41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Comprehensive Review on Current Advances in Peptide Drug Development and Design

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) execute many fundamental cellular functions and have served as prime drug targets over the last two decades. Interfering intracellular PPIs with small molecules has been extremely difficult for larger or flat binding sites, as antibodies cannot cross the cell membrane to reach such target sites. In recent years, peptides smaller size and balance of conformational rigidity and flexibility have made them promising candidates for targeting challenging binding interfaces with satisfactory binding affinity and specificity. Deciphering and characterizing peptide–protein recognition mechanisms is thus central for the invention of peptide-based strategies to interfere with endogenous protein interactions, or improvement of the binding affinity and specificity of existing approaches. Importantly, a variety of computation-aided rational designs for peptide therapeutics have been developed, which aim to deliver comprehensive docking for peptide–protein interaction interfaces. Over 60 peptides have been approved and administrated globally in clinics. Despite this, advances in various docking models are only on the merge of making their contribution to peptide drug development. In this review, we provide (i) a holistic overview of peptide drug development and the fundamental technologies utilized to date, and (ii) an updated review on key developments of computational modeling of peptide–protein interactions (PepPIs) with an aim to assist experimental biologists exploit suitable docking methods to advance peptide interfering strategies against PPIs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references94

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Improved protein-ligand docking using GOLD.

          The Chemscore function was implemented as a scoring function for the protein-ligand docking program GOLD, and its performance compared to the original Goldscore function and two consensus docking protocols, "Goldscore-CS" and "Chemscore-GS," in terms of docking accuracy, prediction of binding affinities, and speed. In the "Goldscore-CS" protocol, dockings produced with the Goldscore function are scored and ranked with the Chemscore function; in the "Chemscore-GS" protocol, dockings produced with the Chemscore function are scored and ranked with the Goldscore function. Comparisons were made for a "clean" set of 224 protein-ligand complexes, and for two subsets of this set, one for which the ligands are "drug-like," the other for which they are "fragment-like." For "drug-like" and "fragment-like" ligands, the docking accuracies obtained with Chemscore and Goldscore functions are similar. For larger ligands, Goldscore gives superior results. Docking with the Chemscore function is up to three times faster than docking with the Goldscore function. Both combined docking protocols give significant improvements in docking accuracy over the use of the Goldscore or Chemscore function alone. "Goldscore-CS" gives success rates of up to 81% (top-ranked GOLD solution within 2.0 A of the experimental binding mode) for the "clean list," but at the cost of long search times. For most virtual screening applications, "Chemscore-GS" seems optimal; search settings that give docking speeds of around 0.25-1.3 min/compound have success rates of about 78% for "drug-like" compounds and 85% for "fragment-like" compounds. In terms of producing binding energy estimates, the Goldscore function appears to perform better than the Chemscore function and the two consensus protocols, particularly for faster search settings. Even at docking speeds of around 1-2 min/compound, the Goldscore function predicts binding energies with a standard deviation of approximately 10.5 kJ/mol. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The exploration of macrocycles for drug discovery--an underexploited structural class.

            Macrocyclic natural products have evolved to fulfil numerous biochemical functions, and their profound pharmacological properties have led to their development as drugs. A macrocycle provides diverse functionality and stereochemical complexity in a conformationally pre-organized ring structure. This can result in high affinity and selectivity for protein targets, while preserving sufficient bioavailability to reach intracellular locations. Despite these valuable characteristics, and the proven success of more than 100 marketed macrocycle drugs derived from natural products, this structural class has been poorly explored within drug discovery. This is in part due to concerns about synthetic intractability and non-drug-like properties. This Review describes the growing body of data in favour of macrocyclic therapeutics, and demonstrates that this class of compounds can be both fully drug-like in its properties and readily prepared owing to recent advances in synthetic medicinal chemistry.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              ClusPro: an automated docking and discrimination method for the prediction of protein complexes.

              Predicting protein interactions is one of the most challenging problems in functional genomics. Given two proteins known to interact, current docking methods evaluate billions of docked conformations by simple scoring functions, and in addition to near-native structures yield many false positives, i.e. structures with good surface complementarity but far from the native. We have developed a fast algorithm for filtering docked conformations with good surface complementarity, and ranking them based on their clustering properties. The free energy filters select complexes with lowest desolvation and electrostatic energies. Clustering is then used to smooth the local minima and to select the ones with the broadest energy wells-a property associated with the free energy at the binding site. The robustness of the method was tested on sets of 2000 docked conformations generated for 48 pairs of interacting proteins. In 31 of these cases, the top 10 predictions include at least one near-native complex, with an average RMSD of 5 A from the native structure. The docking and discrimination method also provides good results for a number of complexes that were used as targets in the Critical Assessment of PRedictions of Interactions experiment. The fully automated docking and discrimination server ClusPro can be found at http://structure.bu.edu
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Mol Sci
                Int J Mol Sci
                ijms
                International Journal of Molecular Sciences
                MDPI
                1422-0067
                14 May 2019
                May 2019
                : 20
                : 10
                : 2383
                Affiliations
                [1 ]QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia; andy.lee@ 123456qimrberghofer.edu.au (A.C.-L.L.); Janelle.Hancock@ 123456qimrberghofer.edu.au (J.L.H.); KumKum.Khanna@ 123456qimrberghofer.edu.au (K.K.K.)
                [2 ]Radiation Biology Research Center, Institute for Radiological Research, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
                [3 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: jihong@ 123456cgmh.org.tw ; Tel.: +886-3328-1200 (ext. 7013)
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1601-6555
                Article
                ijms-20-02383
                10.3390/ijms20102383
                6566176
                31091705
                2653eb38-d818-4acd-b550-9e600bf51b1e
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 19 April 2019
                : 10 May 2019
                Categories
                Review

                Molecular biology
                binding site,docking,interface,modeling,peptide,peptide–protein interaction,protein–protein interaction,scoring

                Comments

                Comment on this article