4.5 Review

Metallocarboxypeptidases: Emerging drug targets in biomedicine

期刊

CURRENT PHARMACEUTICAL DESIGN
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 349-366

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/138161207780162980

关键词

metallocarboxypeptidase; metallocarboxypeptidase inhibitor; inhibitor-enzyme complex; TAFI; pro-fibrinolytic drug; ADEPT and GDEPT; neuropeptide processing

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [DA04494] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK51271] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metallo carboxypepticlases (MCPs) are commonly regarded as exopeptidases that actively participate in the digestion of proteins and peptides. In the recent years, however, novel MCPs comprising a wide range of physio logical roles have been found in different mammalian extra-pancreatic tissues and fluids. Among them, CPU, also known as thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFI), has been shown to cleave C-terminal Lys residues from partially degraded fibrin, acting as inhibitor of clot fibrinolysis and therefore constituting ail important drug target for thrombolytic therapies. Other MCPs such as CPE, CPN, CPM, and CPD function as pro-hormone and neuropeptide processors and display several structural differences with the pancreatic-like enzymes. In addition, important advances have been made in the discovery and characterization of new endogenous and exogenous proteinaceous inhibitors; the structural determination of their complexes with several MCPs has revealed novel binding modes. Finally, the use of MCPs in antibody-directed enzyme pro-drug therapy (ADEPT) has proved to be an efficient approach for the delivery of lethal levels of' chemotherapeutic drugs specifically at tumor tissues. Taken together, these recent developments may help to understand potential biomedical implications of MCPs. Future perspectives for the regulation of these enzymes through the use of' more selective and potent inhibitors are also discussed in this review and combined with earlier observations in the field.

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

4.5
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