The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2021
DOI: 10.1039/d1sc00165e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Peptide-based inhibitors of protein–protein interactions: biophysical, structural and cellular consequences of introducing a constraint

Abstract: This review summarizes the influence of inserting constraints on biophysical, conformational, structural and cellular behaviour for peptides targeting α-helix mediated protein–protein interactions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
59
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(76 citation statements)
references
References 125 publications
0
59
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While the native tertiary structure as well as the stability of the full-length protein is based on the sum of interactions determined by its constituting amino acids (e.g., hydrophobic effects, polarities, charges, stabilizing disulphide bridges, etc. ), the structure and shape of isolated peptides is rather flexible and thus might not closely reproduce the actual interaction interface of both full-length proteins as present in vivo [37]. Prior to the performed peptide-protein docking simulations, the secondary structures of all analyzed peptides have been predicted by the PSIPRED algorithm [28].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the native tertiary structure as well as the stability of the full-length protein is based on the sum of interactions determined by its constituting amino acids (e.g., hydrophobic effects, polarities, charges, stabilizing disulphide bridges, etc. ), the structure and shape of isolated peptides is rather flexible and thus might not closely reproduce the actual interaction interface of both full-length proteins as present in vivo [37]. Prior to the performed peptide-protein docking simulations, the secondary structures of all analyzed peptides have been predicted by the PSIPRED algorithm [28].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The design principles of interface peptides and the repertoire of technical solutions are detailed in recent reviews [ 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 ]. Optimization of the linear peptides is usually required to increase the binding affinity to the target protein, overcome a number of pharmacodynamic (pharmacokinetic) limitations and unfavorable physicochemical properties that reduce the in vivo efficacy.…”
Section: Current Approaches To the Design Of Interfacial Peptidesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The determinants of α-helix stability are key in understanding the formation and strength of α-helix mediated protein-protein interactions (PPIs), 1 and therefore in enabling peptide drugdiscovery. 2,3 Prior studies established helix propensities of individual amino acids, 4,5 the role of helix capping 6,7 and effects of interaction between side chains, [8][9][10][11] however the role of phosphorylation is less well explored. Downloaded from http://portlandpress.com/biochemj/article-pdf/doi/10.1042/BCJ20210812/929569/bcj-2021-0812.pdf by guest on 07 March 2022 for analytical characterization data).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%