Structure-based identification of potential novel inhibitors targeting FAM3B (PANDER) causing type 2 diabetes mellitus through virtual screening

References

• Shehata MM, Kamal MM, El-Hefnawy MH, et al. Association of serum pancreatic derived factor (PANDER) with beta-cell dysfunction in type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Complications. 2017;31(4):748–752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaudhuri A, Duvoor C, Reddy Dendi VS, et al. Clinical review of antidiabetic drugs: implications for type 2. Diabetes Mellitus Management. Front Endocrinol. 2017;8:6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li D, Yeung SC, Hassan MM, et al. Antidiabetic therapies affect risk of pancreatic cancer. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(2):482–488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Burkhardt BR, Guan Y, et al. Role of pancreatic-derived factor in type 2 diabetes: evidence from pancreatic β cells and liver. Nutr Rev. 2012;70(2):100–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Yang W, Wang J, et al. FAM3 gene family: a promising therapeutical target for NAFLD and type 2 diabetes. Metab Clin Exp. 2018;81:71–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moak SL, Dougan GC, MarElia CB, et al. Enhanced glucose tolerance in pancreatic-derived factor (PANDER) knockout C57BL/6 mice. Dis Model Mech. 2014;7(11):1307–1315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt BR, Cook JR, Young RA, et al. PDX-1 interaction and regulation of the Pancreatic Derived Factor (PANDER, FAM3B) Promoter. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2008;1779(10):645–651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert-Cooperman CE, Dougan GC, Moak SL, et al. PANDER transgenic mice display fasting hyperglycemia and hepatic insulin resistance. J Endocrinol. 2014;220(3):219–231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics. 2007;23(21):2947–2948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kairys V, Gilson MK, Fernandes MX, et al. Using protein homology models for structure-based studies: approaches to model refinement. Sci World J. 2006;6:1542–1554.
   Google Scholar
• Ramachandran S, Kota P, Ding F, et al. Automated minimization of steric clashes in protein structures. Proteins. 2011;79(1):261–270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sneha P, Thirumal Kumar D, Saini S, et al. Analyzing the effect of V66M mutation in BDNF in causing mood disorders: a computational approach. Adv Protein Chem Struct Biol. 2017;108:85–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt T, Bergner A, Schwede T. Modelling three-dimensional protein structures for applications in drug design. Drug Discov Today. 2014;19(7):890–897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Protein preparation wizard. New York (NY): Schrodinger, LLC; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Sharanya CS, Arun KG, Vijaytha V, et al. Designing of enzyme inhibitors based on active site specificity: lessons from methyl gallate and its lipoxygenase inhibitory profile. J Recept Signal Transduct Res. 2018;38(3):256–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LigPrep, version 2.3. New York, NY: Schrödinger, LLC; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Rajender PS, Vasavi M, Vuruputuri U. Identification of novel selective antagonists for cyclin C by homology modeling and virtual screening. Int J Biol Macromol. 2011;48(2):292–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyaanamoorthy S, Chen YP. Structure-based drug design to augment hit discovery. Drug Discov Today. 2011;16(17–18):831–839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lionta E, Spyrou G, Vassilatis DK, et al. Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: principles, applications and recent advances. CTMC. 2014;14(16):1923–1938.
