Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5319_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
29.08.2026
Размер:
92 Мб
Скачать

Bibliography and Original Papers



erized” form. In the exposed packing, aloop motif assumes ageometry that is no longer consistent with the original packing of the homodimer.
Below the loop, asmall pocket forms in the “pseu-
-
domonomerized” form that can accommodate small fragments. The fragments can be diffused into crystals of the enzyme and, thus, structurally characterized. NMR spectroscopy provides evidence that these small ligands can also bind in solutions and interfere with the formation of the contact surface. They suggest another principle for inhibitor design by interfering with the functionally essential homodimer formation.
Atransient pocket that can form near the active site,
-
points to another design concept for developing selec­tive inhibitors for the bacterial enzyme. Such inhib­itors must approach acysteine that is unique to the bacterial enzymes by lling the transient pocket in order to undergo irreversible covalent inhibition via the thiol group of the cysteine.
Several design concepts for the inhibition of the bac-
-
terial enzyme are emerging:
Inhibition of the active site by potent inhibitors; Disruption of homodimer formation by active site
inhibitors that perturb the interface contact sur­face with long, spike-like substituents;
– Inhibitors that induce and stabilize formation of
the twisted, functionally incompetent homodimer;
– Small ligands that x aloop in the contact surface
in ageometry that blocks the formation of the original homodimer; and
– Filling atransient pocket with inhibitors that irre-
versibly bind to the thiol group of acysteine resi­due present only in the bacterial enzymes.
Bibliography and Original Papers
C. Romier, K. Reuter, D. Suck, D. and R. Ficner, Crystal structure of
tRNA-guanine transglycosylase: RNA modication by base ex­change, EMBO J., 15, 2850–2857 (1996)
U. Grädler, H.-D. Gerber, D. A. M. Goodenough-Lashua, G. A. Gar-
cia, R. Ficner, K. Reuter, M. T. Stubbs and G. Klebe. A New Target for Shigellosis: Rational Design and Crystallographic Studies of Inhibitors of tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase J. Mol. Biol., 306, 455–467 (2001)
E. A. Meyer, R. Brenk, R. K. Castellano, M. Furler, G. Klebe, F. Die-
derich. De Novo Design, Synthesis, and in Vitro Evaluation of In­hibitors for Prokaryotic tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase (TGT): A Dramatic Sulfur Effect on Binding Afnity, ChemBioChem 2, 250–253 (2002)
R. Brenk, L. Naerum, U. Grädler, H.-D. Gerber, G. A. Garcia, K.
Reuter, M. T. Stubbs and G. Klebe. Virtual Screening for Sub­micromolar Leads of TGT based on a New Unexpected Binding Mode Detected by Crystal Structure Analysis J. Med. Chem., 46, 1133–1143 (2003)
R. Brenk, M.T. Stubbs, A. Heine, K. Reuter, G. Klebe, Flexible adapta-
tions in the structure of the tRNA modifying enzyme tRNA-gua­nine transglycosylase and its implications for substrate selectivity,
reaction mechanism and structure-based drug design, ChemBio-
Chem, 4, 1066–1077 (2003) R. Brenk, H-D. Gerber, J. Kittendorf, G.A. Garcia, K. Reuter, G.
Klebe, From Hit to Lead: De Novo Design based on Virtual
Screening Hits of Inhibitors of tRNA-guanine transglycosylase,
a putative Target of Shigellosis Therapy, Helv. Chim. Acta Vol.
86, 1435–1452 (2003) W. Xie, X. Liu and R. H. Huang. Chemical Trapping and Crystal Struc-
ture of a Catalytic tRNA Guanine Transglycosylase Covalent In-
termediate. Nat. Struct. Biol., 10, 781–788 (2003) E. A. Meyer, M. Furler, F. Diederich, R. Brenk, G. Klebe, Synthesis
Inhibitors for tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase (TGT), Helv.
