Full Schedule

Shantikumar Nair, Ph.D.
Professor & Director, Amrita Center for Nanosciences & Molecular Medicine, Amrita University, India

Spatially Distributed and Hierarchical Nanomaterials in Biotechnology 

Although nano materials are well investigated in biotechnology in their zero-, one- and two-dimensional forms, three-dimensional nanomaterials are relatively less investigated for their biological applications.  Three dimensional nano materials are much more complex with several structural and hierarchical variables controlling their mechanical, chemical and biological functionality.  In this talk examples are given of some complex three dimensional systems including,  scaffolds, aggregates, fabrics and membranes. Essentially three types of hierarchies are considered: one-dimensional hierarchy, two-dimensional hierarchy and three-dimensional hierarchy each giving rise to unique behaviors.

Satheesh Babu T. G., Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Department of Sciences, School of Engineering, Amrita University, Coimbatore, India

Nanomaterials for ‘enzyme-free’ biosensing

Enzyme based sensors have many draw backs such as poor storage stability, easily affected by the change in pH and temperature and involves complicated enzyme immobilization procedures.  To address this limitation, an alternative approach without the use of enzyme, “non-enzymatic” has been tried recently. Choosing the right catalyst for direct electrochemical oxidation / reduction of a target molecule is the key step in the fabrication of non-enzymatic sensors.

Non-enzymatic sensors for glucose, creatinine, vitamins and cholesterol are fabricated using different nanomaterials, such as nanotubes, nanowires and nanoparticles of copper oxide, titanium dioxide, tantalum oxide, platinum, gold and graphenes. These sensors selectively catalyse the targeted analyte with very high sensitivity. These nanomaterials based sensors combat the drawbacks of enzymatic sensors.

Rajasekhar Chekkara, Venkata Reddy Gorla and Sobha Rani Tenkayala

Pharmacophore modeling, atom-based 3D-QSAR and molecular docking studies on Pyrimido[5,4-e][1,2,4]triazine derivatives as PLK 1 inhibitors

Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) is a significant enzyme with diverse biological actions in cell cycle progression, specifically mitosis. Suppression of PLK1 activity by small molecule inhibitors has been shown to inhibit cancer, being BI 2536 one of the most potent active inhibitor of PLK1 mechanism. Pharmacophore modeling, atom-based 3D-QSAR and molecular docking studies were carried out for a set of 54 compounds belonging to Pyrimido[5,4-e][1,2,4]triazine derivatives as PLK1 inhibitors. A six-point pharmacophoremodel AAADDR, with three hydrogen bond acceptors (A), two hydrogen bond donors (D) and one aromatic ring (R) was developed by Phase module of Schrdinger suite Maestro 9. The generated pharmacophore model was used to derive a predictive atom-based 3D quantitative structure-activity relationship analysis (3D-QSAR) model for the training set (r2 = 0.88, SD = 0.21, F = 57.7, N = 44) and for test set (Q2 = 0.51, RMSE = 0.41, PearsonR = 0.79, N = 10). The original set of compounds were docked into the binding site of PLK1 using Glide and the active residues of the binding site were analyzed. The most active compound H18 interacted with active residues Leu 59, Cys133 (glide score = −10.07) and in comparison of BI 2536, which interacted with active residues Leu 59, Cys133 (glide score = −10.02). The 3D-QSAR model suggests that hydrophobic and electron-withdrawing groups are essential for PLK1 inhibitory activity. The docking results describes the hydrogen bond interactions with active residues of these compounds. These results which may support in the design and development of novel PLK1 inhibitors.

DOWNLOAD THE ABSTRACT 

Bodo Eickhoff, Ph.D.
Senior Vice-President, Head of Sales and Marketing for Roche Applied Science, Germany

New paths for treatment of complex diseases: target combinatorial drug therapy

Several types of diseases show a complex pathogenesis and require targeted as well as combinatorial drug treatment. A classical example, Tuberculosis, was thought for decades to be managable by triple therapy, however now requiring new therapeutic approaches due to multi drug resistant strains. HIV and AIDS can only be kept under control by combinations of specific, virus-protein targeted drugs, requiring constant monitoring of resistance patterns and modulation of drug combinations during life-long therapy. As a third example, Cancer in all its different variations, requires detailled molecular understanding to enable targeted therapy. New technologies provide more and in depths molecular insights into pathomechanisms and resulting treatment options. However, is there an alternative way to approach complex diseases by holistic models? Can restoring of apoptosis-capabilities of transformed cells be an example of such an alternative path? How do we in future adress major unresolved topics like increasing drug resistance in bacterial infections, lack of anti-viral drugs, treatment of parasite diseases like Malaria, and newly emerging infectious diseases in research and fast translation of these results into diagnosis and treatment?