4.7 Article

BRACO19 analog dimers with improved inhibition of telomerase and hPot 1

期刊

BIOORGANIC & MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 2030-2037

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bmc.2009.01.015

关键词

Telomerase; hPot1; G-Quadruplex; Acridines; Telomere

资金

  1. Elsa Pardee Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human chromosomes terminate with telomeres, which contain double-stranded G-rich, repetitive DNA followed by a single-stranded overhang of the G-rich sequence. Single-stranded oligonucleotides containing G-rich telomeric repeats have been observed in vitro to fold into a variety of G-quadruplex topologies depending on the solution conditions. G-quadruplex structures are notable in part because G-quadruplex ligands inhibit both the enzyme telomerase and other telomere-binding proteins. Because telomerase is required for growth by the majority of cancers, G-quadruplex-stabilizing ligands have become an attractive platform for anticancer drug discovery. Here, we present the preparation and biochemical activities of a novel series of 3,6-disubstituted acridine dimers modeled after the known G-quadruplex ligand BRACO19. These BRACO19 Analog Dimer (BAD) ligands were shown to bind to human telomeric DNA and promote the formation of intramolecular G-quadruplexes in the absence of monovalent cations. As expected, the BAD ligands bound to telomeric DNA with a 1:1 stoichiometry, whereas the parent compound BRACO19, a monomer, bound with a 2:1 stoichiometry. The BAD ligands exhibited potent inhibition of human telomerase with IC50 values similar to or lower than those of BRACO19. Furthermore, the BAD ligands displayed greater potency in the inhibition of hPot1 and increased selectivity for G-quadruplex DNA when compared to BRACO19. Collectively, these experiments support the hypothesis that there is an increased potency and selectivity to be gained in the design of G-quadruplex-stabilizing agents that incorporate multiple interactions. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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