Unexpected activity of a novel kunitz-type inhibitor Inhibition of cysteine proteases but not serine proteases

© 2016 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc. Kunitz-type (KT) protease inhibitors are low molecular weight proteins classically defined as serine protease inhibitors. We identified a novel secreted KT inhibitor associated with the gut and parenchymal tissues of the infective juvenile stage of Fasciola hepatica, a helminth parasite of medical and veterinary importance. Unexpectedly, recombinant KT inhibitor (rFhKT1) exhibited no inhibitory activity toward serine proteases but was a potent inhibitor of the major secreted cathepsin L cysteine proteases of F. hepatica, FhCL1 and FhCL2, and of human cathepsins L and K (Ki ô 0.4-27 nM). FhKT1 prevented the autocatalytic activation of FhCL1 and FhCL2 and formed stable complexes with the mature enzymes. Pulldown experiments from adult parasite culture medium showed that rFhKT1 interacts specifically with native secreted FhCL1, FhCL2, and FhCL5. Substitution of the unusual P1 Leu15 within the exposed reactive loop of FhKT1 for the more commonly found Arg (FhKT1Leu15 / Arg15 ) had modest adverse effects on the cysteine protease inhibition but conferred potent activity against the serine protease trypsin (Ki ô 1.5 nM). Computational docking and sequence analysis provided hypotheses for the exclusive binding of FhKT1 to cysteine proteases, the importance of the Leu15 in anchoring the inhibitor into the S2 active site pocket, and the inhibitor's selectivity toward FhCL1, FhCL2, and human cathepsins L and K. FhKT1 represents a novel evolutionary adaptation of KT protease inhibitors by F. hepatica, with its prime purpose likely in the regulation of the major parasite-secreted proteases and/or cathepsin L-like proteases of its host

Improving virtual screening of G protein-coupled receptors via ligand-directed modeling

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) play crucial roles in cell physiology and pathophysiology. There is increasing interest in using structural information for virtual screening (VS) of libraries and for structure-based drug design to identify novel agonist or antagonist leads. However, the sparse availability of experimentally determined GPCR/ligand complex structures with diverse ligands impedes the application of structure-based drug design (SBDD) programs directed to identifying new molecules with a select pharmacology. In this study, we apply ligand-directed modeling (LDM) to available GPCR X-ray structures to improve VS performance and selectivity towards molecules of specific pharmacological profile. The described method refines a GPCR binding pocket conformation using a single known ligand for that GPCR. The LDM method is a computationally efficient, iterative workflow consisting of protein sampling and ligand docking. We developed an extensive benchmark comparing LDM-refined binding pockets to GPCR X-ray crystal structures across seven different GPCRs bound to a range of ligands of different chemotypes and pharmacological profiles. LDM-refined models showed improvement in VS performance over origin X-ray crystal structures in 21 out of 24 cases. In all cases, the LDM-refined models had superior performance in enriching for the chemotype of the refinement ligand. This likely contributes to the LDM success in all cases of inhibitor-bound to agonist-bound binding pocket refinement, a key task for GPCR SBDD programs. Indeed, agonist ligands are required for a plethora of GPCRs for therapeutic intervention, however GPCR X-ray structures are mostly restricted to their inactive inhibitor-bound state

Computing Highly Correlated Positions Using Mutual Information and Graph Theory for G Protein-Coupled Receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a superfamily of seven transmembrane-spanning proteins involved in a wide array of physiological functions and are the most common targets of pharmaceuticals. This study aims to identify a cohort or clique of positions that share high mutual information. Using a multiple sequence alignment of the transmembrane (TM) domains, we calculated the mutual information between all inter-TM pairs of aligned positions and ranked the pairs by mutual information. A mutual information graph was constructed with vertices that corresponded to TM positions and edges between vertices were drawn if the mutual information exceeded a threshold of statistical significance. Positions with high degree (i.e. had significant mutual information with a large number of other positions) were found to line a well defined inter-TM ligand binding cavity for class A as well as class C GPCRs. Although the natural ligands of class C receptors bind to their extracellular N-terminal domains, the possibility of modulating their activity through ligands that bind to their helical bundle has been reported. Such positions were not found for class B GPCRs, in agreement with the observation that there are not known ligands that bind within their TM helical bundle. All identified key positions formed a clique within the MI graph of interest. For a subset of class A receptors we also considered the alignment of a portion of the second extracellular loop, and found that the two positions adjacent to the conserved Cys that bridges the loop with the TM3 qualified as key positions. Our algorithm may be useful for localizing topologically conserved regions in other protein families

Probe Confined Dynamic Mapping for G Protein-Coupled Receptor Allosteric Site Prediction

none7Targeting G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) through allosteric sites offers advantages over orthosteric sites in identifying drugs with increased selectivity and potentially reduced side effects. In this study, we developed a probe confined dynamic mapping protocol that allows the prediction of allosteric sites at both the GPCR extracellular and intracellular sides, as well as at the receptor−lipid interface. The applied harmonic wall potential enhanced sampling of probe molecules in a selected area of a GPCR while preventing membrane distortion in molecular dynamics simulations. The specific probes derived from GPCR allosteric ligand structures performed better in allosteric site mapping compared to commonly used cosolvents. The M2 muscarinic, β2 adrenergic, and P2Y1 purinergic receptors were selected for the protocol’s retrospective validation. The protocol was next validated prospectively to locate the binding site of [5-fluoro-4-(hydroxymethyl)-2-methoxyphenyl]-(4-fluoro-1H-indol-1-yl)methanone at the D2 dopamine receptor, and subsequent mutagenesis confirmed the prediction. The protocol provides fast and efficient prediction of key amino acid residues surrounding allosteric sites in membrane proteins and facilitates the structure-based design of allosteric modulators.openCiancetta, Antonella; Gill, Amandeep Kaur; Ding, Tianyi; Karlov, Dmitry S.; Chalhoub, George; McCormick, Peter J.; Tikhonova, Irina G.Ciancetta, Antonella; Gill, Amandeep Kaur; Ding, Tianyi; Karlov, Dmitry S.; Chalhoub, George; Mccormick, Peter J.; Tikhonova, Irina G

