4.6 Review

Differential scanning calorimetry in life science: Thermodynamics, stability, molecular recognition and application in drug design

期刊

CURRENT MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 12, 期 17, 页码 2011-2020

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/0929867054546564

关键词

calorimetry; DSC; thermodynamics; Delta H degrees; Delta Cp; binding; stability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

All biological phenomena depend on molecular recognition, which is either intermolecular like in ligand binding to a macromolecule or intramolecular like in protein folding. As a result, understanding the relationship between the structure of proteins and the energetics of their stability and binding with others (bio)molecules is a very interesting point in biochemistry and biotechnology. It is essential to the engineering of stable proteins and to the structure-based design of pharmaceutical ligands. The parameter generally used to characterize the stability of a system (the folded and unfolded state of the protein for example) is the equilibrium constant (K) or the free energy (Delta G degrees), which is the sum of enthalpic (AH degrees) and entropic (Delta S degrees) terms. These parameters are temperature dependent through the heat capacity change (Delta Cp). The thermodynamic parameters Delta H degrees and Delta Cp can be derived from spectroscopic experiments, using the van't Hoff method, or measured directly using calorimetry. Along with isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) is a powerful method, less described than ITC, for measuring directly the thermodynamic parameters which charaterize biomolecules. In this article, we summarize the principal thermodynamics parameters, describe the DSC approach and review some systems to which it has been applied. DSC is much used for the study of the stability and the folding of biomolecules, but it can also be applied in order to understand biomolecular interactions and can thus be an interesting technique in the process of drug design.

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