4.8 Article

Mechanistic validation of a clinical lead stapled peptide that reactivates p53 by dual HDM2 and HDMX targeting

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 36, 期 15, 页码 2184-2190

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2016.361

关键词

-

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Feodor Lynen Fellowship
  2. NIH training grant [T32GM007753]
  3. Doctoral Foreign Studies Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [DFS-134963]
  4. William Lawrence and Blanche Hughes Foundation
  5. Hyundai Hope on Wheels Quantum Award
  6. Alex's Lemonade Stand Reach Grant
  7. Todd J Schwartz Memorial Fund
  8. Leukemia and Lymphoma SCOR and Scholar Awards

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrocarbon-stapled peptides that display key residues of the p53 transactivation domain have emerged as bona fide clinical candidates for reactivating the tumor suppression function of p53 in cancer by dual targeting of the negative regulators HDM2 and HDMX. A recent study questioned the mechanistic specificity of such stapled peptides based on interrogating their capacity to disrupt p53/HDM2 and p53/HDMX complexes in living cells using a new recombinase enhanced bimolecular luciferase complementation platform (ReBiL). Here, we directly evaluate the cellular uptake, intracellular targeting selectivity and p53-dependent cytotoxicity of the clinical prototype ATSP-7041. We find that under standard serum-containing tissue culture conditions, ATSP-7041 achieves intracellular access without membrane disruption, dose-dependently dissociates both p53/HDM2 and p53/HDMX complexes but not an unrelated protein complex in long-term ReBiL experiments, and is selectively cytotoxic to cancer cells bearing wild-type p53 by inducing a surge in p53 protein level. These studies underscore the importance of a thorough stepwise approach, including consideration of the time-dependence of cellular uptake and intracellular distribution, in evaluating and advancing stapled peptides for clinical translation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据