Chim. Acta, 87, 1333–1356 (2004) R. Brenk, E. Meyer, K. Reuter, M.T. Stubbs, G.A. Garcia, F. Diederich,
G. Klebe, Crystallographic study of inhibitors of tRNA-guanine
transglycosylase suggests a new structure-based pharmacophore
for virtual screening, J. Mol. Biol., 338, 55–75 (2004) B. Stengl, K. Reuter and G. Klebe. Mechanism and Substrate Specic-
ity of tRNA–Guanine Transglycosylases (TGTs): tRNA Modify-
ing Enzymes from the Three Different Kingdoms of Life Share a
Common Mechanism. Chem-BioChem, 6, 1926–1939 (2005) E. A. Meyer, N. Donati, M. Guillot, B. Schweizer, F. Diederich, B.
Stengl, R. Brenk, K. Reuter, G. Klebe, Synthesis, biological eval-
uation, and crystallographic studies of extended guanine-based
(lin-benzoguanine) inhibitors for tRNA-guanine transglycosylase
(TGT), Helv. Chim. Acta, 89, 573–597(2006) B. Stengl, E. A. Meyer, A. Heine, R. Brenk, F. Diederich and G. Klebe.
Crystal Structures of tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase (TGT) in
Complex with Novel and Potent Inhibitors Unravel Pronounced
Induced-t Adaptations and Suggest Dimer Formation upon Sub-
strate Binding. J. Mol. Biol., 370, 492–511 (2007) S. Hörtner, T. Ritschel, B. Stengl, C. Kramer, G. Klebe, F. Diederich.
Potent inhibitors of tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase, an Enzyme
linked to the Pathogenicity of the Shigella Bacterium: Charge-as-
sisted Hydrogen Bonding. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 46, 8266–8269
(2007) T. Ritschel, C. Atmanene, K. Reuter, A. Van Dorsselaer, S. Sangli-
er-Cianférani, G. Klebe, An Integrative Approach combining Non-
covalent Mass Spectrometry, Enzyme Kinetics and X-ray Crys-
tallography to Decipher Tgt Protein-Protein and Protein-RNA
Interaction. J. Mol. Biol., 393, 833–847 (2009) P. C. Kohler, T. Ritschel, W. B. Schweizer, G. Klebe, F. Diederich,
High-Afnity Inhibitors of tRNA–Guanine Transglycosylase Re-
placing the Function of a Structural Water Cluster, Chem. Eur. J.,
15 10809–10817 (2009) T. Ritschel, P. C. Kohler, G. Neudert, A. Heine, F. Diederich, G. Klebe,
How to Replace the Residual Solvation Shell of Polar Active-site
Residues to Achieve Nanomolar Inhibition of tRNA-guanine
transglycosylase, ChemMedChem, 4, 2012–2023 (2009) L. J. Barandun, F. Immekus, P. C. Kohler, S. Tonazzi, B. Wagner, S.
Wendelspiess, T. Ritschel, A. Heine, M. Kansy, G. Klebe, F. Die-
derich, From lin-Benzoguanines to lin-Benzohypoxanthines as Li-
gands for Zymomonas mobilis tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase:
Replacement of Protein-Ligand Hydrogen Bonding by Importing
Water Clusters, Chem. Eur. J., 18, 9246–9257 (2012) I. Biela, N. Tidten-Luksch, F. Immekus, S. Glinca, Tran Xuan Phong
Nguyen, H.-D. Gerber, A. Heine, G. Klebe, K. Reuter, Investi-
gation of Specicity Determinants in Bacterial tRNA-Guanine
Transglycosylase Reveals Queuine, the Substrate of Its Eukaryotic
Counterpart, as Inhibitor, PLoS ONE 8, e64240 (2013) F. Immekus, L.J. Barandun, M. Betz, F. Debaene, S. Petiot, S. San-
glier-Cianférani, K. Reuter, F. Diederich, G. Klebe, Launching
Spiking Ligands into a Protein-Protein Interface: A Promising
Strategy to Destabilize and Break Interface Formation in a tRNA
Modifying Enzyme. ACS Chem. Biol., 8, 1163–1178 (2013)
21
Chapter  • A Case Study: Structure-Based Inhibitor Design for tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase
