Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
A series of carbamate-based inhibitors of glutamate carboxypeptidase II (GCPII) were designed and synthesized using ZJ-43, N-[[[(1S)-1-carboxy-3-methylbutyl]amino]carbonyl]-l-glutamic acid, as a molecular template in order to better understand the impact of replacing one of the two nitrogen atoms in the urea-based GCPII inhibitor with an oxygen atom. Compound 7 containing a C-terminal 2-oxypentanedioic acid was more potent than compound 5 containing a C-terminal glutamic acid (2-aminopentanedioic acid) despite GCPII's preference for peptides containing an N-terminal glutamate as substrates. Subsequent crystallographic analysis revealed that ZJ-43 and its two carbamate analogs 5 and 7 with the same (S,S)-stereochemical configuration adopt a nearly identical binding mode while (R,S)-carbamate analog 8 containing a d-leucine forms a less extensive hydrogen bonding network. QM and QM/MM calculations have identified no specific interactions in the GCPII active site that would distinguish ZJ-43 from compounds 5 and 7 and attributed the higher potency of ZJ-43 and compound 7 to the free energy changes associated with the transfer of the ligand from bulk solvent to the protein active site as a result of the lower ligand strain energy and solvation/desolvation energy. Our findings underscore a broader range of factors that need to be taken into account in predicting ligand-protein binding affinity. These insights should be of particular importance in future efforts to design and develop GCPII inhibitors for optimal inhibitory potency.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6374116 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bmc.2018.11.022 | DOI Listing |