The human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) capsid protein (CA) plays a critical role in the viral life cycle. The C-terminal domain (CTD) of CA binds to human lysyl-tRNA synthetase (hLysRS), and this interaction facilitates packaging of host cell tRNA(Lys,3), which serves as the primer for reverse transcription. Here, we report the library synthesis, high-throughput screening, and identification of cyclic peptides (CPs) that bind HIV-1 CA. Scrambling or single-residue changes of the selected peptide sequences eliminated binding, suggesting a sequence-specific mode of interaction. Two peptides (CP2 and CP4) subjected to detailed analysis also inhibited hLysRS/CA interaction in vitro. Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and mutagenesis studies revealed that both CPs bind to a site proximal to helix 4 of the CA-CTD, which is the known site of hLysRS interaction. These results extend the current repertoire of CA-binding molecules to a new class of peptides targeting a novel site with potential for development into novel antiviral agents.
The n class="Species">humann>n class="Disease">immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) capsid protein (CA) plays a critical role in the viral life cycle. The C-terminal domain (CTD) of CA binds to humanlysyl-tRNA synthetase (hLysRS), and this interaction facilitates packaging of host cell tRNA(Lys,3), which serves as the primer for reverse transcription. Here, we report the library synthesis, high-throughput screening, and identification of cyclic peptides (CPs) that bind HIV-1 CA. Scrambling or single-residue changes of the selected peptide sequences eliminated binding, suggesting a sequence-specific mode of interaction. Two peptides (CP2 and CP4) subjected to detailed analysis also inhibited hLysRS/CA interaction in vitro. Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and mutagenesis studies revealed that both CPs bind to a site proximal to helix 4 of the CA-CTD, which is the known site of hLysRS interaction. These results extend the current repertoire of CA-binding molecules to a new class of peptides targeting a novel site with potential for development into novel antiviral agents.
n class="Species">Human immunodeficiency virus
type 1 (n>n class="Species">HIV-1) infection involves several key steps throughout the
viral life cycle, which are mediated by protein–protein and
protein–nucleic acid interactions. Highly active antiretroviral
therapy against HIV-1consists of administering a cocktail of inhibitors
that target key players in viral pathogenesis, including the virally
encoded enzymes reverse transcriptase, integrase, and protease, along
with inhibitors of viral entry.[1−3] Although successful results have
been achieved by combination therapy, complete eradication of HIV-1
has been a challenge, primarily due to the emergence of drug resistant
strains.[4] Identification of alternative
targets for restriction by novel and potent antiviral compounds is
therefore needed. The critical role played by HIV-1 capsid protein
(CA) throughout the viral life cycle makes it an attractive target
for antiviral intervention.[5−7]
n class="Species">HIV-1 CA is one of the major
domains of the large viral precursor
proteins Gag and GagPol, which interact with each other, with the
viral RNA genome, and with various host cell factors during viral
assembly.[8] The CA domain mediates Gag-Gag
interactions that are critical for immature particle formation.[9] CA is a two-domain dimeric protein, composed
of largely helical N-terminal and C-terminal domains (NTD and CTD,
respectively) separated by a flexible linker.[10] The CTDcontains the dimerization motif and plays an important role
in Gag multimerization.[11,12] Using crystallographic
studies, the dimer interface of CA has been mapped to helix 2 of the
CTD with residues Trp184 and Met185 providing the major stabilizing
contacts.[13]
Upon proteolytic processing,
the CA protein is released from the
n class="Gene">Gag precursor and rearranges to form a n>n class="Chemical">conical core surrounding the
viral RNA genome and associated proteins.[10,14] Uncoating of the viral core, which occurs following entry into target
cell and concomitant with early steps of reverse transcription,[15] is another key step in the viral life cycle.
Mutations that alter the core stability lead to dramatic reductions
in viral infectivity.[12,16] The stability of the CA core
is dependent on inter- as well as intramolecular interactions between
the NTD and the CTD of CA.[17] The NTD (residues
1–146) forms hexamers and the CTD (residues 146–231),
which is dimeric in solution, links adjacent hexamers.[11] Thus, potential therapeutic strategies include disrupting
CA–CA interactions involved in immature particle formation,
mature core assembly, or core disassembly.
n class="Species">HIV-1 CA is also
known to interact with a variety of host cell
factors[6] including cyclophilin A, a host
restriction factor TRIM5α, and n>n class="Species">human lysyl-tRNAsynthetase (hLysRS).
