4.3 Article

New ketomethylene inhibitor analogues: synthesis and assessment of structural determinants for N-domain selective inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme

期刊

BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 393, 期 6, 页码 485-493

出版社

WALTER DE GRUYTER & CO
DOI: 10.1515/hsz-2012-0127

关键词

inhibitor design; kinetics; metallopeptidase; molecular docking; peptidomimetic inhibitors

资金

  1. South African National Research Foundation
  2. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
  3. Ernst & Ethel Eriksen Trust
  4. University of Cape Town

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) is a zinc metallopeptidase containing two homologous domains. While the C-domain plays a major role in blood pressure regulation, the N-domain hydrolyzes the antifibrotic agent N-acetyl-Ser-Asp-Lys-Pro. Thus, N-domain selective (N-selective) inhibitors could be useful in the treatment of conditions relating to excessive tissue fibrosis. New keto-ACE analogues were designed that contained functionalities considered important for N-selective inhibitor RXP407 binding, namely, a P-2 Asp, N-acetyl group, and C-terminal amide. Such functionalities were incorporated to assess the structural determinants for N-selective binding in a novel inhibitor template. Inhibitors containing a C-terminal amide and modified P-2' group were poor inhibitors of the N-domain, with several of these displaying improved inhibition of the C-domain. Molecules with both a C-terminal amide and P-2 Asp were also poor inhibitors and not N-selective. Compounds containing a free C-terminus, a P-2 Asp and protecting group displayed a change of more than 1000-fold N-selectivity compared with the parent molecule. Molecular docking models revealed interaction of these P-2 groups with S-2 residues Tyr369 and Arg381. This study emphasizes the importance of P-2 functionalities in allowing for improved N-selective binding and provides further rationale for the design of N-selective inhibitors, which could be useful in treating tissue fibrosis.

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

4.3
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