3.9 Article

Universal screening methods and applications of ThermoFluor®

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMOLECULAR SCREENING
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 854-863

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1087057106292746

关键词

ThermoFluor (R); genomic sequencing; drug discovery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The genomics revolution has unveiled a wealth of poorly characterized proteins. Scientists are often able to produce milligram quantities of proteins for which function is unknown or hypothetical, based only on very distant sequence homology. Broadly applicable tools for functional characterization are essential to the illumination of these orphan proteins. An additional challenge is the direct detection of inhibitors of protein-protein interactions (and allosteric effectors). Both of these research problems are relevant to, among other things, the challenge of finding and validating new protein targets for drug action. Screening collections of small molecules has long been used in the pharmaceutical industry as 1 method of discovering drug leads. Screening in this context typically involves a function-based assay. Given a sufficient quantity of a protein of interest, significant effort may still be required for functional characterization, assay development, and assay configuration for screening. Increasingly, techniques are being reported that facilitate screening for specific ligands for a protein of unknown function. Such techniques also allow for function-independent screening with better characterized proteins. ThermoFluor (R), a screening instrument based on monitoring ligand effects on temperature-dependent protein unfolding, can be applied when protein function is unknown. This technology has proven useful in the decryption of an essential bacterial enzyme and in the discovery of a series of inhibitors of a cancer-related, protein-protein interaction. The authors review some of the tools relevant to these research problems in drug discovery, and describe our experiences with 2 different proteins.

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

3.9
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