In the immature virus particle, host cell tRNALys,3 is
annealed to the genomic RNA via complementary base-pairing
interactions and serves as a primer for reverse transcription.[18,19] Gag specifically interacts with hLysRS via its
CA domain and packages it into the newly budding virions.[20] This interaction is important for selective
packaging of primer tRNALys into the virion.[8] A recent report suggests that interactions also occur between
LysRS and the Pol domain of the GagPol precursor.[21] The packaging of hLysRS into HIV-1 is specific; out of
nine aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases and three additional components of
the mammalian multisynthetase complex tested, only LysRS has been
shown to be packaged.[22] Previously, we
have mapped the interaction interface to helix 4 (h4) of the CA-CTD
and motif 1 of hLysRS, which are also the homodimerization domains
of the individual proteins.[23] Furthermore,
monomeric LysRS and monomeric Gag have also been shown to interact in vitro with a similar affinity as the wild-type (WT) proteins.[24] More recently, Schimmel and co-workers have
produced an ab initio energy minimized “bridging
monomer” model of the HIV-1CA-CTD/hLysRS/tRNALys ternary complex[25] (Figure 1). Furthermore, circular dichroism experiments along with in silico binding studies support an interaction between
h4 of the CA-CTD and helix 7 of the motif 1 domain of hLysRS.[26] Taken together, these data suggest that targeting
the h4 region of the CA-CTD, which forms the interface with hLysRS,
is another potential drug target.
Figure 1
Model of the tRNALys (orange),
hLysRS (gray), and HIV-1
CA-CTD (multicolor) complex. This figure is based on the “bridging
monomer” model published by Guo et al.(25) The motif 1 dimerization domain of hLysRS is
yellow, and the helices of CA-CTD are red (h1), pink (h2), cyan (h3),
and blue (h4). Also indicated is the anticodon binding domain (AC-BD)
and the catalytic domain (CD) of LysRS. The N-terminal 65 amino acids
of hLysRS are not shown.
Model of the tRNALys (orange),
n class="Gene">hLysRS (gray), and n>n class="Species">HIV-1
CA-CTD (multicolor) complex. This figure is based on the “bridging
monomer” model published by Guo et al.(25) The motif 1 dimerization domain of hLysRS is
yellow, and the helices of CA-CTD are red (h1), pink (h2), cyan (h3),
and blue (h4). Also indicated is the anticodon binding domain (AC-BD)
and the catalytic domain (CD) of LysRS. The N-terminal 65 amino acids
of hLysRS are not shown.
Previous attempts to develop inhibitors against
CA led to the identification
of a variety of small molecule inhibitors, namely, n class="Gene">CAP-1,[27] n>n class="Gene">CAP-2,[27] PA-457,[28] and PF-3450074.[29] A 12-mer peptide known as the CA assembly inhibitor (CAI) was identified
by phage-display screening and reported to disrupt the assembly of
both immature and mature virus-like particles in vitro by binding to the CA-CTD.[30] However,
it lacked cell permeability and failed to inhibit HIV-1 in cell culture.
An improved variant of the CAI peptide was generated by “hydrocarbon
stapling”, and the resulting peptide, NYAD-1,[31] disrupted formation of both immature and mature virus-like
particles in cell-free and cell-based in vitro assembly
assays. Furthermore, rationally designed interfacial peptide inhibitors
of CA have also been shown to possess antiviral activity.[32] This study further validates CA as an anti-HIV
drug target.
In this work, we employed a n class="Chemical">combinatorial library
approach to identify
n>n class="Chemical">cyclic peptides (CPs) that bind to HIV-1 CA. CPs are a distinct class
of biologically active compounds[33] that
are widely produced in nature by plants, bacteria, fungi, marine invertebrates,
and primate leukocytes. CPs such as cyclosporin A[34] (an immunosuppressant), caspofungin[35] (an antifungal agent), and daptomycin[36] (an antibiotic) are clinically used as therapeutic agents.
In comparison to their linear counterparts, CPs are more stable against
proteolytic degradation due to their higher conformationally rigidity
and lack of free N- or C-termini. The entropic advantages associated
with increased rigidity also make CPs potentially tighter-binding
and more specific ligands of macromolecular targets.[33] Recently, conformationally constrained CP mimics of the
HIV-1 trans-activator of transcription (Tat) have been used to block
Tat interactions with the trans-activation response element RNA at
nanomolar concentrations in vitro.[37]
We report here the synthesis, high-throughput screening,
and identification
of novel n class="Gene">CP ligands against n>n class="Species">HIV-1 CA. The most promising peptides
(CP2 and CP4) bound with ∼500 nM affinity and inhibited the
LysRS/CA interaction with IC50 values of ∼1 μM in vitro. Furthermore, NMR studies along with mutational
analysis suggest that both peptides bind to the site on the CA-CTD
that has been previously identified as the site of LysRS interaction.[23,25] Taken together, these results suggest that CPs represent a new class
of CA-CTD binders that could be further exploited for antiviral drug
development.
