COVID-19 will be with us for some
time. Despite the unprecedented speed of vaccine development, it is worth
remembering that humanity has only truly eradicated two widespread viral
diseases, smallpox and rinderpest. Thus, the long march of small molecule drug
discovery against SARS-CoV-2 is justified. In a paper recently posted on
bioRxiv, Ivan Ahel and more than 50 multinational collaborators take the first
steps.
Last year we highlighted two independent
crystallographic screens against the main protease of SARS-CoV-2. Another
potential viral target is the macrodomain (Mac1) portion of non-structural
protein 3 (Nsp3), an enzyme which clips ADP-ribose from modified proteins, thus
helping the virus evade the immune response.
The researchers soaked crystals
of Mac1 against a total of 2683 fragments curated from several collections. This
yielded 214 hits, and most of the structures were solved at high resolution
(better than 1.35 Å). About 80% of the fragments bound in the active site, with
many binding in the adenosine sub-pocket. Two different crystal forms were used
for soaking, and one set of 320 fragments was soaked against both. Interestingly,
this yielded a hit rate of 21% for one crystal form and just 1.3% for the other.
Even more surprising, of the five hits found in both crystal forms, only two bound
in the same manner in both. This is a clear demonstration that it is worth
investing up-front effort to develop a suitable crystal form of a protein before
rushing into soaking experiments.
Independently, the researchers computationally
screened more than 20 million fragments (mostly from ZINC15) against the protein
using DOCK3.7, a process which took just under 5 hours on a 500-core computer
cluster. Of 60 top hits chosen for crystallographic soaking, 20 yielded structures,
all at high resolution (0.94-1.01 Å). The ultra-high resolution structures revealed
that four fragments had misassigned structures (wrong isomers), which long-time
readers may not find surprising. Importantly, most of the 20 experimentally
determined structures confirmed the docking predictions.
A strength and weakness of crystallographic
screening is that it can find extraordinarily weak binders, which may be
difficult to optimize. To see whether they could independently verify binding,
the researchers tested 54 of the docking hits in a differential scanning fluorimetry
(DSF) assay. Ten increased thermal stability, and all of these had yielded
crystal structures. Only four of 19 fragments tested yielded reliable data in isothermal
titration calorimetry (ITC) assays, but encouragingly these four also gave among the
most significant thermal shifts in the DSF assay. Finally, 57 of the docking
hits and 18 of the crystallographic hits were tested in a homogenous time-resolved
fluorescence (HTRF) based peptide-displacement assay, yielding 8 and 3 hits
respectively, the best with an IC50 of 180 µM.
This paper is a tour de force,
and may represent the largest collection of high-resolution crystallographic
fragment hits against any target. Laudably, all 234 of the crystal structures
have been released in the public domain, and the researchers have already
suggested ideas for merging and linking. As they point out, many of the
fragments bind in the adenine pocket, so selectivity will be an issue not just
against human macrodomains but also against kinases and other ATP-dependent
enzymes. Still, as the dozens of approved kinases inhibitors demonstrate, achieving
selectivity is possible.
From a technology perspective, this publication affirms
the rising power of both crystallographic and computational screening. Indeed,
the hundreds of crystal structures will themselves be useful input for training
new computational methods. And from a drug discovery perspective, each of these
fragments represents a potential starting point for SARS-CoV-2 leads.
Let’s get busy!
No comments:
Post a Comment