Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27749047›Full record

ArticleAccounts of chemical research2016

Stimulus-Responsive Prochelators for Manipulating Cellular Metals.

Qin Wang, Katherine J Franz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Accounts of chemical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Decoding the Implications of Zinc in the Development and Therapy of Leukemia.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Targeting iron to contrast cancer progression.Current opinion in chemical biology · 2023
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. TanP: A Multifunctional Anionic Peptide FromFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Qin WangDepartment of Chemistry, Duke University , Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States.
Katherine J FranzDepartment of Chemistry, Duke University , Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States.
Duke University · US

Funding

Metals, Drugs and Fungal PathogensR01GM084176 · NIGMS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI FRANZ, KATHERINE J. · 2008 to 2021
$4.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metal ions are essential for a wide range of physiological processes, but they can also be toxic if not appropriately regulated by a complex network of metal trafficking proteins. Intervention in cellular metal distribution with small-molecule or peptide chelating agents has promising therapeutic potential to harness metals to fight disease. Molecular outcomes associated with forming metal-chelate interactions in situ include altering the concentration and subcellular metal distribution, inhibiting metalloenzymes, enhancing the reactivity of a metal species to elicit a favorable biological response, or passivating the reactivity of a metal species to prevent deleterious reactivity. The systemic administration of metal chelating agents, however, raises safety concerns due to the potential risks of indiscriminate extraction of metals from critical metalloproteins and inhibition of metalloenzymes. One can estimate that chelators capable of complexing metal ions with dissociation constants in the submicromolar range are thermodynamically capable of extracting metal ions from some metalloproteins and disrupting regular function. Such dissociation constants are easily attainable for multidentate chelators interacting with first-row d-block metal cations in relevant +1, + 2, and +3 oxidation states. To overcome this challenge of indiscriminate metal chelation, we have pursued a prodrug strategy for chelating agents in which the resulting "prochelator" has negligible metal binding affinity until a specific stimulus generates a favorable metal binding site. The prochelator strategy enables conditional metal chelation to occur preferentially in locations affected by disease- or therapy-associated stimuli, thereby minimizing off-target metal chelation. Our design of responsive prochelators encompasses three general approaches of activation: the "removal" approach operates by eliminating a masking group that blocks a potential metal chelation site to reveal the complete binding site under the desired conditions; the molecular "switch" approach involves a reversible conformational change between inactive and active forms of a chelator with differential metal binding affinity under specific conditions; and the "addition" approach adds a new ligand donor arm to the prochelator to constitute a complete metal chelation site. Adopting these approaches, we have created four categories of triggerable prochelators that respond to (1) reactive oxygen species, (2) light, (3) specific enzymes, and (4) biological regulatory events. This Account highlights progress from our group on building prochelators that showcase these four categories of responsive metal chelating agents for manipulating cellular metals. The creation and chemical understanding of such stimulus-responsive prochelators enables exciting applications for understanding the cell biology of metals and for developing therapies based on metal-dependent processes in a variety of diseases.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell LineChelating AgentsHumansHydroxyquinolinesLightMetalsMicePeptidesProdrugsRatsReactive Oxygen SpeciesChelating AgentsHydroxyquinolinesMetalsPeptidesProdrugsReactive Oxygen Species

Identifiers

PMID27749047
PMCPMC5482569
OpenAlexW2532828861

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.