Results and Discussion
Previous studies have characterized
the interaction between n class="Species">HIV-1
n>n class="Chemical">CA-CTD and hLysRS, which is critical for tRNA primer packaging into
HIV-1. This complex represents a novel target for antiviral intervention,
and we hypothesize that CPs can be identified to block this viral
protein–host protein interaction. In this work, we use a chemical
approach, namely, combinatorial library synthesis followed by high-throughput
screening, to identify CPs that bind to HIV-1 CA. Detailed biochemical
analyses are then performed to characterize their binding affinity,
sequence specificity, target selectivity, and ability to inhibit LysRS
interaction. Biophysical and genetic studies to identify the binding
pocket are also carried out.
Design and Synthesis of CP Library
A one-bead-two-n class="Chemical">compound
(OBTC) n>n class="Gene">CP library was synthesized (Supporting
Figure s1a) containing five random residues, cyclo[aX1X2X3X4X5a(0–3)E]BBNBRM-resin (where “a” is d-alanine, B
is β-alanine, and X represents the random residues) (Supporting Methods, Supporting Figure s1b). Each
bead was spatially segregated into two layers, with a unique CP displayed
on the surface layer and the corresponding linear peptidecontained
in the bead interior as a coding tag. The library was constructed
to have a 10-fold reduced ligand density on the bead surface relative
to the loading of linear peptides inside the bead. We and others have
previously shown that a lower density on the bead surface increases
the screening stringency, allowing the identification of the most
active ligands by greatly reducing the amount of nonspecific binding
caused by avidity effects,[38].[39] The density of linear peptide inside the bead
was kept high to provide enough material for sequencing. Each of the
random positions contained 26 amino acids including 12 proteinogenic
α-l-amino acids [Arg, Asp, Gln, Gly, His, Ile, Lys,
Pro, Ser, Thr, Trp, and Tyr], four non-proteinogenic α-l-amino acids [Fpa, Nle, Orn, Phg], six α-d-amino acids
[d-Ala, d-Asn, d-Glu, d-Leu, d-Phe, and d-Val], and four Nα-methylated α-l-amino acids [Mal, Mle,
Mpa, Sar] (see Supporting Table s1). d-Alanine was added to the N-terminus of all peptides to give
more uniform cyclization efficiency, while different numbers of d-alanine were added to the C-terminal side of the random sequence
to give different ring sizes (hepta-, octa-, nona-, and decapeptides).
Library Screening against CA and WM CA-CTD
A portion
of the n class="Gene">CP library (100 mg, ∼3 × 105 beads)
was screened against n>n class="Chemical">Texas Red-labeled CA and a non-dimerizing CA-CTD
variant (W184A-M185ACA-CTD)[40] in two stages.
Initial screening against CA resulted in 39 fluorescent beads. Fifty
non-fluorescent beads were randomly selected from the first screen
as controls. Both “hits” and control beads were washed
with 8 M guanidine·HCl to remove the bound proteins and subjected
to a second round of screening against WM CA-CTD. Of the 39 initial
hits, 21 beads again developed a strong fluorescence signal (Supporting Figure s2), while only 4 beads in
the control group displayed weak fluorescence. The 21 hits were sequenced
by partial Edman degradation/mass spectrometry (PED/MS) (Supporting Table s1). Inspection of the selected
peptides revealed a preference for hydrophobic residues in the randomized
positions and larger ring sizes, although CPs of varying ring sizes
(7–10 amino acids) were selected.
CP2 and CP4 Bind CA with High Affinity
To quantify
the binding affinity between the pan class="Chemical">CPs and CA, the six most potent hits
based on fluorescence intensity (CP1–CP6) were individually
resynthesized with the addition of a lysine residue to the side chain
of the invariant glutamate (Table 1). This
lysine side chain provides a handle for labeling with fluorescein
or biotin. The binding affinity of CP1–CP6 to CA and WM CA-CTD
was determined by fluorescence anisotropy (FA). With the exception
of CP1 and CP3, most of the selected peptides bound to both target
proteins. Among them, CP2 and CP4 had the highest affinity, with Kd values of 0.4–1.1 μM (Table 1 and Figure 2a). The affinity
of CP1 for the proteins or that of CP3 for WM CA-CTDcould not be
accurately determined due to low FA signals, suggesting that the interactions
are rather weak. We also tested the binding of CP1, CP2, and CP4 to
HIV-1GagΔp6, a truncated form of Gag lacking the C-terminal
p6 domain. CP2 and CP4 bound with apparent Kd values of ∼0.8–0.9 μM (Figure 2b), whereas CP1 failed to show significant binding.