L. J. Barandun, F. Immekus, P. C. Kohler, T. Ritschel, A. Heine, P.
Orlando, G. Klebe, F. Diederich, High-afnity Inhibitors of Zy- momonas mobilis tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase through Con­vergent Optimization. Acta Cryst., Sect., D 69, 1798–1807 (2013)
S. Jakobi, T.X.P. Nguyen, F. Debaene, A. Metz, S. Sanglier-Cianférani,
K. Reuter, G. Klebe, Hot-spot Analysis to Dissect the Functional Protein-Protein Interface of a tRNA-modifying Enzyme. Proteins, 82, 2713–2732 (2014)
M. Neeb, P. Czodrowski, A. Heine, L. Jakob, S. Barandun, C. Hohn,
F. Diederich, G. Klebe, Chasing protons: How isothermal titra­tion calorimetry, mutagenesis, and pKa calculations trace the locus of charge in ligand binding to a tRNA-binding enzyme. J. Med. Chem., 57, 5554–5565 (2014)
M. Neeb, M. Betz, A. Heine, L. J. Barandun, C. Hohn, F. Diederich,
G. Klebe, Beyond afnity: enthalpy–entropy factorization unravels complexity of a at structure-activity relationship for inhibition of a tRNA-modifying enzyme, J. Med. Chem., 57, 5566–5578 (2014)
S. Jakobi, T.X.P. Nguyen, F. Debaene, S. Cianférani, K. Reuter, G.
Klebe, What Glues a Homodimer Together: Systematic Analysis of the Stabilizing Effect of an Aromatic Hot Spot in the Protein–Pro­tein Interface of the tRNA-modifying Enzyme Tgt. ACS Chem. Biol., 10, 1897–1907 (2015)
L.J. Barandun, F.R. Ehrmann, D. Zimmerli, F. Immekus, M. Giroud,
C. Grünenfelder, W.B. Schweizer, B. Bernet, M. Betz, A. Heine, G. Klebe, F. Diederich, Replacement of Water Molecules in a Phos­phate Binding Site by Furanoside-Appended lin-Benzoguanine Ligands of tRNA–Guanine Transglycosylase (TGT), Chem. Eur. J. 21, 126–135 (2015)
M. Neeb, C. Hohn, F. R. Ehrmann, A. Härtsch, A. Heine, F. Diederich,
G. Klebe, Occupying a Flat Subpocket in a tRNA-modifying En­zyme with Ordered or Disordered Sidechains: Favorable or Unfa­vorable for Binding?, Bioorg. Med. Chem., 24, 4900–4910 (2016)
F. R. Ehrmann, J. Kalim, T. Pfaffeneder, B. Bernet, C. Hohn, E.
Schäfer, T. Botzanowski, S. Cianférani, A. Heine, K. Reuter, F. Diederich, G. Klebe, Swapping Interface Contacts in the Homod­imeric tRNA Guanine Transglycosylase: An Option for Functional Regulation. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl., 57, 10085–10090 (2018)
E. Hassaan, C. Hohn, F. R. Ehrmann, F. W. Goetzke, L. Movsisyan,
T. Hüfner-Wulsdorf, M. Sebastiani, A. Härtsch, K. Reuter, F. Die­derich, G. Klebe, Fragment Screening Hit Draws Attention to a Novel Transient Pocket Adjacent to the Recognition Site of the tR­NA-Modifying Enzyme TGT. J. Med. Chem., 63, 6802–6820 (2020)
A. Nguyen, D. Nguyen, T. Nguyen, Tran, M. Sebastiani, S. Dörr, O.
Hernandez-Alba, F. Debaene, S. Cianférani, A. Heine, G. Klebe, K. Reuter, The importance of charge in perturbing the aromatic glue stabilizing the protein–protein interface of homodimeric tRNA-guanine transglycosylase, ACS Chem. Biol. 15, 3021– 3029(2020)
D. Nguyen, X. Xie, S. Jakobi, F. Terwesten, A. Metz, T. X. P. Nguyen,
V. A. Palchykov, A. Heine, K. Reuter, G. Klebe, Targeting a Cryptic Pocket in a Protein–Protein Contact by Disulde-Induced Rup­ture of a Homodimeric Interface. ACS Chem. Biol., 16, 1090–1098 (2021)