GPCR structure, function, drug discovery and crystallography: report from Academia-Industry International Conference (UK Royal Society) Chicheley Hall, 1-2 September 2014

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the targets of over half of all prescribed drugs today. The UniProt database has records for about 800 proteins classified as GPCRs, but drugs have only been developed against 50 of these. Thus, there is huge potential in terms of the number of targets for new therapies to be designed. Several breakthroughs in GPCRs biased pharmacology, structural biology, modelling and scoring have resulted in a resurgence of interest in GPCRs as drug targets. Therefore, an international conference, sponsored by the Royal Society, with world-renowned researchers from industry and academia was recently held to discuss recent progress and highlight key areas of future research needed to accelerate GPCR drug discovery. Several key points emerged. Firstly, structures for all three major classes of GPCRs have now been solved and there is increasing coverage across the GPCR phylogenetic tree. This is likely to be substantially enhanced with data from x-ray free electron sources as they move beyond proof of concept. Secondly, the concept of biased signalling or functional selectivity is likely to be prevalent in many GPCRs, and this presents exciting new opportunities for selectivity and the control of side effects, especially when combined with increasing data regarding allosteric modulation. Thirdly, there will almost certainly be some GPCRs that will remain difficult targets because they exhibit complex ligand dependencies and have many metastable states rendering them difficult to resolve by crystallographic methods. Subtle effects within the packing of the transmembrane helices are likely to mask and contribute to this aspect, which may play a role in species dependent behaviour. This is particularly important because it has ramifications for how we interpret pre-clinical data. In summary, collaborative efforts between industry and academia have delivered significant progress in terms of structure and understanding of GPCRs and will be essential for resolving problems associated with the more difficult targets in the future

GPCR structure, function, drug discovery and crystallography: report from Academia-Industry International Conference (UK Royal Society) Chicheley Hall, 1-2 September 2014.

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the targets of over half of all prescribed drugs today. The UniProt database has records for about 800 proteins classified as GPCRs, but drugs have only been developed against 50 of these. Thus, there is huge potential in terms of the number of targets for new therapies to be designed. Several breakthroughs in GPCRs biased pharmacology, structural biology, modelling and scoring have resulted in a resurgence of interest in GPCRs as drug targets. Therefore, an international conference, sponsored by the Royal Society, with world-renowned researchers from industry and academia was recently held to discuss recent progress and highlight key areas of future research needed to accelerate GPCR drug discovery. Several key points emerged. Firstly, structures for all three major classes of GPCRs have now been solved and there is increasing coverage across the GPCR phylogenetic tree. This is likely to be substantially enhanced with data from x-ray free electron sources as they move beyond proof of concept. Secondly, the concept of biased signalling or functional selectivity is likely to be prevalent in many GPCRs, and this presents exciting new opportunities for selectivity and the control of side effects, especially when combined with increasing data regarding allosteric modulation. Thirdly, there will almost certainly be some GPCRs that will remain difficult targets because they exhibit complex ligand dependencies and have many metastable states rendering them difficult to resolve by crystallographic methods. Subtle effects within the packing of the transmembrane helices are likely to mask and contribute to this aspect, which may play a role in species dependent behaviour. This is particularly important because it has ramifications for how we interpret pre-clinical data. In summary, collaborative efforts between industry and academia have delivered significant progress in terms of structure and understanding of GPCRs and will be essential for resolving problems associated with the more difficult targets in the future

Ligand and structure-based methodologies for the prediction of the activity of G protein-coupled receptor ligands

Accurate in silico models for the quantitative prediction of the activity of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) ligands would greatly facilitate the process of drug discovery and development. Several methodologies have been developed based on the properties of the ligands, the direct study of the receptor-ligand interactions, or a combination of both approaches. Ligand-based three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationships (3D-QSAR) techniques, not requiring knowledge of the receptor structure, have been historically the first to be applied to the prediction of the activity of GPCR ligands. They are generally endowed with robustness and good ranking ability; however they are highly dependent on training sets. Structure-based techniques generally do not provide the level of accuracy necessary to yield meaningful rankings when applied to GPCR homology models. However, they are essentially independent from training sets and have a sufficient level of accuracy to allow an effective discrimination between binders and nonbinders, thus qualifying as viable lead discovery tools. The combination of ligand and structure-based methodologies in the form of receptor-based 3D-QSAR and ligand and structure-based consensus models results in robust and accurate quantitative predictions. The contribution of the structure-based component to these combined approaches is expected to become more substantial and effective in the future, as more sophisticated scoring functions are developed and more detailed structural information on GPCRs is gathered