Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24530489›Full record

ReviewPharmacological research2014

Pharmacological chaperoning: a primer on mechanism and pharmacology.

Nancy J Leidenheimer, Katelyn G Ryder

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacological research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Non-radioactive RbMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. KFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Pharmacological Chaperone Therapy for Pompe Disease.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nancy J LeidenheimerDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 33932, Shreveport, LA 71130-3932, United States. Electronic address: nleide@lsuhsc.edu.
Katelyn G RyderDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 33932, Shreveport, LA 71130-3932, United States. Electronic address: kgalli@lsuhsc.edu.
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport · US

Funding

Regulation of GABAA Receptor Cell Surface ExpressionR01MH062640 · NIMH · LOUISIANA STATE UNIV HSC SHREVEPORT · PI LEIDENHEIMER, NANCY J · 2002 to 2010
$2.2M
GABA chaperoning of epilepsy-associated GABAA receptor mutants.R03NS075526 · NINDS · LOUISIANA STATE UNIV HSC SHREVEPORT · PI LEIDENHEIMER, NANCY J · 2011 to 2012
$144k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH062640NINDS NIH HHS R03 NS075526
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately forty percent of diseases are attributable to protein misfolding, including those for which genetic mutation produces misfolding mutants. Intriguingly, many of these mutants are not terminally misfolded since native-like folding, and subsequent trafficking to functional locations, can be induced by target-specific, small molecules variably termed pharmacological chaperones, pharmacoperones, or pharmacochaperones (PCs). PC targets include enzymes, receptors, transporters, and ion channels, revealing the breadth of proteins that can be engaged by ligand-assisted folding. The purpose of this review is to provide an integrated primer of the diverse mechanisms and pharmacology of PCs. In this regard, we examine the structural mechanisms that underlie PC rescue of misfolding mutants, including the ability of PCs to act as surrogates for defective intramolecular interactions and, at the intermolecular level, overcome oligomerization deficiencies and dominant negative effects, as well as influence the subunit stoichiometry of heteropentameric receptors. Not surprisingly, PC-mediated structural correction of misfolding mutants normalizes interactions with molecular chaperones that participate in protein quality control and forward-trafficking. A variety of small molecules have proven to be efficacious PCs and the advantages and disadvantages of employing orthostatic antagonists, active-site inhibitors, orthostatic agonists, and allosteric modulator PCs are considered. Also examined is the possibility that several therapeutic agents may have unrecognized activity as PCs, and this chaperoning activity may mediate/contribute to therapeutic action and/or account for adverse effects. Lastly, we explore evidence that pharmacological chaperoning exploits intrinsic ligand-assisted folding mechanisms. Given the widespread applicability of PC rescue of mutants associated with protein folding disorders, both in vitro and in vivo, the therapeutic potential of PCs is vast. This is most evident in the treatment of lysosomal storage disorders, cystic fibrosis, and nephrogenic diabetes insipidus, for which proof of principle in humans has been demonstrated.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryAnimalsCystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance RegulatorHumansLysosomesProtein FoldingProtein Processing, Post-TranslationalProteinsProtein Structure, QuaternaryReceptors, LHRHSmall Molecule LibrariesCystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance RegulatorProteinsReceptors, LHRHSmall Molecule LibrariesCalnexinChaperoningEndoplasmic reticulumGPCRMisfolding mutantPharmacological chaperonePharmacoperoneProtein folding disordersRescue

Identifiers

PMID24530489
PMCPMC4521617
OpenAlexW1965674436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.