2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.imu.2021.100829
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highlighting the mechanistic role of Olutasidenib (FT-2102) in the selective inhibition of mutated isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) in cancer therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The introduction of a fluorine atom in place of chlorine also resulted in good retention of inhibitory potency (22.7 ± 5.2 nM) despite an approximate fourfold decrease when compared with iodinated compound (S)-2. As the 6-chloro substituent of the quinolinone ring of FT-2102 is positioned in a hydrophobic pocket [24,26], the better inhibitory potency of (S)-2 compared with (S)-3 could be explained by the ability of iodine, due to its lower electronegativity, to form stronger hydrophobic interactions with the With replacement of chlorine with iodine, compound (S)-2 maintained similar potency for all tested IDHs as that of the lead compound FT-2102 (5.23 ± 0.75 nM vs. 4.88 ± 1.63 nM, respectively, on IDH1 R132H and 160 ± 24 nM vs. 178 ± 70 nM, respectively, on IDH1 R132C). The introduction of a fluorine atom in place of chlorine also resulted in good retention of inhibitory potency (22.7 ± 5.2 nM) despite an approximate fourfold decrease when compared with iodinated compound (S)-2.…”
Section: Biological Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The introduction of a fluorine atom in place of chlorine also resulted in good retention of inhibitory potency (22.7 ± 5.2 nM) despite an approximate fourfold decrease when compared with iodinated compound (S)-2. As the 6-chloro substituent of the quinolinone ring of FT-2102 is positioned in a hydrophobic pocket [24,26], the better inhibitory potency of (S)-2 compared with (S)-3 could be explained by the ability of iodine, due to its lower electronegativity, to form stronger hydrophobic interactions with the With replacement of chlorine with iodine, compound (S)-2 maintained similar potency for all tested IDHs as that of the lead compound FT-2102 (5.23 ± 0.75 nM vs. 4.88 ± 1.63 nM, respectively, on IDH1 R132H and 160 ± 24 nM vs. 178 ± 70 nM, respectively, on IDH1 R132C). The introduction of a fluorine atom in place of chlorine also resulted in good retention of inhibitory potency (22.7 ± 5.2 nM) despite an approximate fourfold decrease when compared with iodinated compound (S)-2.…”
Section: Biological Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The introduction of a fluorine atom in place of chlorine also resulted in good retention of inhibitory potency (22.7 ± 5.2 nM) despite an approximate fourfold decrease when compared with iodinated compound (S)-2. As the 6-chloro substituent of the quinolinone ring of FT-2102 is positioned in a hydrophobic pocket [24,26], the better inhibitory potency of (S)-2 compared with (S)-3 could be explained by the ability of iodine, due to its lower electronegativity, to form stronger hydrophobic interactions with the neighbouring nonpolar amino acids in the active site. As expected, the (R)-methyl enantiomers were substantially less potent, with at least 30-fold lower inhibition of the two mutants (IC 50 : 323 nM and 698 nM on IDH1 R132H and >10,000 nM on IDH1 R132C).…”
Section: Biological Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, as summarized in Figure 5 and described in more detail in Section 7 , most mIDH1-selective inhibitors have been shown or are thought to target a common induced-fit pocket adjacent to the substrate binding site, which may also be present in the wildtype enzyme but appears to be more accessible in mutated isoforms. While the exact residues involved ( Figure 5 A), as well as the mode of binding to this pocket (e.g., competitive or non-competitive with respect to α-KG and/or Mg 2+ ) can differ between inhibitors, they appear to invariably lock the enzyme in inactive states, as exemplified in Figure 5 B [ 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 ]. Selectivity for mutant over wildtype enzymes may at least in part arise from mutation-induced destabilization of a regulatory segment (regulatory segment 2 comprised residues 271–286), which is normally held in place by the interaction of Asp 279 with Arg 132 (i.e., the mutated residue) and restricts access to the allosteric pocket in inactive wildtype enzymes [ 66 , 67 , 68 ] ( Figure 5 B inset).…”
Section: Considerations For the Development Of Midh-selective Pet-tra...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to molecular docking, the energy grid was generated by enclosing the conserved residues of mIDH2 protein reported in the literature. For instance, the conserved residues incorporated in the grid include Val161, Trp164, Val294, Val297, Leu298, Trp306, Glu316, Ile319, Leu320 and Gly323 [40,41]. The grid coordinates (-32.31, -14.10, -27.02) encompassing these residues serve as the binding site for the library compounds during the course of molecular docking.…”
Section: Virtual Screeningmentioning
confidence: 99%