6. Welch Foundation Grant [C-1792]
  7. Direct For Biological Sciences
  8. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience [1214457] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  9. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  10. Division Of Physics [1427654] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Because of their importance in maintaining protein homeostasis, molecular chaperones, including heat-shock protein 90 (Hsp90), represent attractive drug targets. Although a number of Hsp90 inhibitors are in preclinical/clinical development, none strongly differentiate between constitutively expressed Hsp90 beta and stress-induced Hsp90 alpha, the two cytosolic paralogs of this molecular chaperone. Thus, the importance of inhibiting one or the other paralog in different disease states remains unknown. We show that the natural product, gambogic acid (GBA), binds selectively to a site in the middle domain of Hsp90 beta, identifying GBA as an Hsp90 beta-specific Hsp90 inhibitor. Furthermore, using computational and medicinal chemistry, we identified a GBA analog, referred to as DAP-19, which binds potently and selectively to Hsp90 beta. Because of its unprecedented selectivity for Hsp90 beta among all Hsp90 paralogs, GBA thus provides a new chemical tool to study the unique biological role of this abundantly expressed molecular chaperone in health and disease.

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