D. Nguyen, D. Abdullin, C. A. Heubach, T. Pfaffeneder, A. Nguyen, A.
Heine, K. Reuter, F. Diederich, O. Schiemann, G. Klebe, Unravel­ing a Ligand-induced Twist of a Homodimeric Enzyme by Pulsed Electron–electron Double Resonance. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed Engl., 60, 23419–23426 (2021)
A. Nguyen, G. Gemmecker, C. A. Softley, L. D. Movsisyan, T. Pfaff-
eneder, A. Heine, K. Reuter, F. Diederich, M. Sattler, G. Klebe,
19
F-NMR unveils the ligand-induced conformation of a catalyti­cally inactive twisted homodimer of tRNA-guanine transglycosy­lase. ACS Chem. Biol., 17, 1745–1755 (2022)
M. Sebastiani, C. Behrens, S. Dörr, H. D. Gerber, R. Benazza, O.
Hernandez-Alba, S. Cianférani, G. Klebe, A. Heine, K. Reuter, Structural and Biochemical Investigation of the Heterodimeric Murine tRNA-Guanine Transglycosylase, ACS Chem. Biol., 17, 2229–2247 (2022)
355
Drugs and Drug Action:
Sucesses of Structure­Based Design
V
The design and development of asuitable small‐molecule drug candidate for agiven macromolecular target structure, selected from the universe of all possible proteins, means nding the most suitable compound from the chemical space of all conceivable pharmacologically relevant molecules. This is equivalent to the task of merging both the chemical and the biological space. The gure tries to symbol­ize the intersection of these two spaces by the spiral nebulae of protein and ligand structures merging into each other (announcement poster of the author’s working group on the occasion of aconference in 2007, Rauischholzhausen, Marburg).
Contents
Chapter 22 How Drugs Act: Concepts for Therapy – 357
Chapter 23 Inhibitors of Hydrolases with an Acyl–
Enzyme Intermediate – 371
Chapter 24 Aspartic Protease Inhibitors – 403
Chapter 25 Inhibitors of Hydrolyzing Metalloenzymes – 427
Chapter 26 Transferase Inhibitors – 451
Chapter 27 Oxidoreductase Inhibitors – 483
Chapter 28 Agonists and Antagonists of Nuclear Receptors – 521
Chapter 29 Agonists and Antagonists of Membrane-
Bound Receptors – 537
Chapter 30 Ligands for Channels, Pores, and Transporters – 561
Chapter 31 Ligands for Surface Receptors – 597
Chapter 32 Biologicals: Peptides, Proteins, Nucleotides,
and Macrolides as Drugs – 625
How Drugs Act:
Concepts for Therapy
Contents
22.1 The Druggable Genome – 358
22.2 Enzymes as Catalysts in Cellular Metabolism – 359
22.3 How Do Enzymes Push Substrates Towards the Transition State? – 360
22.4 Enzymes and Their Inhibitors – 361
22.5 Receptors as Target Structures for Drugs – 362


22.6 Drugs Regulate Ion Channels: Our Extremely Fast Switches – 364
22.7 Blocking Transporters and Water Channels – 364
22.8 Modes of Action: ANever-Ending Story – 365
22.9 Resistance and Its Origin – 367
22.10 Combined Administration of Drugs – 368
22.11 Synopsis – 368
Bibliography and Further Reading – 369
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature 2024 G. Klebe, Drug Design, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68998-1_22
22
Chapter  • How Drugs Act: Concepts for Therapy
How many drug targets and modes of action are there? It has been estimated that currently available drugs act on approximately 600–700 targets. Optimistic projec­tions suggest that this number could be increased by afactor of10. But this number is still small compared to the diversity of proteins that play arole in our organ­ism. Our genome has been sequenced. We know that the number of our coding genes (about 21,500) is much smaller than originally thought (Sect.12.3). However, the number of relevant proteins encoded by these genes is much larger because, among other reasons, versatile posttranslational modications and alternative splicing cause the genetic information to be diversied into mul­tiple protein variants. So our genome is mapped, but do we know the function of each gene? How can predic­tions about proteins and their functions and possible roles in pathophysiology be extracted from this ood of sequence information? Many of the proteins discov­ered in the genome can be assigned to protein families based on sequence comparisons. Nevertheless, asig­nicant portion of our genetic information still awaits annotation. The rst step has been taken, but what are the spatial structures of these proteins for which only sequences are known? Which ligands are recognized by these proteins and what is their biochemical role in our organism? The biochemical function, that is whether aprotein is aprotease, an ion channel, or atransporter, still does not provide information about the systemic role of the protein in the functional processes of acell or an entire organism. The spatial structure of apro­tein is responsible for this function. For this reason, the spatial structures of the proteins in our genome are intensively studied or their geometries are predicted by computer methods. The goal is to map the structural space of all proteins as well as possible. Then it might be possible to nd aspatially resolved and sufciently homologous reference structure for each discovered se­quence. Today, the structures of all members of afew gene families have already been determined. It is only amatter of time before we have the spatial structure of all relevant proteins. The road may be long and ardu ous, but it is clearly marked out. Will this revolutionize the market for potential drugs and enable completely new therapeutic approaches? The chemical space of all conceivable compounds and the biological space of all possible pathology-relevant proteins were discussed in Sects.11.4 and 12.4. Drug design attempts to merge these two spaces. In the cross-section of both spaces, there are molecules to be found as candidates for poten­tial drugs. This chapter attempts to provide an overview of the range of mechanisms of action and some general principles in the families of similar proteins and biomol­ecules. Details of the individual families can be found in Chaps.23–32.
