2008
DOI: 10.1097/coh.0b013e328313911d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approaches to the design of HIV protease inhibitors with improved resistance profiles

Abstract: Several theories on how to design HIV protease inhibitors with improved resistance profiles have been proposed during the review period. The general concepts that are incorporated into most design strategies include maximizing the interactions with the backbone and conserved side chains of the enzyme while minimizing inhibitor size and maintaining conformational flexibility to allow for modified binding modes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Seven of the nine FDA approved drugs are 2-3 orders of magnitude weaker inhibitors of WT protease ( K i = 46–284 pM), while two are low picomolar binders (LPV and DRV, K i = 5 pM). The precise measurements of K i values in the low pM range using standard biochemical assays are limited (Gulnik and Eissenstat, 2008; Kuzmi&Ccaron, 1996; Miller, et al, 2006). This makes direct comparison of new PIs with DRV, and each other, challenging, as all have K i values in the low pM range.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Seven of the nine FDA approved drugs are 2-3 orders of magnitude weaker inhibitors of WT protease ( K i = 46–284 pM), while two are low picomolar binders (LPV and DRV, K i = 5 pM). The precise measurements of K i values in the low pM range using standard biochemical assays are limited (Gulnik and Eissenstat, 2008; Kuzmi&Ccaron, 1996; Miller, et al, 2006). This makes direct comparison of new PIs with DRV, and each other, challenging, as all have K i values in the low pM range.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various strategies have been used to develop new antiviral PI therapies against drug resistant HIV, including increasing the plasma levels of existing PIs by using a boosting agent (Kempf, et al, 1997; Youle, 2007; Zeldin and Petruschke, 2004) and developing new PIs using structure-based drug design (Ghosh, et al, 2008; Gulnik and Eissenstat, 2008; Nalam and Schiffer, 2008; Wensing, et al, 2010). The design strategy to maximize the number of hydrogen bonds with the protease backbone led to the development of highly potent PIs active against drug-resistant HIV (Ghosh, et al, 2011; Ghosh, et al, 2008; Ghosh, et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, the design of novel HIV PIs includes efforts to minimize the inhibitor molecular weight, maximize its interactions with the backbone of the PR binding cleft while maintaining flexibility for better fit to the variable binding clefts of PR resistant species [89]. These general principles are being used by scientists from industry and academia in their efforts to design the next generation of HIV PIs.…”
Section: Other Non-peptidic Hiv Protease Active Site Inhibitorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, newly infected patients are infected with resistant viruses which are an added challenge in the treatment of HIV infections. Various strategies have been used to develop new antiviral therapies against drug-resistant HIV, including increasing the plasma levels of existing PIs by using a boosting agent [22] and developing new PIs using structure-based drug design [4,2325]. Among different approaches, one design strategy maximizes the number of hydrogen bonds with the protease backbone and led to the development of highly potent PIs active against drug-resistant HIV [25,26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%