2003
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2003.09.114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SU9516: biochemical analysis of cdk inhibition and crystal structure in complex with cdk2

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
37
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
2
37
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The C3 substituent points towards the outside of the pocket. The same binding has been observed for other compounds of the same class (Mohammadi et al 1997, Moshinsky et al 2003. This result suggests that our model of RET kinase domain is reliable.…”
Section: Molecular Modelingsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The C3 substituent points towards the outside of the pocket. The same binding has been observed for other compounds of the same class (Mohammadi et al 1997, Moshinsky et al 2003. This result suggests that our model of RET kinase domain is reliable.…”
Section: Molecular Modelingsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The apparent divergence in mechanism of inhibition between HER1 and HER2 is not without precedent. A small-molecule inhibitor of the cyclin-dependent kinases was previously shown to inhibit cyclin-dependent kinase 2 and cyclin-dependent kinase 4 by distinct mechanisms (39). Similarly, an inhibitor of the Src kinase families was found to exhibit distinct modes of inhibition of two highly related members within the family (40).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Structural investigations demonstrated that the higher potency of these two variants is due to formation of additional interactions with the polar residue Asp86, while the "standard" triplet of hydrogen bonds is retained [17,30]. A puzzling exception is 3-(3H-Imidazol-4-ylmethylene)-5-methoxy-1,3-dihydro-indol-2-one (SU9516) which appears to form only the standard hydrogen bond triplet but is highly potent and also presents a good degree of selectivity for CDK2 against CDK4 [31,32]. Unlike potency, the issue of selectivity has proven to be much harder to explain via analysis of the available crystal structures only [11,12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%