. Fig. 22.1 Distribution of the target proteins for drugs that are on
the market today

22.1 The Druggable Genome

Andrew Hopkins and Colin Groom rst provided an over­view of the pharmaceutical market in 2002. Later in 2017,
amore comprehensive assessment of this market was published by aconsortium of authors, suggesting some shifts over the past 15years (. Fig.22.1). About one­third of the drugs on the market today inhibit enzymes. Another 30% affect the behavior of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). About 15% develop their therapeu­tic signicance at ligand- or voltage-gated ion channels. Nearly 7% affect transporters. About 13.5% of drugs tar­get nuclear hormone receptors. However, these market shares do not correspond to the frequency of these tar­gets in our genome. For example, GPCRs represent only
2.3% of our genome if sensory GPCRs are excluded. GPCRs represent about 15% of the “druggable” genome, the part of the genome whose function could be modu­lated by drug therapy. In contrast, kinases represent more than 22% of the druggable genome, however, only 5.9% of currently used drugs act on these enzymes. Due to the long time span between current discovery research and
-
market launch, the drug market is expected to continue to change in the coming years, especially as the propor­tion of macromolecular drugs, known as biologicals, has recently increased sharply. These are not included in the gures above.
In the chapters that follow, examples of individual target structures that represent potential drug therapy targets are presented. They are discussed on the basis of their key structural features because the structure of the target generally denes what is needed to qualify amol­ecule as an inhibitor, agonist, antagonist, or allosteric modulator. These principles serve as a general concept for the design of new drugs. In modern drug discovery, the target structure for which anew compound is being sought is usually known. In many historical examples of drug development, this was not initially the case. Today,
. • Enzymes as Catalysts in Cellular Metabolism
. Table 22.1 Enzyme classication based on the four-digit number code
Class Name Biochemical function Examples Coenzymes
EC 1.x.x.x Oxido-
reductases
EC 2.x.x.x Transferases Transfer functional groups such as methyl,
EC 3.x.x.x Hydrolases Hydrolytic cleavage of molecules Esterases, Lipases, Phos-
EC 4.x.x.x Lyases Nonhydrolytic addition or cleavage of groups
EC 5.x.x.x Isomerases Intramolecular rearrangement and isomeriza-
EC 6.x.x.x Ligases Coupling of two molecules by the formation
Catalyze redox reactions; transfer of H- and O-atoms or electrons between molecules
acyl, amino, or phosphate groups from one molecule to another
on molecules, particularly double bonds, cleavage of C–C, C–N, C–O, and C–S bonds
tion within amolecule
of C–C, C–N, C–O, or C–S bonds by using ATP
Dehydrogenases, Oxidases, Oxygenases, Hydroxylases
Phosphotransferases (including kinases) Ami­notransferases
phatases, and Peptidases
Decarboxylases, Aldo­lases, Synthases
Racemases, Mutases Glucose-1,6-bisphos-
Synthestases, Carbox­ylases
NAD FMD, and Liponic acid
S-Adenosyl methionine, Biotin, cAMP, ATP, Thiamine pyrophosphate (TPP), Tetrahydrofolic acid
Not needed
TTP, Pyridoxal phos­phate
phate, Vitamin B12
ATP, NAD

+
, NADP+, FAD,
+

however, many modes of action are known. Peter Im­ming and his research group at the University of Halle, Germany, have compiled asummary of the modes of action for abroad collection of drugs in use today. In addition, Tudor Oprea’s WOMBAT database at the Uni- versity of New Mexico in Albuquerque, USA, provides quick access to functionally annotated drugs along with their characteristic properties. The ChEMBL database continues to be atreasure trove for correlating the chem­ical structure and biological action of atarget structure.
