2011
DOI: 10.1021/jm1011116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Design and Evaluation of Fragment-Like Estrogen Receptor Tetrahydroisoquinoline Ligands from a Scaffold-Detection Approach

Abstract: A library of small tetrahydroisoquinoline ligands, previously identified via structure- and chemistry-based hierarchical organization of library scaffolds in tree-like arrangements, has been generated as novel estrogen receptor agonistic fragments via traditional medicinal chemistry exploration. The approach described has allowed for the rapid evaluation of a structure-activity relationship of the ligands concerning estrogen receptor affinity and estrogen receptor β subtype selectivity. The structural biologic… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Figure 4(A) and (B), the calculated binding free energy differences between ERβ-LBD19 system to ERβ-LBD19H, ERβ-LBD8, ERβ-LBD9, or ERβ-LBD10 systems are −.13, .55, 2.03, and .95 kcal/mol under AMBER ff03 charge. However, the same binding free energy differences calculated under QMPC are about −3.49, −.08, −2.28, and −.21 kcal/mol, which are much closer to the corresponding experimental values (−2.09, −.02, −3.54, and −1.10 kcal/mol) (Möcklinghoff et al, 2011). As a result, the calculated binding free energy difference (between ERβ-LBD19 system to all ligandbound ERβ systems) under QMPC (R 2 = .61) has better correlation with the experimentally measured data than that calculated under AMBER ff03 charge parameters (R 2 = .42).…”
supporting
confidence: 82%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…As shown in Figure 4(A) and (B), the calculated binding free energy differences between ERβ-LBD19 system to ERβ-LBD19H, ERβ-LBD8, ERβ-LBD9, or ERβ-LBD10 systems are −.13, .55, 2.03, and .95 kcal/mol under AMBER ff03 charge. However, the same binding free energy differences calculated under QMPC are about −3.49, −.08, −2.28, and −.21 kcal/mol, which are much closer to the corresponding experimental values (−2.09, −.02, −3.54, and −1.10 kcal/mol) (Möcklinghoff et al, 2011). As a result, the calculated binding free energy difference (between ERβ-LBD19 system to all ligandbound ERβ systems) under QMPC (R 2 = .61) has better correlation with the experimentally measured data than that calculated under AMBER ff03 charge parameters (R 2 = .42).…”
supporting
confidence: 82%
“…In the present study, MD simulation and MM/ GBSA calculation were performed on the systems of ERβ bound with these five ligands to understand the detailed mechanism underlying the difference in binding affinity induced by the seemingly trivial change in the ligand structure. For example, the slight change in LBD19H by replacing methyl group with a trifluoromethyl group (LBD19) was observed to increase the binding ability to ERβ about 33-fold (Möcklinghoff et al, 2011). The special nature of fluorine (high electronegativity and small size) imparts a variety of properties to certain medicines, including enhanced binding interactions, metabolic stability, changes in physical properties, and selective reactivities (Hagmann, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The PamGene platform has been used frequently and in various iterations to demonstrate gene expression 41 , biochemical mechanisms 42 , rational personalized therapy selection and design [43][44][45] , drug target discovery 46,47 , and microbe species detection and identification 48,49 . Many of these studies have involved cancer signaling, treatment, and target identification and characterization.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%