CP2 and CP4 also bound to WT CA-CTD with Kd values of 0.37–0.52 μM (Supporting
Figure s4a). Furthermore, surface plasmon resonance (SPR) experiments
confirmed the binding of CA and WM CA-CTD to biotinylated CP2 and
CP4peptides immobilized onto a streptavidin-coated surface and gave Kd values (0.06–1.3 μM) similar
to those derived from the FA assay (Supporting
methods, Supporting Table s3).
Table 1
Sequences of Selected CPs and Apparent
Dissociation Constants (Kd) for Binding
to CA and WM CA-CTD Based on FA Measurementsa
Measurements were performed in the
presence of binding buffer as described in the Methods. Reported values are averages of three trials with the standard
deviation indicated. ND, could not be determined accurately due to
a low FA. NB, no binding observed. Highlighted in bold are the variable
positions of each CP.
Figure 2
FA assay of CP binding to WM CA-CTD and
GagΔp6. (a) Plots
of FA as a function of WM CA-CTD concentration for fluorescein-labeled
CP2 and CP4 (100 nM each). (b) The binding of GagΔp6 to fluorescein-labeled
CP1, CP2, and CP4 (100 nM each). (c) Competition between fluorescein-labeled
CP2 (100 nM) and unlabeled CP2 and its Asn-scan variants (0–10
μM) for binding to WM CA-CTD (2 μM) (Supporting Table s4). (d) Competition between fluorescein-labeled
CP4 (100 nM) and unlabeled CP4 and its Asn-scan variants (0–10
μM) for binding to WM CA-CTD (2 μM).
FA assay of n class="Gene">CP binding to WM n>n class="Chemical">CA-CTD and
GagΔp6. (a) Plots
of FA as a function of WM CA-CTDconcentration for fluorescein-labeled
CP2 and CP4 (100 nM each). (b) The binding of GagΔp6 to fluorescein-labeled
CP1, CP2, and CP4 (100 nM each). (c) Competition between fluorescein-labeled
CP2 (100 nM) and unlabeled CP2 and its Asn-scan variants (0–10
μM) for binding to WM CA-CTD (2 μM) (Supporting Table s4). (d) Competition between fluorescein-labeled
CP4 (100 nM) and unlabeled CP4 and its Asn-scan variants (0–10
μM) for binding to WM CA-CTD (2 μM).
Measurements were performed in the
presence of binding buffer as described in the Methods. Reported values are averages of three trials with the standard
deviation indicated. ND, pan class="Chemical">could not be determined accurately due to
a low FA. NB, no binding observed. Highlighted in bold are the variable
positions of each n>n class="Gene">CP.
To determine the binding stoichiometry, we performed
an FA assay
by using saturating n class="Chemical">concentrations of WM n>n class="Chemical">CA-CTD and CP2 or CP4 (structures
shown in Figure 3a and b). Increasing amounts
of WM CA-CTD (0–1.2 mM) were titrated against a fixed concentration
of CP2/CP4 (0.6 mM), and binding was assayed by monitoring changes
in anisotropy of trace amounts of fluorescein-labeled CP2/CP4. In
both cases, the amount of bound CP2/CP4peptide increased linearly
with the protein concentration until the protein/peptide ratio reached
1:1, when the amount of WM CA-CTD·CPcomplex plateaued, supporting
a 1:1 binding stoichiometry (Figure 3c).
Figure 3
Structures
of (a) CP2 and (b) CP4. (c) FA assay to determine the
binding stoichiometry of CP2 and CP4 to WM CA-CTD. Increasing WM CA-CTD
was added to a mixture of 10 μM fluorescein-labeled CP2 or CP4
and 590 μM unlabeled CP2 or CP4 in binding buffer (see Methods). Binding stoichiometry was obtained by
determining the intersection of the linear fits to the first 5 data
points and the last 4 data points.
Structures
of (a) n class="Gene">CP2 and (b) n>n class="Chemical">CP4. (c) FA assay to determine the
binding stoichiometry of CP2 and CP4 to WM CA-CTD. Increasing WM CA-CTD
was added to a mixture of 10 μM fluorescein-labeled CP2 or CP4
and 590 μM unlabeled CP2 or CP4 in binding buffer (see Methods). Binding stoichiometry was obtained by
determining the intersection of the linear fits to the first 5 data
points and the last 4 data points.
To determine whether the n class="Chemical">CPs are specific for n>n class="Species">HIV-1
CA, we tested
their binding to HIV-1 nucleocapsid (NC), matrix (MA), hLysRS, humanprolyl-tRNAsynthetase (hProRS), and Escherichia coli cysteinyl-tRNA synthetase (EcCysRS) by FA. As shown in Supporting Table s2, the CPs bound many of the
proteins with micromolar (μM) affinities. The hydrophobic nature
of the CPs is likely responsible for the observed non-selective binding.
