NMR is among the more sensitive
fragment-finding techniques: the starting point for clinical compound ASTX660
had low millimolar affinity at best. Now, three papers by A. Joshua Wand and
colleagues at University of Pennsylvania have taken sensitivity to a new level,
enabling the detection of fragments that bind hundreds of times less tightly. (Derek
Lowe recently wrote about one of them, and I highlighted a talk last year.)
All three papers focus on a
method called reverse micelle encapsulation, in which an aqueous solution of protein
and ligand is encapsulated in nanoscale reverse micelles measuring less than
100 Å in diameter. At this size, each micelle will contain at most just a
single protein and a few thousand water molecules. Because of the small volume,
the protein concentration – and that of any fragments – will be extraordinarily
high. The micelles have polar groups pointed inwards towards their watery
interior, and their hydrophobic tails point out towards solvent, typically
pentane. The overall water content of the sample is typically around 2%.
Various NMR techniques can be
used to study the proteins. Although the reverse micelles are larger than the
proteins themselves and thus would be expected to tumble more slowly, the low viscosity
of the pentane solvent makes up for this, providing high-quality spectra.
The primary paper, in ACS
Chem. Biol., focuses specifically on fragments. To establish that the technique
can detect weak interactions, the researchers show that they can measure the 26
mM dissociation constant of adenosine monophosphate to the enzyme dihydrofolate
reductase.
Next, they turned to the protein
interleukin-1β (IL-1β), an inflammatory target with no reported
small-molecule binders. One challenge of the method is that hydrophobic fragments
could partition into the micelles or even diffuse into the pentane, thus reducing
their concentration. To avoid this, the researchers assembled a library of 233
very polar, water-soluble fragments with cLogP values < 0.5. A 2-dimensional
NMR screen (15N-TROSY) using standard conditions (100 µM protein and
800 µM fragment) yielded no hits.
In contrast, NMR screening using
reverse micelles with the protein at an effective concentration of 5 mM and
fragments at 40 mM yielded 31 hits. Chemical shift perturbations (CSPs) were
used to determine where they were binding. Ten of the fragments didn’t show
clear binding to specific sites on the protein, but the remaining 21 did, with
all but one binding to multiple sites. Of these, 13 also showed non-specific
interactions with other regions of the protein. Altogether, the fragment
binding sites covered 67% of the protein surface, with the receptor-binding
interface particularly well-represented.
Concentration-dependent CSPs were
used to determine dissociation constants, which ranged from 50 mM to over 1 M.
An SAR-by-catalog exercise was able to improve the affinity of one fragment from
200 mM to 50 mM at one site, though it also binds three other sites with slightly
weaker affinity.
The second paper, also in ACS
Chem. Biol., uses IL-1β but focuses on the interaction of even smaller
molecules such as pyrimidine, methylammonium, acetonitrile, ethanol, N-methylacetamide,
and imidazole. Not surprisingly, the dissociation constants are even weaker, averaging
1.5 – 2.5 M.
Finally, a Methods in Enzymology
paper goes into depth on how to actually run the experiments, including details
on choosing detergents and making the micelles. At high fragment concentrations,
for example, pH needs to be carefully controlled.
Five years ago we asked “how weak
is too weak” for a fragment. In terms of practicality, I’d say that these
fragments qualify. Indeed, the ligand efficiency for the best fragment
mentioned above is just 0.15 kcal mol-1 atom-1.
But the findings do raise the
almost philosophical question of what exactly constitutes a small molecule
binding site. Astex researchers reported several years ago that most proteins
have more than one, and their more recent work with MiniFrags suggest on
average 10 sites at high enough concentrations. Similar results were also reported
earlier this month from Monash. Whether or not the fragments from such screens
turn out to be immediately useful, they could certainly advance our understanding
of molecular recognition.
No comments:
Post a Comment