22.2 Enzymes as Catalysts in Cellular
Metabolism
All metabolic processes, biosynthetic pathways, and the regulation of important physiological processes are mediated by enzymes. Enzymes are macromolecular bio- catalysts that enable complex chemical reactions to take place in an aqueous medium, usually at 37 °C and under normal pressure. During evolution, families of enzymes with analogous architecture and identical catalytic sites have evolved. Small differences in the structure of the binding sites result in quite different substrate specici­ties, making these enzymes either highly specic or highly promiscuous, depending on the function required.
Enzymes do not bind particularly strongly to their substrates and reaction products. The bound conforma­tion of the ligand is often different from the energetically most favorable conformation in aqueous solution. An enzyme binds the substrate in ageometry that prepares it for the transition state of the reaction. In addition,
polar groups can induce the necessary charge shifts. The enzyme stabilizes the transition state of achemical re­action by the spatial arrangement and orientation of its reactive groups. At the same time, the enzyme lowers the activation energy of the reaction and allows for some­times dramatic rate accelerations of chemical reactions. After dissociation of the product, the enzyme is available for the conversion of the next substrate molecule.
Enzymes are classied according to the reactions they catalyze. An international commission has divided en­zymes into six classes, each of which is assigned afour- digit code (. Table22.1). The main class indicates the type of reaction catalyzed (redox reactions, transfer reactions, transfer of functional groups to water, cleav­age and elimination reactions, isomerization of groups within the substrate, or condensation or linkage of mo­lecular groups). The remaining numbers classify, for ex­ample, which group is transferred or whether the protein is regulated by cofactors. The MEROPS database, main­tained by the Sanger Institute in Cambridge, England, provides quick access and abroad overview of proteases, their substrates, reaction mechanisms, and selectivities. Chaps.23–27 review the major classes of enzymes for which drugs have been successfully developed. Asev­enth class has now been dened. It includes enzymes that catalyze the movement of ions or molecules across membranes or their separation within membranes. The reaction actually describes the transfer of these particles, and the subclasses differentiate the types of components transferred. The next subclass further differentiates the reaction processes that are the driving force for spatial transport.
ab
cd
Chapter  • How Drugs Act: Concepts for Therapy
22.3 How Do Enzymes Push Substrates
Towards the Transition State?
To illustrate how an enzyme prepares its substrate for the transition state of a reaction, let us consider an ex­ample. The crystal structure of creatinase with its nat­ural substrate creatine 22.1 and avery similar inhibitor, carbamoylsarcosine 22.2, was determined in the research
. Fig. 22.2 The enzyme creatinase cleaves creatine 22.1 with water
into urea and sarcosine. The structurally very similar molecule, carba­moylsarcosine 22.2, is an inhibitor of this enzyme
group of Robert Huber at the Max Planck Institute in Martinsried, Germany. The enzyme catalyzes the cleav­age of creatine into urea and sarcosine (. Fig.22.2). The central carbon of the C–N bond in the guanidinium moiety of creatine is nucleophilically attacked by awater molecule. All three C–N bonds in the guanidinium moi­ety have adouble bond character and the group prefers aplanar geometry due to electron delocalization. How does the enzyme manage to distort creatine towards the transition state of the reaction to prepare it for nucleop­hilic attack and bond cleavage? The zwitterionic creatine is bound by its guanidinium function through two glu­tamate residues that form two salt-bridge-like hydrogen bonds (. Figs.22.3 and22.4). The opposite acid func­tion nds strongly polarizing binding partners in two arginine residues. In addition, awater molecule is found near the central imine-like carbon atom in the crystal structure. Next to it in the binding pocket is ahistidine residue. This histidine orients the water molecule in ex­actly the right position and also supports the abstraction of aproton from this water molecule. This increases the
