2021
DOI: 10.1002/cmdc.202100324
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fragment‐Based Drug Discovery for RNA Targets

Abstract: Rapid development within the fields of both fragment-based drug discovery (FBDD) and medicinal targeting of RNA provides possibilities for combining technologies and methods in novel ways. This review provides an overview of fragment-based screening (FBS) against RNA targets, including a discussion of the most recently used screening and hit validation methods such as NMR spectroscopy, X-ray crystallography, and virtual screening methods. A discussion of fragment library design based on research from small-mol… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
(309 reference statements)
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While structure-based computational methods like molecular docking are regularly used for protein targets, most identified RNA-binding small molecules, however, emerged from high-throughput or fragment-screening campaigns and derivatization of a known ligand or serendipity rather than structure-based design by molecular docking. , One challenge in this regard is the low number of available 3D RNA structures compared to the number of proteins deposited in the protein data bank (PDB), often additionally struggling with low resolution. However, these structures already show clearly that the limited chemical diversity of just four RNA bases compared to 20 canonical amino acids in proteins can still result in many different folds, for example, hairpins, G-quadruplexes, multiway junctions, (pseudo)­knots, L-shaped tRNAs, triple helices, ribozymes, and the ribosome complex .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While structure-based computational methods like molecular docking are regularly used for protein targets, most identified RNA-binding small molecules, however, emerged from high-throughput or fragment-screening campaigns and derivatization of a known ligand or serendipity rather than structure-based design by molecular docking. , One challenge in this regard is the low number of available 3D RNA structures compared to the number of proteins deposited in the protein data bank (PDB), often additionally struggling with low resolution. However, these structures already show clearly that the limited chemical diversity of just four RNA bases compared to 20 canonical amino acids in proteins can still result in many different folds, for example, hairpins, G-quadruplexes, multiway junctions, (pseudo)­knots, L-shaped tRNAs, triple helices, ribozymes, and the ribosome complex .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We consistently observe that SPR can successfully measure binding affinities of low-molecular weight, weakly binding (fragment) ligands. Fragment screens have been widely adopted, and growing evidence supports that fragment-based screening is well-suited for targeting RNA. ,, The orthogonal methods outlined in the introduction yield valuable information about RNA–ligand binding, including thermodynamics (ITC); RNA structure, ligand engagement, and conformational rearrangements (chemical probing); and atomic-resolution binding modes (NMR). SPR surpasses these methods in throughput and efficient use of material.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, the assumption from previous studies is that fragments bind their targets with modest affinities (μM to mM) and must be lead-optimized for bioactivity. 13 To study the limits of physicochemical properties of compounds that bind RNA and to test the assertion that fragment-like compounds must be lead optimized for bioactivity, a 2500-member RNA-focused fragment-like library was constructed (molecular weight ≤ 300 Da), selected by possessing chemical features that are found in known RNA binders. These compounds were then tested for their RNAbinding capacity in a massively parallel format to define their binding landscapes.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%