To check for their sequence specificity in binding to CA or WM CA-CTD,
two control peptides (SCP2 and SCP4) were synthesized containing scrambled
sequences of CP2 and CP4 (Table 1). Both scrambled
peptides failed to bind CA or WM CA-CTD. We next performed an “asparagine
scan”, wherein the hydrophobic residues at variable positions
1, 2, 4, and 5 were individually replaced with Asn, to identify the
residues critical for CA binding and obtain a less hydrophobic variant
(which may be more selective for CA) (Supporting
Table s4). Strikingly, substitution of Asn for any of the hydrophobic
residues greatly reduced the binding affinity. In a FA competition
assay, CP2 and CP4 inhibited the binding of fluorescein-labeled CP2
or CP4 to WM CA-CTD with IC50 values of 1.2 and 0.63 μM,
respectively (Figure 2c and d). In contrast,
none of the Asn-scan variants (at 10 μM) showed significant
competition. Taken together, these data suggest that CP2 and CP4 (Figure 3a and b) are high-affinity ligands of WM CA-CTD/CA
and bind in a sequence-dependent manner. Based on the sequence of
the selected CPs and the results of the Asn scan, both CP2 and CP4
appear to bind CA primarily via hydrophobic interactions,
which is consistent with the hydrophobic nature of the protein surface.[11,17,41]
Inhibition of CA-LysRS Interaction by CP2 and CP4
We
have previously shown that n class="Gene">hLysRS specifically interacts with n>n class="Species">HIV-1
CA,[24] GagΔp6,[24] and CA-CTD[23]in vitro. We assessed the ability of the CPs to inhibit this interaction
by carrying out an FA competition assay (Supporting
methods), in which the binding of Texas Red-labeled CA or WM
CA-CTD to hLysRS was examined in the absence and presence of increasing
amounts of CP (Figure 4a). CP2 and CP4 readily
inhibited the binding of hLysRS to both CA (Figure 4b) and WM CA-CTD (Figure 4c) with IC50 values of 0.5–1.0 μM, whereas no inhibition
or much weaker inhibition was observed for CP1, CP3, CP5, and CP6
(Table 2). Thus, the latter peptides, which
have lower affinity for CA (Table 1), may also
bind to CA at a site distinct from the hLysRS binding site.[23,25] CP2 and CP4 also inhibited the interaction of hLysRS with GagΔp6,
with IC50 of ∼1–1.5 μM, whereas CP1
showed only slight inhibition (Figure 4d).
Figure 4
Inhibition
of CA-hLysRS interaction by CPs. (a) Binding of Texas
Red-labeled hLysRS to CA (100 nM) and WM CA-CTD (inset). (b) Texas
Red-labeled CA (100 nM) was preincubated with varying concentrations
of CPs (0–8 μM), followed by addition of unlabeled hLysRS
(3 μM). (c) Texas Red-labeled WM CA-CTD (100 nM) was preincubated
with varying concentrations of CPs (0–8 μM), followed
by addition of unlabeled hLysRS (3 μM). (d) GagΔp6 (3
μM) was preincubated with varying amounts of CP1, CP2, and CP4
(0–8 μM) followed by addition of 100 nM FITC-labeled
hLysRS.
Table 2
Inhibition of LysRS/CA, LysRS/WM CA-CTD,
and LysRS/GagΔp6 Interaction by CP1-CP6
IC50 (μM)a
peptide
LysRS/CA
LysRS/WM CA-CTD
LysRS/GagΔp6
CP1
5.3 ± 0.8
NI
NI
CP2
0.61 ± 0.04
0.97 ± 0.1
1.5 ± 0.5
CP3
23 ± 3
16 ± 3
CP4
0.91 ± 0.1
0.53 ± 0.1
1.1 ± 0.3
CP5
NI
63 ± 40
CP6
NI
15 ± 3
IC50 values were determined
from FA inhibition measurements as described in Methods. Reported values are averages of three trials with the standard
deviation indicated. A dash indicates the experiment was not performed.
NI, no significant inhibition observed.
Inhibition
of CA-n class="Gene">hLysRS interaction by n>n class="Chemical">CPs. (a) Binding of Texas
Red-labeled hLysRS to CA (100 nM) and WM CA-CTD (inset). (b) Texas
Red-labeled CA (100 nM) was preincubated with varying concentrations
of CPs (0–8 μM), followed by addition of unlabeled hLysRS
(3 μM). (c) Texas Red-labeled WM CA-CTD (100 nM) was preincubated
with varying concentrations of CPs (0–8 μM), followed
by addition of unlabeled hLysRS (3 μM). (d) GagΔp6 (3
μM) was preincubated with varying amounts of CP1, CP2, and CP4
(0–8 μM) followed by addition of 100 nM FITC-labeled
hLysRS.