22
. Fig. 22.3 a In the rst step, a water molecule is polarized by
aneighboring histidine so that anucleophilic attack on the imine-like carbon is facilitated. bThen, the histidine transfers aproton to the
central nitrogen atom. cThe substrate reacts further in that aC=O double bond is formed and the C–N bond is cleaved. dThe products urea and sarcosine leave the binding pocket
. • Enzymes and Their Inhibitors
. Fig. 22.4 Upper row The vice-like xation of the creatine molecule
by two glutamate and two arginine residues causes atwist in the guani­dinium group, which is planar in the unbound state. This disrupts con­jugation across the guanidinium moiety and weakens the C–N bond to be cleaved. The twist is indicated by the red and yellow planes passing through the atoms of the guanidinium group. Middle row The neigh- boring protonated histidine further polarizes the methyl-substituted nitrogen atom and involves it in ahydrogen bond. In the course of the reaction, the nitrogen atom takes on apyramidal conguration, devi­ating from the plane (yellow) of its next three neighbors. Bottom row In the structure with the substrate-like inhibitor carbamoylsarcosine, awater molecule can be found at aposition from which the nucleophil­ic attack on the substrate creatine is initiated. This occurs from above and diagonally behind the C=N bond. (7 https://sn.pub/MXp0Uw)

nucleophilicity of the water molecule to form an OH− group. The vice-like xation of the guanidine group by the two glutamate residues causes atwisting of this building block, which is, as mentioned, planar in the unbound state. This disrupts the conjugation and signicantly weakens the C–N bond to be cleaved. Nucleophilic at­tack occurs and atetrahedral transition state is formed. At the same time, the now protonated histidine is able to polarize the methyl-substituted nitrogen atom and in­volves this atom in ahydrogen bond. This prepares the substrate for the transition state of the bond-breaking reaction step. After the proton is transferred from the histidine to the substrate, apositive charge is formed on the nitrogen atom of the bond to be cleaved. Histidine accepts aproton from the oxygen atom of the tetrahedral transition state as aC=O double bond is formed, and the central C–N bond is cleaved. The products then leave the binding pocket. In this way, the enzyme creates astereo- electronically complementary environment for the cleavage reaction. Its polar groups position the water molecule correctly for nucleophilic attack, and histidine induces apyramidalization of the nitrogen atom in the bond to be broken. At the same time, it serves as both aproton donor and acceptor during the reaction.
The crystal structure in . Fig.22.4 was determined together with carbamoylsarcosine. This molecule differs from the substrate creatine in that anitrogen atom has been replaced by an oxygen atom. However, this part of the molecule does not carry apositive charge like cre­atine. The addition of the nucleophilic OH− leads to decomposition and compensation of the charge in the guanidinium moiety of creatine. Asimilar attack on car­bamoylsarcosine would lead to the formation of anega­tive charge next to the two negatively charged glutamates. This is energetically unfavorable. As aresult, the cleavage reaction does not occur on this molecule, and the con­version is blocked. This example shows how perfectly the substrate and the enzyme must match. Small changes can drastically alter this system, turning asubstrate molecule into an inhibitor of the desired transformation reaction.

22.4 Enzymes and Their Inhibitors

Enzymes can be organized into multienzyme complexes that carry out multiple reactions on asubstrate sequen­tially. They can also form cascades in which one enzyme activates the inactive precursor of the next enzyme. This activation is passed on to the next enzyme, and the next, and so on. The coagulation cascade (Sect.23.3) is acti­vated by two independent pathways, each with several steps that ultimately merge into acommon pathway. Thus, asmall initiating event is amplied by several or­ders of magnitude. This is good for normal coagulation after injury, but in the context of a coagulopathy (i.e.,

Chapter  • How Drugs Act: Concepts for Therapy
atendency to form clots too easily), it can have disastrous consequences!
