2014
DOI: 10.1080/07391102.2014.986197
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Protease activated receptor-2 (PAR2): possible target of phytochemicals

Abstract: The use of phytochemicals either singly or in combination with other anticancer drugs comes with an advantage of less toxicity and minimal side effects. Signaling pathways play central role in cell cycle, cell growth, metabolism, etc. Thus, the identification of phytochemicals with promising antagonistic effect on the receptor/s playing key role in single transduction may have better therapeutic application. With this background, phytochemicals were screened against protease-activated receptor 2 (PAR2). PAR2 b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 80 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The ligand binding energy of each of the 20 phytocompounds required to inhibit AChE was estimated using the prime molecular mechanics‐generalized born surface area (MM-GBSA) module in the Schrodinger Suite 2014 [26], [27]. The total free energy binding (digibind, kcal/mol) was estimated as follows using the software:normalΔnormalGnormalbnormalinormalnnormald=Gnormalcnormalonormalmnormalpnormallnormalenormalx-true(Gprotein+Gligandtrue)Where each energy term is a combination of G=molecular mechanics energies (MME)+GSGB (SGB solvation model for polar solvation)+GNP (non-polar solvation) [28] coulomb energy, covalent binding energy, Vander Waals energy, lipophilic energy, GB electrostatic solvation energy, prime energy, hydrogen-bonding energy, hydrophobic contact, and self-contact correction [29]. We then used this score to rank the ligand-protein Glide XP docked complex.…”
Section: Tools and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ligand binding energy of each of the 20 phytocompounds required to inhibit AChE was estimated using the prime molecular mechanics‐generalized born surface area (MM-GBSA) module in the Schrodinger Suite 2014 [26], [27]. The total free energy binding (digibind, kcal/mol) was estimated as follows using the software:normalΔnormalGnormalbnormalinormalnnormald=Gnormalcnormalonormalmnormalpnormallnormalenormalx-true(Gprotein+Gligandtrue)Where each energy term is a combination of G=molecular mechanics energies (MME)+GSGB (SGB solvation model for polar solvation)+GNP (non-polar solvation) [28] coulomb energy, covalent binding energy, Vander Waals energy, lipophilic energy, GB electrostatic solvation energy, prime energy, hydrogen-bonding energy, hydrophobic contact, and self-contact correction [29]. We then used this score to rank the ligand-protein Glide XP docked complex.…”
Section: Tools and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the results regarding the structure of molecular docking, acarbose and naringenin were buried in the α-glucosidase binding site. In the MD studies, root mean square deviation (RMSD) was used as an indicator that evaluates the average conformational change of an atom concerning reference conformations [ 42 ]. The RMSD of acarbose was initially at 0.9 Å, which then fluctuated up to 4 Å in 2.5 ns ( Figure 3 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Where each energy term is a combination of G = Molecular mechanics energies (MME) + GSGB (SGB solvation model for polar solvation) + GNP (non-polar solvation) (Kakarala and Jamil, 2015) coulomb energy, covalent binding energy, Vander Waals energy, lipophilic energy, GB electrostatic solvation energy, prime energy, hydrogen-bonding energy, hydrophobic contact, and self-contact correction (Lee and Olson, 2013).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%