IC50 values were determined
from FA inhibition measurements as described in Methods. Reported values are averages of three trials with the standard
deviation indicated. A dash indicates the experiment was not performed.
NI, no significant inhibition observed.
Identification of CP Binding Surface by NMR and Mutational Analysis
To map the n class="Gene">CP binding site on WM n>n class="Chemical">CA-CTD, three peptides were chosen
for NMR analysis: CP2, CP4, and a control hydrophilic CP (CPX).[42] The peptides were labeled at the terminal lysine
moiety using the amine-reactive spin-label 1-oxyl-2,2,5,5-tetramethylpyrroline-3-carboxylate N-hydroxysuccinimide ester prior to purification. We first
tested the binding of CPX to either CA or WM CA-CTD by FA. As shown
in Supporting Figure s4b, CPX failed to
produce a significant anisotropy change, thereby suggesting very weak
or no binding to the target proteins. This result further confirmed
the sequence specificity of CP2 and CP4 in binding to CA-CTD in vitro.
Paramagnetic relaxation enhancement (PRE)
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrospan class="Chemical">copy was performed by using
pan class="Gene">spin-labeled CP2, CP4, CPX, and uniformly 15N-labeled WM
CA-CTD (Supporting methods). Titration
of spin-labeled CPX in the presence of 250 μM 15N-labeled
WM CA-CTD at a 1:5 protein:peptide ratio failed to produce any significant
change in signal intensity, confirming the FA results showing little
interaction with this hydrophilic peptide (Supporting
Table s6). In contrast, titration of spin-labeled CP4 at a
1:5 protein:peptide ratio resulted in a significant decrease in signal
intensity (>40% reduction) for 14 residues (Table 3). Unfortunately, addition of spin-labeled CP2 to 250 μM
WM CA-CTD at a 1:2 protein:peptide ratio caused protein precipitation.
An experiment at lower protein concentration (100 μM) was conducted
with both CP2 and CP4. Titration of CPs at a 1:5 protein:peptide ratio
resulted in a significant decrease in signal intensity for 3 residues:
I150, L211, and E212 (Supporting Table s5). On the basis of the data shown in Supporting
Table s5 and Table 3, we speculate that
CP2 and CP4 bind to similar sites on CA-CTD. As an additional control,
we also checked whether the spin-probe alone caused any intensity
changes upon incubation with 250 μM 15N-labeled WM
CA-CTD at a 1:5 protein:spin-probe ratio. The amine reactive spin-probe
was prepared by using excess glycine as a quenching agent. As shown
in Supporting Table s7, the decrease in
signal intensity caused by the spin-probe alone was small, suggesting
that the intensity decreases observed are due to CP binding.
Table 3
Summary of NMR Data Obtained upon
Titration of 250 μM WM CA-CTD with Spin-Labeled CP4a
T148
I150
L151
D152
K158
R173
V181
A185
T186
Q192
G208
L211
E212
T216
1:1
53%
54%
43%
87%
68%
93%
54%
66%
82%
63%
87%
40%
69%
60%
1:2
51%
48%
30%
75%
70%
76%
34%
44%
74%
59%
75%
21%
50%
41%
1:5
21%
32%
11%
50%
41%
45%
14%
16%
52%
45%
42%
5%
21%
10%
Fourteen WM CA-CTD residues showing
significant (> 40%) decreases in peak intensity upon titration
with
spin-labeled CP4 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 protein:peptide ratio) are shown.
Numbers indicate peak intensity relative to that of the free protein.
Fourteen WM n class="Chemical">CA-CTD residues showing
significant (> 40%) decreases in peak intensity upon titration
with
n>n class="Gene">spin-labeled CP4 (1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 protein:peptide ratio) are shown.
Numbers indicate peak intensity relative to that of the free protein.
As summarized in Table 3, residues
I150,
D152, K158, R173, T186, Q192, and G208 showed signal intensity decreases
between 40% and 70%, whereas residues T148, L151, V181, A185, L211,
n class="CellLine">E212, and T216 showed signal intensity decreases of >70% (Figure 5a). These results suggest two potential n>n class="Gene">CP binding
sites on the protein surface. The first site (Figure 5b and c) lies between the 310 helix and h2 and
constitutes eight residues: T148, I150, L151, D152, V181, A185, T186,
and Q192. The second site is primarily located on h4 (Figure 5d and e) and comprises residues A208, L211, E212,
and T216.
