University of Padova Department of Pharmacology and Anesthesiology, Largo E.Meneghetti 2, 35131 Padova, Italy.
Curr Pharm Des. 2011;17(25):2704-18. doi: 10.2174/138161211797415995.
Neurotrophic factors were originally identified based on their ability to prevent naturally occurring cell death in the developing nervous system. Many of these proteins also promote survival after injury or protect neurons in toxin-disease models in animals. In addition to neuroprotective effects, these factors exert trophic effects on neurons, stimulating increases in neuronal metabolism, cell size, and process outgrowth. These properties underlie expectations for neurorestoration, in which growth of new axons and synapses could lead to functional improvement, which is of great interest for those patients who are already significantly disabled by disease. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that subcutaneous or intravenous administration of neurotrophic factors may be effective for the treatment of peripheral nervous system diseases. However, even though these proteins are natural products, they do present specific problems when used as therapeutic agents. They cannot be given orally, present uncertain pharmacokinetic behavior, and large-scale production is labor and cost-intensive. Neurotrophic factor treatment of central nervous system diseases presents an even more complex scenario, since they are not able to cross the blood-brain barrier and must be given intracerebrally. Although there is an active search for alternative delivery strategies, for central nervous system diseases in particular the advantages of small molecule mimetics over proteins are evident. Small organic molecules can be modified to penetrate freely into the brain parenchyma and can be designed for oral administration. There are several possible approaches for replacing neurotrophic proteins with small molecule mimetics. For therapeutic use in the peripheral nervous system, neurotrophic proteins could be replaced by active peptide fragments with receptor binding properties similar to the full-length protein, but improved pharmacokinetic properties and lower production costs. In principle, it should be possible to replace the entire protein or fully active peptide fragment by a non-peptidic molecule binding to the same receptor site. It may be possible to regulate neurotrophic factor receptor activity by allosterically-acting molecules which influence the functional efficacy of the receptors. Other strategies include intracellular effector-targeting approaches, which are based on knowledge of signaling pathways involved in neuronal cell survival and demise, and which can be agonized or antagonized to promote neuroprotection. This chapter will begin with a brief overview on the biology neurotrophic proteins, followed with a description of strategies taken towards the development of small molecule mimetics for neurotrophic factors and the emerging drug candidates. The latter will encompass both receptor-directed as well as intracellular signalling approaches.
神经营养因子最初是根据其在发育中的神经系统中防止自然发生的细胞死亡的能力而被识别的。这些蛋白质中的许多还能促进损伤后的存活,或在动物的毒素疾病模型中保护神经元。除了神经保护作用外,这些因子还对神经元发挥营养作用,刺激神经元代谢、细胞大小和突起生长的增加。这些特性使人们期望能够进行神经修复,即新轴突和突触的生长可能导致功能改善,这对那些因疾病而已经严重残疾的患者非常有吸引力。临床前和临床数据表明,神经营养因子的皮下或静脉给药可能对周围神经系统疾病的治疗有效。然而,尽管这些蛋白质是天然产物,但作为治疗剂使用时确实存在一些特定问题。它们不能口服,药代动力学行为不确定,大规模生产既费力又昂贵。神经营养因子治疗中枢神经系统疾病呈现出更为复杂的情况,因为它们不能穿过血脑屏障,必须脑内给药。尽管人们正在积极寻找替代的传递策略,但对于中枢神经系统疾病来说,小分子类似物相对于蛋白质的优势是显而易见的。可以对小分子进行修饰,使其自由穿透脑实质,并可设计用于口服给药。用小分子类似物替代神经营养蛋白有几种可能的方法。对于周围神经系统的治疗用途,可以用具有与全长蛋白相似的受体结合特性的活性肽片段替代神经营养蛋白,但具有改善的药代动力学特性和更低的生产成本。原则上,应该有可能用与同一受体结合的非肽分子替代整个蛋白质或完全活性肽片段。通过影响受体功能效力的变构作用分子调节神经营养因子受体活性可能是可行的。其他策略包括基于参与神经元细胞存活和死亡的信号通路的细胞内效应器靶向方法,这些方法可以被激动或拮抗以促进神经保护。本章将首先简要概述神经营养蛋白的生物学特性,然后描述针对神经营养因子小分子类似物的开发策略以及新兴的候选药物。后者将包括受体定向和细胞内信号转导方法。