4.4 Article

Mechanism and Specificity of a Symmetrical Benzimidazolephenylcarboxamide Helicase Inhibitor

期刊

BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 49, 期 9, 页码 1822-1832

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bi901974a

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AI052395, MH085690]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the effects of 1-N,4-N-bis[4-(1H-benzimidazol-2-yl)phenyl]benzene-1,4-dicarboxamide ((BIP)(2)B) oil the NS3 helicase encoded by the hepatitis C virus (HCV). Molecular beacon based helicase assays were Used to show that (BIP)(2)B inhibits the ability of HCV helicase to separate a variety of RNA and DNA duplexes with half-maximal inhibitory concentrations ranging from 0.7 to 5 mu M, depending on the nature of the substrate. In single turnover assays, (BIP)(2)B only inhibited unwinding reactions when it was preincubated with file helicase-nucleic acid complex. (BIP)(2)B quenched NS3 intrinsic protein fluorescence with an apparent dissociation constant of 5 mu M, and in the presence of (BIP)(2)B, HCV helicase did not appear to Interact with a fluorescent DNA oligonucleotide. In assays monitoring HCV helicase-catalyzed ATP hydrolysis, (BIP)(2)B only inhibited helicase-catalyzed ATP hydrolysis in the presence of Intermediate concentrations OF RNA, suggesting RNA and (BIP)(2)B compete For the Same binding site. HCV helicases isolated From various HCV genotypes were similarly sensitive to (BIP)(2)B, with half-maximal inhibitory concentrations ranging From 0.7 to 2.4 mu M. (BIP)(2)B also inhibited ATP hydrolysis catalyzed by related helicases from Dengue virus, Japanese encephalitis virus, and humans. (BIP)(2)B appeared to bind the HCV and human proteins with similar affinity (K-i = 7 and 8 mu M, respectively), flat it bound the flavivirus Proteins Lip to 270 times more lightly. Results are discussed in light of a molecular model of a (BIP)(2)B-HCV helicase complex, which IS Unable to bind nucleic acid, thus preventing the enzyme from separating double-stranded nucleic acid.

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

4.4
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