Chemical Biology 2007
DOI: 10.1002/9783527619375.ch15c
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Nuclear Receptor Superfamily and Drug Discovery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 124 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The LBD is the primary target for NR drug discovery (Hall & McDonnell 2005, Moore et al 2006. In most traditional approaches, pharmaceuticals designed to modulate NR activity compete for access to the cognate ligand-binding pocket.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The LBD is the primary target for NR drug discovery (Hall & McDonnell 2005, Moore et al 2006. In most traditional approaches, pharmaceuticals designed to modulate NR activity compete for access to the cognate ligand-binding pocket.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8.1. The AF1 and hinge regions of NRs are the most divergent in sequence and length across the superfamily, are considered intrinsically disordered (Krasowski et al 2008), and their function and significance have been reviewed (Moore et al 2006;Warnmark et al 2003;Tremblay et al 1999;Clinckemalie et al 2012;Zwart et al 2010). The DBD is the most highly conserved sequence among NRs and contains two zinc finger motifs to bind distinct DNA response elements.…”
Section: Nuclear Receptorsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…First, SF-1 and RORA are both transcriptionally active in cell-based functional assays (Carlberg et al, 1994;Mellon and Bair, 1998) and they both bind DNA as monomers, whereas most of NRs do so only in a homo-or heterodimerized state (Giguère, 1999). Second, their ligand binding domains may be responsive to smallmolecule ligands (Kallen et al, 2004;Li et al, 2005), and their phylogeny is distant enough to make them susceptible to different ligands (Moore et al, 2006). An ancillary benefit is that assay protocols and reagents used for both assays were nearly identical; the major difference is the transient transfection procedure for each receptor's particular ligand binding domain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are involved in diverse biological processes, such as embryogenesis, homeostasis, reproduction, cell growth, and death (Mangelsdorf et al, 1995). With numerous NR-targeting drugs marketed or in development, NRs have proven to be successful therapeutic targets for a wide range of diseases (Moore et al, 2006). Whereas natural or synthetic ligands have been reported for numerous members of the NR superfamily, the pharmacology of so-called "orphan" nuclear receptors-for which no natural ligand has been reported-as well as those recently "adopted" remains poorly characterized (Giguère, 1999).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%