4.6 Article

De Novo Design of Self-Assembled Hexapeptides as β-Amyloid (Aβ) Peptide Inhibitors

期刊

ACS CHEMICAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 5, 期 10, 页码 972-981

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cn500165s

关键词

Amyloid inhibitor; protein misfolding; self-assembled peptide; amyloid cytotoxicity; Alzheimer's disease

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation Project of Chongqing CSTC [cstc2012gg-gjhz10003]
  2. NSF [CBET-0952624, CBET-1158447]
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [0952624, 1158447] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability of peptides to construct specific secondary structures provides a useful function for biomaterial design that cannot be achieved with traditional organic molecules and polymers. Inhibition of amyloid formation is a promising therapeutic approach for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. Existing peptide-based inhibitors are mainly derived from original amyloid sequences, which have very limited sequence diversity and activity. It is highly desirable to explore other peptide-based inhibitors that are not directly derived from amyloid sequences. Here, we develop a hybrid high-throughput computational method to efficiently screen and design hexapeptide inhibitors against amyloid-beta (A beta) aggregation and toxicity from the first principle. Computationally screened/designed inhibitors are then validated for their inhibition activity using biophysical experiments. We propose and demonstrate a proof-of-concept of the like-interacts-like design principle that the self-assembling peptides are able to interact strongly with conformationally similar motifs of A beta peptides and to competitively reduce A beta-A beta interactions, thus preventing A beta aggregation and A beta-induced toxicity. Such a de novo design can also be generally applicable to design new peptide inhibitors against other amyloid diseases, beyond traditional peptide inhibitors with homologous sequences to parent amyloid peptides.

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