Ligand deconstruction is a strategy for early-stage drug
discovery in which a known hit is dissected into component fragments and one or more of them is optimized. When successful, it can lead to new and improved
chemical series. One such example was just published in J. Med. Chem. by Andreas Lingel and colleagues at Novartis.
The researchers were interested in finding inhibitors of the
protein methyltransferase polychrome repressive complex 2 (PRC2). Although some
drugs have entered the clinic against this anticancer target, all of these are
competitive with the cofactor S-adenosylmethionine
(SAM), and resistant mutants are already being detected. Thus, the team sought
a molecule that would act through a different mechanism.
PRC2 is actually a complex of four different proteins. The
SET domain of the protein EZH2 contains the catalytic machinery, but a protein
called EED stabilizes the protein complex and is necessary for activity. EED
also recognizes trimethylated lysine residues on histone substrates,
allosterically activating methyltransferase activity.
A high-throughput biochemical screen identified compound 1,
which has low micromolar activity and is noncompetitive with the SAM cofactor and
substrate peptide. Subsequent NMR and crystallography experiments revealed that
compound 1 binds to EED, with the tertiary amine binding in the same pocket
that normally recognizes trimethyllysine. However, compound 1 is quite complex,
with three stereocenters. Thus, the researchers sought to deconstruct it to
something simpler. They began by chopping off two of the rings – an
unconventional disconnection but one supported by crystallography, which
revealed that the terminal rings were not closely associated with the protein.
The resulting fragment 2 was down more than an order of magnitude
in potency but had improved ligand efficiency. Crystallography confirmed that it
binds in a very similar fashion to compound 1. Initial SAR was conducted around
the methoxybenzyl moiety, which is buried within the enzyme. Most changes were
not tolerated, but compound 9 did show somewhat improved activity.
Next, the researchers sought to optimize the positively
charged portion of the molecule. Replacing the amine with a guanidine improved
the affinity but at a cost to cell permeability. This led to a search for less conventional replacements, ultimately yielding the 2-aminoimidazole moiety in
compound 16. Not only did this regain the activity of the initial molecule, it
also shows good permeability and cell activity. Crystallography revealed that
it too binds in a similar fashion to the original hit.
This is a nice example of fragment-assisted drug discovery
(FADD), in which concepts from FBDD were used to simplify and optimize a hit
from HTS. There is of course much more to do with this series, not the least
of which is figuring out exactly how the molecules actually inhibit PRC2.
Trimethyllysine-containing peptides that bind to EED normally activate the
enzyme, yet the small molecules that bind to the same site somehow allosterically
inhibit activity. Despite multiple crystal structures, the researchers frankly
acknowledge that they were “not able to decipher the molecular basis for this
phenomenon.” A number of conformational changes occur when EED binds to
ligands, and perhaps these propagate through the protein complex. A picture may
be worth 1000 words, but we may have to wait for the movie to learn the full
story.
No comments:
Post a Comment