   Google Scholar
• SiteMap. New York, NY: Schrodinger, LLC; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Glide. New York, NY: Schrodinger, LLC; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Isa MA, Majumdhar RS, Haider S. In silico docking and molecular dynamics simulation of 3-dehydroquinate synthase (DHQS) from Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Mol Model. 2018;24(6):132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shoichet BK. Virtual screening of chemical libraries. Nature. 2004;432(7019):862–865.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mustyala KK, Malkhed V, Potlapally SR, et al. Macromolecular structure and interaction studies of SigF and Usfx in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Recept Signal Transduct Res. 2014;34(3):162–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prime.New York, NY: Schrödinger, LLC; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Ramatenki V, Potlapally SR, Dumpati RK, et al. Homology modeling and virtual screening of ubiquitin conjugation enzyme E2A for designing a novel selective antagonist against cancer. J Recept Signal Transduct Res. 2015;35(6):536–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tripathi SK, Muttineni R, Singh SK. Extra precision docking, free energy calculation and molecular dynamics simulation studies of CDK2 inhibitors. J Theor Biol. 2013;334:87–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• QikProp. New York, NY: ISTS190067; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Vijaykumar B, Parasuraman S, Ravindran R, et al. Identification of natural inhibitors against angiotensin I converting enzyme for cardiac safety using induced fit docking and MM-GBSA studies. Phcog Mag. 2014;10(Suppl 3):639–644.
   Google Scholar
• Shaikh F, Siu SW. Identification of novel natural compound inhibitors for human complement component 5a receptor by homology modeling and virtual screening. Med Chem Res. 2016;25(8):1564–1573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomich CH, da Silva P, Carvalho I, et al. Homology modeling and molecular interaction field studies of alpha-glucosidases as a guide to structure-based design of novel proposed anti-HIV inhibitors. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2005;19(2):83–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiser A. Template-based protein structure modeling. Methods Mol Biol. 2010;673:73–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heinz DW, Baase WA, Dahlquist FW, et al. How amino-acid insertions are allowed in an alpha-helix of T4 lysozyme. Nature. 1993;361(6412):561–564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apweiler R, Bairoch A, Wu CH, et al. UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:D115–D119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kini RM, Evans HJ. Molecular modeling of proteins:a strategy for energy minimization by molecular mechanics in the AMBER force field. J Biomol struct Dyn. 1991;9(3):475–488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathula R, Lanka G, Muddagoni N, et al. Identification of potential Aurora Kinase-C protein inhibitors: an amalgamation of energy minimization, virtual screening, prime MMGBSA and AutoDock. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2019:1–12. DOI: 10.1080/07391102.2019.1630318
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vyas VK, Ukawala RD, Ghate M, et al. Homology modeling a fast tool for drug discovery: current perspectives. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2012;74(1):1–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiederstein M, Sippl MJ. ProSA-web: interactive web service for the recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(Web Server):W407–W410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sippl MJ. Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins. 1993;17(4):355–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollingsworth SA, Karplus PA. A fresh look at the Ramachandran plot and the occurrence of standard structures in proteins. Biomol Concepts. 2010;1(3–4):271–283.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bowie JU, Luthy R, Eisenberg D. A method to identify protein sequences that fold into a known three-dimensional structure. Science. 1991;253(5016):164–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halgren TA. Identifying and characterizing binding sites and assessing druggability. J Chem Inf Model. 2009;49(2):377–389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan H, Irwin JJ, Sali A. Virtual ligand screening against comparative protein structure models. Methods Mol Biol. 2012;819:105–126.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mehta P, Srivastava S, Sharma M, et al. Identification of chemically diverse GABAA agonists as potential anti-epileptic agents using structure-guided virtual screening, ADMET, quantum mechanics and clinical validation through off-target analysis. Int J Biol Macromol. 2018;119:1113–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James N, Shanthi V, Ramanathan K. Drug design for ALK-positive NSCLC: an integrated pharmacophore-based 3D QSAR and virtual screening strategy. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2018;185(1):289–315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhargavi M, Sivan SK, Potlapally SR. Identification of novel anti cancer agents by applying insilico methods for inhibition of TSPO protein. Comput Biol Chem. 2017;68:43–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du J, Sun H, Xi L, et al. Molecular modeling study of checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitors by multiple docking strategies and prime/MM–GBSA calculation. J Comput Chem. 2011;32(13):2800–2809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisthul AA, Retnakumari AP, A S, et al. Insilico screening for identification of fatty acid synthase inhibitors and evaluation of their antiproliferative activity using human cancer cell lines. J Recept Signal Transduct. 2018;26:1–7.
   Google Scholar