Figure 5
(a) Sequence of WM CA-CTD with 4 helices indicated: h1 (residues
161–175), h2 (residues 179–192), h3 (residues 196–205),
and h4 (residues 211–220). Asterisks indicate the residues
that display decreased signal intensity upon titration with spin-labeled
CP4. One asterisk indicates a 40–70% reduction in signal intensity,
while two asterisks indicate a >70% reduction in signal intensity.
(b–e) Views of HIV-1 WM CA-CTD (PDB ID: 2K1C) generated by PyMoL[56] showing the two potential binding surfaces of
CP4 based on NMR studies using spin-labeled peptide. (b) The eight
residues constituting binding site 1 are explicitly shown: T148, I150,
L151, D152, V181, A185, T186, and Q192. (c) Surface representation
of binding site 1 shown in the same orientation used in panel b. (d)
The four residues constituting binding site 2 are explicitly shown:
A208, L211, E212, and T216. (e) Surface representation of binding
site 2 showed in the same orientation used in panel d. Residues in
blue and red displayed 40–70% and >70% reduced signal intensity
upon CP4 binding, respectively. (f) Bar graph representation of FA
binding analysis using WM CA-CTD point mutants. Fluorescein-labeled
CP2 and CP4 (100 nM) were bound to WT WM CA-CTD and variants of binding
site 1 (L151A, D152A, V181A, and Q192A) and binding site 2 (L211A,
E212A, and T216A). The apparent Kd values
are the average of three trials with the standard deviation indicated.
(g) Model of CP4 docked onto HIV-1 CA-CTD- X-ray crystal structure
(PDB ID: 2BUO). Capsid protein residues are shown as a molecular surface representation
except for the h4 residues.
(a) Sequence of WM n class="Chemical">CA-CTD with 4 helices indicated: h1 (residues
161–175), n>n class="Chemical">h2 (residues 179–192), h3 (residues 196–205),
and h4 (residues 211–220). Asterisks indicate the residues
that display decreased signal intensity upon titration with spin-labeled
CP4. One asterisk indicates a 40–70% reduction in signal intensity,
while two asterisks indicate a >70% reduction in signal intensity.
(b–e) Views of HIV-1 WM CA-CTD (PDB ID: 2K1C) generated by PyMoL[56] showing the two potential binding surfaces of
CP4 based on NMR studies using spin-labeled peptide. (b) The eight
residues constituting binding site 1 are explicitly shown: T148, I150,
L151, D152, V181, A185, T186, and Q192. (c) Surface representation
of binding site 1 shown in the same orientation used in panel b. (d)
The four residues constituting binding site 2 are explicitly shown:
A208, L211, E212, and T216. (e) Surface representation of binding
site 2 showed in the same orientation used in panel d. Residues in
blue and red displayed 40–70% and >70% reduced signal intensity
upon CP4 binding, respectively. (f) Bar graph representation of FA
binding analysis using WM CA-CTD point mutants. Fluorescein-labeled
CP2 and CP4 (100 nM) were bound to WT WM CA-CTD and variants of binding
site 1 (L151A, D152A, V181A, and Q192A) and binding site 2 (L211A,
E212A, and T216A). The apparent Kd values
are the average of three trials with the standard deviation indicated.
(g) Model of CP4 docked onto HIV-1CA-CTD- X-ray crystal structure
(PDB ID: 2BUO). Capsid protein residues are shown as a molecular surface representation
except for the h4 residues.
To map the residues involved
in binding, we n class="Chemical">constructed seven point mutants of residues at both
sites 1 and 2. Five residues showing the largest decrease in intensity
(L151, V181, L211, E212, and T216) and two additional residues (D152
and Q192) were mutated to alanine. These mutant proteins were then
tested for binding to fluorescein-labeled CP2 and CP4 by FA. As shown
in Figure 5f, the three mutations at the binding
site 2 (i.e., L211A, E212A, and T216A) resulted in
∼9-, 4-, and 7-fold reduction in binding affinity to CP2, respectively.
In comparison, the L151A and V181A variants with mutations in binding
site 1 decreased their affinity for CP2 by only ∼2-fold. Similar
results were obtained with CP4. While three binding site 2 variants
exhibited 4- to 12-fold weaker binding, the site 1 variants did not
significantly impact CP4 binding. In conclusion, our mutational analysis
supports site 2 as the binding site for both CP2 and CP4. Since CP2
and CP4 bind to WM CA-CTD in a 1:1 stoichiometry even at saturating
concentrations, we conclude that site 2 was the primary binding site
for the CPs.
