Covalent fragment-based lead
discovery is becoming increasingly popular, spurred on by the rapid discovery and
approval of sotorasib. In general, covalent inhibitors contain
cysteine-reactive electrophiles, though efforts are also targeting other amino
acid residues such as serine and lysine. In all these cases though, the fragment
contains an electrophile, while the protein contains the nucleophile. A new
paper in J. Am. Chem. Soc. by Megan Matthews and collaborators at University
of Pennsylvania and Oberlin College turns things around.
None of the twenty standard amino
acids are electrophilic, but some proteins do use electrophilic cofactors, such
as pyridoxal phosphate. Moreover, some proteins undergo post-translational
modifications which introduce a pyruvoyl (Pyvl) or glyoxylyl (Glox) group onto
the N-terminus; these contain, respectively, an electrophilic ketone or aldehyde.
As we wrote about here, aldehydes and ketones can react covalently with hydrazines,
and the new paper shows that the kinetics of this reaction vary – as expected –
with the nucleophilicity of the hydrazine.
Next, the researchers assembled a
library of 17 fragment probes containing both a nucleophile as well as an
alkyne that could be used for click chemistry. These probes were screened
against cells for 30 minutes at 37 °C, the cells were lysed, labeled proteins conjugated
to a dye, and the whole gemish run on a denaturing gel; the results showed a
wide range of reactivities for the different probes.
To assess which proteins were
reacting with which probes, the researchers turned to isoTOP-ABPP, a chemoproteomic
method we previously wrote about here in the context of electrophilic fragments.
(Chemical biologists are fond of abbreviations, and they call this new approach
with nucleophilic fragments “reverse-polarity activity-based protein profiling”,
or RP-ABPP.) Three probes, P11, P12, and P13, were found to modify 98, 60, and
16 proteins, respectively. Remarkably, despite their small size and common hydrazine
nucleophile, only a single protein was labeled by all three probes.
Two of the proteins labeled by P11
include secernin-2 and -3 (SCRN2 and SCRN3). The functions of these proteins
are unknown, though genome-wide studies have associated SCRN3 with several
diseases.
The requirement for the probes to
contain both an alkyne handle and a nucleophile increases complexity, and the
researchers recognized that they could use the probes in competition mode
against fragments lacking the alkyne. They assembled a set of 45 nucleophile-containing
fragments and treated cell lysates with these, followed by treatment with probe
P11, click chemistry to introduce a fluorescent dye, and gel electrophoresis. Hydrazine-containing
fragments that inhibited the binding of P11 were found for SCRN2, SCRN3, and
the protein AMD1. Some of these fragments showed EC50 values less
than 1 µM and were up to 25-fold selective for SCRN3 over SCRN2 despite the 54%
sequence identity shared between the two proteins.
An orthodox medicinal chemist might
sniff at the hydrazine moiety in these molecules, but it is worth noting that P12,
P13, and P17 are all derived from approved drugs (carbidopa, hydralazine, and
phenelzine; substructures colored blue).
The functional roles of Pyvl and Glox
modifications in proteins are poorly understood, and whether modulating them
will prove useful in treating diseases remains uncertain. But the best way to
answer this question will be by inventing suitable chemical probes. This paper
suggests that nucleophilic fragments may prove useful.
No comments:
Post a Comment