Cambridge Healthtech Institute
held its annual Discovery on Target meeting in Boston last week. Although it
was technically a hybrid event, about 90% of attendees were physically present,
so it really felt like a return to normalcy. Still, the online option was useful:
just as with the spring DDC meeting, at least one speaker tested positive for
COVID-19 and had to give his presentation remote. Also, with up to eight
concurrent tracks, the fact that sessions were recorded for future viewing
reduces FOMO, though likely at a cost of spontaneity (see our poll). Panel discussions
were in-person only and not recorded, allowing for more candid conversations.
Fragments made appearances throughout
the event. In a keynote talk, Steve Fesik (Vanderbilt) described work on
several targets, most notably KRAS. Long-time readers will recall how NMR screens
a decade ago identified molecules that bind to what has become known as the switch
I/II pocket. Heroic efforts in collaboration with Boehringer Ingelheim have led
to a chemical probe, but the biology around this particular site is
complicated.
Also, the switch I/II pocket
seems to be a magnet for fragments: all 25 crystallographically-characterized
fragments from an NMR screen bound here. To look for new sites, the researchers
introduced a cysteine residue to covalently block the switch I/II pocket with a
known fragment, and then ran an NMR screen to find noncovalent binders at other
sites. This identified fragments binding at the switch II pocket used by sotorasib.
Extensive optimization and addition of a covalent warhead to target the G12C
mutation led to clinical-stage BI 1823911. Steve emphasized the importance of diverse
vectors for fragment growing and linking, and not being seduced by potency
alone.
According to Christopher Davies
of Genentech, one of the reasons KRAS has been so hard to drug is that it is
very dynamic; in particular, the switch I and switch II loops can adopt
multiple conformations. To constrain the protein, the researchers generated
antibodies against the G12C mutant covalently bound to a small molecule
inhibitor. One of these CLAMPs (Conformational Locking Antibody for Molecular Probe
discovery) could stabilize the “open” form of the switch II pocket, thereby
improving the affinity of ligands for this pocket and increasing the hit rate
from an SPR-based fragment screen. (This work was published in Nat. Biotech.
earlier this year.)
KRAS is a small GTPase. Samy Meroueh (Indiana University) discussed screening electrophilic
fragments against Rgl2, which activates RAL, another small GTPase. We recently
wrote about some of this work, and he mentioned that future publications are on
the way.
Continuing the theme of difficult
targets, Brad Shotwell described various hit-finding approaches used at AbbVie
against the “cytokinome,” including IL-36γ, TNFα, and two sites on IL-17. We
covered some of their TNFα work last year, and the IL-17 work will be the
subject of a future post. In line with observations on other proteins, fragment
hit rates predicted target ligandability.
The protein-protein interaction
between NRF2 and KEAP1 is also a challenging target, and David Norton (Astex) discussed
how a fragment-inspired virtual screen of the GlaxoSmithKline library ultimately led to low nanomolar inhibitors distinct from an earlier series. He emphasized the importance of growing fragments
deliberately rather than attempting dramatic changes.
The pocket on KEAP1 is difficult
because it is highly polar, but Marianne Schimpl (AstraZeneca) faced the opposite
problem with the lipophilic allosteric site on MAT2a (work we highlighted last
year). She mentioned the role of synthetic tractability: one fragment hit with
higher LLE and Fsp3 was deprioritized in favor of a less shapely molecule
that was more readily derivatized.
I spent much of the conference in
PROTACs and molecular glues talks. Despite my arguments in 2018, FBLD is still not
prominent here, but hopefully this will change. For PROTACs especially, which
consist of two separate binding elements and a linker, minimizing the overall size
is important. Indeed, Yue Xiong (Cullgen) described finding E3 ligands with
molecular weights less than 300 Da. Despite only having micromolar affinity, they
could be used to make highly effective PROTACs.
A broad view of drug discovery was
provided by plenary keynote speaker Anabella Villalobos, who described the multiple therapeutic
modalities used at Biogen to tackle neuroscience diseases. She mentioned that there
are around 15 FDA-approved oligonucleotide-based drugs, but that this did not
happen overnight: the first was approved more than a quarter century ago. This long
“induction period” reminds me of my post last year comparing the rise of therapeutic
antibodies with FBDD.
There is plenty more of interest;
for those of you who attended, what talks would you recommend watching? And
mark your calendars for September 25-28 next year, when DoT returns to Boston!
1 comment:
Thank you for the nice coverage of fragment talks at DoT!
Fragments for protein degradation will be an interesting addition to the topics for discussion next year. See you next year at DDC in San Diego, April 11-13 to continue exploring new avenues for FBDD!
Post a Comment