Pacifichem, the last significant
conference of 2021, has just ended. Traditionally held every five years, these
meetings usually bring thousands of visitors from Pacific Rim countries to
Honolulu. They are planned years in advance: symposia proposals were due in
early 2018. Pacifichem 2015 saw the first symposium dedicated to FBLD, and that
was so popular that a few of us planned one for 2020. The conference organizers
decided to postpone the 2020 meeting in the hope that we could all meet in
person. But SARS-CoV-2 had other plans, and instead of meeting in Hawaii we met
on Zoom.
Time zones were challenging.
Four-hour sessions started in the morning or evening Hawaiian time, which translated
to 02:00 in Shanghai or 23:00 in Boston, respectively. In contrast to other virtual meetings almost all the presentations were live and not recorded,
which meant that you only had one chance to see a talk.
Despite these challenges and
universal Zoom-fatigue, the event came off quite well. With more than two dozen
presentations I won’t attempt to cover everything but will instead just touch
on a few themes.
Methods
Quite a few talks focused on
methods, with NMR being especially well-represented. The symposium started with
Will Pomerantz (University of Minnesota) discussing Protein-Observed Fluorine
(PrOF) NMR, in which fluorinated amino acids are introduced into proteins.
We’ve written about this previously, including Will’s longstanding interest in
assessing shapely fragments. After reading about Mads Clausen’s fluorinated Fsp3-rich library, Will established a collaboration and has found 8 hits from
79 fragments screened against BET bromodomain proteins. He has also been able
to optimize potent leads selective for either the BD1 or BD2 domains of BRD4.
Scott Prosser (University of
Toronto) is also using NMR to study fluorine-labeled proteins, in this case
GPCRs. And Michael Overduin (University of Alberta), one of the symposium
organizers, is also studying membrane-bound proteins using NMR techniques.
On the extreme side of
spectrometers, Chojiro Kojima described the 950 MHz NMR at Osaka University.
This enables a 1H-13C HSQC experiment on protein as
dilute as 0.2 micromolar, which could be valuable for insoluble or
hard-to-purify proteins. The facility is open to international collaborators.
Chojiro also described isotopically labeling proteins with transglutaminase and
1H{19F} STD NMR, which works even when the fluorine peak
itself is broadened to invisibility.
But you don’t need a big magnet
to do good science. Brian Stockman’s group at Adelphi University is composed
entirely of undergraduates who use substrate-detected NMR to follow enzymatic
reactions to find inhibitors of neglected parasitic infections.
All techniques can give false
positives, and NMR can be very effective at weeding these out. As we described
two years ago Steven LaPlante (NMX) has been developing methods to rapidly
identify aggregators and has been assembling something of a taxonomy; more later.
But the conference was not all
NMR all the time. Rebecca Whitehouse (Monash University) described a
91-compound “MicroFrag” library consisting of fragments containing 5-8 atoms,
“somewhere in the land between solvents and fragments.” NMR and
crystallographic screens of the difficult antimicrobial target DsbA gave very
high hit rates, and both techniques successfully identified the large but
shallow substrate-binding groove. In contrast, screening actual solvents or
using the well-established FTMap computational approach did not clearly identify
this groove.
The push in crystallography is
towards increased speed, and Debanu Das described the high-throughput platform
at Acclero BioStructures, which is capable of screening 1000 fragments per
week, similar to XChem. But if even that is too slow for you, Marius Schmidt (University
of Wisconsin-Madison) described mix-and-inject experiments using the European X-ray
free-electron laser (XFEL). Much of the focus with this technique has been on high-speed
enzymology, but since 100 datasets can be collected in 10 hours it can be
used for high-throughput crystallographic screening too. An upgrade next year
will increase this to 1000 datasets in 3 hours, though the resulting petabytes of data will no doubt create headaches for IT departments.
It’s not enough to find
hits, you need to figure out what to do with them, and symposium organizer
Martin Scanlon (Monash University) discussed a computational approach (GRADe, similar
to Fragment Network) as well as the experimental (REFiL) approach we’ve
discussed previously. Across 9 projects the techniques were successful
at improving affinity, in some cases from unmeasurable levels.
Covalent Fragments
Several talks focused on covalent FBLD. Alexander Statsyuk (University of Houston) proposed five rules for
covalent fragments: 1) ease of synthesis; 2) non-promiscuous electrophiles; 3)
intrinsic reactivity should be the same within the library; 4) a given library
should use the same electrophile; and 5) the electrophile should be on the end
of the molecule with a minimal linker connecting it to the variable fragment.
Some of these make sense, but it would have been fun to debate others over Mai Tais.
Dan Nomura (UC Berkeley)
described using covalent fragments in chemoproteomic experiments, where he has
identified more than 100,000 potentially ligandable hotspots in more than
16,000 human proteins. Among other applications, this allows him to make
bifunctional molecules to bring two proteins together. A clear application is
PROTACs, where the electrophilic fragment targets an E3 ligase, but he also
described targeting the deubiquitinase OTUB1 to stabilize proteins.
Earlier this year we celebrated
the approval of the KRASG12C inhibitor sotorasib. This target had long
resisted drug discovery efforts; Ratmir Derda (University of Alberta)
evocatively mentioned “waves and waves of medicinal chemists washing off its
shore for 30 years.” Success was finally enabled using disulfide Tethering, and
David Turner (Frederick National Laboratory) is now using this approach to
interrogate nearly every surface-exposed residue by systematically mutating
them to cysteines and screening against more than 1000 disulfide-containing
fragments. He is well over half-way through the 85 mutants, and the resulting dataset
should be valuable not just for drug discovery but for understanding molecular
interactions.
Success Stories
With more than 50 drugs in the
clinic derived from fragments, there were several success stories. Masakazu
Atobe (Asahi Kasei) presented the discovery of the potent PKCζ inhibitors we
wrote about here. And Chaohong Sun (AbbVie) described inhibitors of TNFα (see
here), emphasizing the importance of robust biophysics and early committed
chemistry.
Finally, Emiliano Tamanini
(Astex) presented a nice fragment-to-lead effort to find a selective inhibitor of HDAC2. Despite some successes, histone deacetylase inhibitors tend to be
non-specific and come with side effects. Emiliano described a fragment screen
that identified a new metal chelator and used fragment merging to develop a
molecule capable of crossing the blood-brain-barrier.
These last two stories in
particular are examples of pursuing difficult targets, another
theme throughout the conference. When asked about the challenges
of targeting cancer-resistance-causing glucuronosyltransferases, Katherine Borden (University
of Montreal) responded, “if you don’t try, where will you be?”
Bright words for these
darkling days.
No comments:
Post a Comment