Many inhibitors prevent the catalytic activity of an enzyme by occupying the site where the substrate binds site, the so-called orthosteric site. Such inhibitors are called competitive inhibitors. In addition, there are al- losteric inhibitors, which bind to another position on the enzyme and cause achange in its three-dimensional structure or dynamic properties. This can prevent the enzyme from assuming the conformation necessary for catalysis and lead to aweakening of catalytic activity. Detailed studies of enzyme kinetics allow the distinction between competitive and noncompetitive inhibition. De­pending on the type of interaction with the enzyme, re- versible and irreversible inhibitors can be distinguished. In the case of reversible inhibitors, the binding to the enzyme must be strong enough to reliably prevent the conversion of the substrate. Some reversible inhibitors form acovalent bond to the catalytic center that is chemi­cally labile and, therefore, fully reversible, such as ahemi­acetal bond. Irreversible inhibitors react with the enzyme by forming achemically stable bond. These inhibitors, or the reacting groups, cannot be removed and the enzyme remains inhibited for the remainder of the enzyme’s life until it is degraded by the organism. In addition, there are naturally occurring protease inhibitors that bind re­versibly but adhere so strongly that the complex is de­graded before the inhibitor is released.
The rational design of an enzyme inhibitor usually starts with the structure of the substrate. Aparticularly successful approach is to mimic the transition state with achemically analogous group that is not attacked by the enzyme. Many examples of the design of such inhibitors are given in Chaps.23–27. In general, irreversible enzyme inhibitors play aminor role compared to reversible in­hibitors, but important drugs such as acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, Sect.27.9), omeprazole (Sect.30.9), clopidogrel (an inhibitor of platelet aggregation), penicillins and cephalosporins (Sect.23.7), and some monoamine oxi­dase inhibitors (Sect.27.8) belong to this group.
as the enkephalins (opiate receptors), neurokinins, and endothelins for glycoproteins, as well as the group of sensory receptors. Neurotransmitters are the endogenous agonists of many membrane-bound receptors (Sect.1.4). Nerve cells are connected to each other by synapses; these are zones where chemical information is transmit­ted by neurotransmitters. The synaptic gap is located be­tween the transmitting cell (presynaptic neuron) and the receiving cell (postsynaptic neuron). Neurotransmitters are synthesized in the presynaptic neuron and stored in vesicles. Upon nerve stimulation, they are released into the synaptic cleft. There, by binding to aspecic recep­tor on the postsynaptic neuron, they cause achange in membrane potential, thereby stimulating that cell. After reuptake into the cell, entrapment in vesicles, or degra­dation by, for example, the enzyme monoamine oxidase (amines), esterases (acetylcholine), and peptidases, or in glial cells by the activity of catechol-O-methyltransferase, the effect rapidly subsides (see . Fig.22.7).
Inside the cell, these receptors act on G-proteins
(. Fig.22.5), which derive their name from guanosine di- and triphosphate that they bind. All G-protein-cou- pled receptors (GPCRs) are identical in structure and function. They consist of aprotein chain with seven hy­drophobic segments that penetrate the cell membrane and anchor the receptor. These segments are connected by loops. To date, about 800 human GPCR sequences
22
22.5 Receptors as Target Structures
for Drugs
Receptors are proteins or protein complexes that
Mediate the information exchange between cells
-
(membrane-bound receptors),
Regulate hormone-controlled gene expression (solu-
-
ble receptors or transcription factors), and
Are coupled to ion channels and control the ow of
-
ions into or out of acell along aconcentration gra-
dient.
Important membrane-bound receptors include those for adrenaline, serotonin, dopamine, histamine, acetylcho­line, adenosine, and thromboxane, and for peptides such
. Fig. 22.5 Schematic representation of the structure and function
of aG-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR). The seven cylinders sym­bolize the seven transmembrane helices. The extra- and intracellular loops that bind the helices are not shown. After binding an agonist, the α-subunit dissociates from the so-called G-protein complex. If aGs or G generates an internal hormone, a“second messenger.” For example, the membrane-bound enzyme adenylate cyclase generates cyclic ade­nosine monophosphate (cAMP) from adenosine triphosphate (ATP). This second messenger can further affect target proteins via protein kinaseA, or open an ion channel. To avoid an overreaction, cAMP is constantly being degraded by the enzyme phosphodiesterase. G proteins inhibit enzymes that form second messengers
protein is present, then an enzyme is activated that
q/11
i/0
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана