1. Stabilization of triple-helical structures of collagen peptides containing a Hyp-Thr-Gly, Hyp-Val-Gly, or Hyp-Ser-Gly sequence
Kenji Okuyama, Keita Miyama, Tatsuya Morimoto, Kouichi Masakiyo, Kazunori Mizuno, Hans Peter Bächinger Biopolymers. 2011 Sep;95(9):628-40. doi: 10.1002/bip.21625. Epub 2011 Mar 25.
The single-crystal structures of three collagen-like host-guest peptides, (Pro-Pro-Gly)(4) -Hyp-Yaa-Gly-(Pro-Pro-Gly)(4) [Yaa = Thr, Val, Ser; Hyp = (4R)-4-hydroxyproline] were analyzed at atomic resolution. These peptides adopted a 7/2-helical structure similar to that of the (Pro-Pro-Gly)(9) peptide. The stability of these triple helices showed a similar tendency to that observed in Ac-(Gly-Hyp-Yaa)(10) -NH(2) (Yaa = Thr, Val, Ser) peptides. On the basis of their detailed structures, the differences in the triple-helical stabilities of the peptides containing a Hyp-Thr-Gly, Hyp-Val-Gly, or Hyp-Ser-Gly sequence were explained in terms of van der Waals interactions and dipole-dipole interaction between the Hyp residue in the X position and the Yaa residue in the Y position involved in the Hyp(X):Yaa(Y) stacking pair. This idea also explains the inability of Ac-(Gly-Hyp-alloThr)(10) -NH(2) and Ac-(Gly-Hyp-Ala)(10) -NH(2) peptides to form triple helices. In the Hyp(X):Thr(Y), Hyp(X):Val(Y), and Hyp(X):Ser(Y) stacking pairs, the proline ring of the Hyp residues adopts an up-puckering conformation, in agreement with the residual preference of Hyp, but in disagreement with the positional preference of X in the Gly-Xaa-Yaa sequence.
2. Synthesis, transport and antiviral activity of Ala-Ser and Val-Ser prodrugs of cidofovir
Larryn W Peterson, et al. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2011 Jul 1;21(13):4045-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2011.04.126. Epub 2011 May 3.
We report the synthesis and biological evaluation of Ala-(Val-)l-Ser-CO(2)R prodrugs of 1, where a dipeptide promoiety is conjugated to the P(OH)(2) group of cidofovir (1) via esterification by the Ser side chain hydroxyl group and an ethyl group (4 and 5) or alone (6 and 7). In a murine model, oral administration of 4 or 5 did not significantly increase total cidofovir species in the plasma compared to 1 or 2, but 7 resulted in a 15-fold increase in a rat model and had an in vitro EC(50) value against human cytomegalovirus comparable to 1. Neither 6 nor 7 exhibited toxicity up to 100 μM in KB or HFF cells.