To further understand the binding mode of n class="Chemical">CPs,
a docked model of
n>n class="Chemical">CP4 to WM CA-CTD was generated (Supporting Methods and Figure 5g). This model shows key consistency
with the experimental data. Arg and Tyr residues of CP4 wrap on the
N-terminus of h4 with Arg-E212 ion pair and h4 helical dipole interaction
with Tyr side-chain π electrons, affecting the chemical shifts
of quite a few h4 residues. Trp, Ile, and Fpa side chains have strong
interactions to the CA-CTD binding cleft, affecting chemical shifts
of G208, T186, and L211. The interactions are mostly hydrophobic and
van der Waals with the CA-CTD binding pocket, which consists of residues
Phe168, Leu172, Thr186, Leu190, Val191, and Met214. The subpocket
in which Trp occupies is partially covered by the loop residues 206–210.
The CP4Ile and Fpa also mimic the Leu and Tyr residues of CAI[30] peptide helix in their interactions with CA-CTD,
respectively.
Conclusion
In this study, screening of an OBTC library
identified two n class="Chemical">CPs that bind to n>n class="Species">HIV-1 CA-CTD with low micromolar affinity.
These novel peptides are also capable of inhibiting the interaction
between CA and hLysRS at low micromolar concentrations. PRE NMR spectroscopy
studies identified two potential binding pockets. One site involves
the N-terminal 310 helix and h2, whereas the second site
lies primarily on h4. Site-directed mutagenesis and computational
docking studies are consistent with the second site being directly
involved in binding; mutations in this region significantly reduced
the CP binding affinity (up to 12-fold reduction in Kd), while changes in site 1 had only minimal (≤2-fold)
effects. Overall, the mutagenesis results are in excellent agreement
with the previously identified binding site for hLysRS[23,25] and help to explain the in vitro inhibition of
LysRS-CA binding observed in the presence of these CPs.
The
ability of selected n class="Chemical">peptides n>n class="Gene">CP2, CP4, and a control octa-argininepeptide (R8) to inhibit HIV-1 in cell-based assays was also tested
(Supporting Methods). This was accomplished
by attaching an octa-arginine tail known to facilitate membrane translocation
and a fluorescein probe for monitoring the internalization. Although
both CPs were internalized by the cells (Supporting
Figure s5), they did not show significant inhibition of HIV-1
replication (Supporting Methods and Supporting
Figure s6). Given the ability of the CPs to bind to other proteins in vitro, this result was not unexpected. Further modification
of the CPs and/or future studies incorporating negative selection
steps into the screening protocol should increase the target protein
selectivity.
In summary, we have identified a new class of n class="Chemical">compounds
with the
potential to inhibit HIV replication. We demonstrated the feasibility
of selecting n>n class="Chemical">CPs that bind to CA-CTD with high affinity and in a sequence-dependent
manner. CP2 and CP4 bind proximal to the h4 domain of CA-CTD and are,
therefore, also effective at inhibiting CA’s interaction with
one of its known binding partners, hLysRS. Although the selected peptides
are not specific for CA (they also bind to other proteins), they demonstrate
the feasibility of developing small-molecule inhibitors (such as cyclic
peptides) against HIV-1 CA-hLysRS interaction as a novel strategy
for anti-HIV therapy. It should be possible to improve the binding
affinity and specificity as well as the pharmacokinetic properties
of the selected CPs through medicinal chemistry efforts (e.g., replacement of the invariant d-alanine residues with other
amino acids).
Methods
Synthesis of Individual CPs
Each n class="Chemical">peptide (n>n class="Chemical">CP1-CP6,
SCP2, SCP4, and single Asn variants of CP2 and CP4) was synthesized
on 200 mg of Rink Resin LS (0.2 mmol g–1) in a manner
similar to that employed for the library synthesis (Supporting methods) except the synthesis was started with
a lysine residue followed by the coupling of Fmoc-Glu-OAll for the
ring cyclization. Peptide cyclization was monitored by a ninhydrin
test to detect any remaining amines. The peptides were released from
the resin by reagent K, evaporated to a minimum volume under a nitrogen
atmosphere, and triturated three times with cold diethyl ether. The
resulting crude peptides were purified by reversed-phase high-performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC) on a C18 column (Supporting Figure s3), and the authenticity of
the peptides was confirmed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time
of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) analysis. Fluorescein-labeled
and biotinylated peptides were prepared by treating peptides with
3 equiv of 5-carboxyfluorescein or biotinsuccinimidyl ester in 100
mM sodium bicarbonate buffer (pH 8.5) and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)
1:1 (v/v) mixture with a total reaction volume of 100 μL. The
reaction was allowed to proceed at RT for 20 min, and any unreacted
dye or biotin ester was quenched by treatment with 5 μL of 1
M Tris-HCl buffer (pH 8.5) for 5 min. The spin-labeled peptides, CP2,
CP4, and a control hydrophilic CP with the sequence cyclo-ARYQSRVE
(CPX), were prepared similarly using the amine reactive spin label
1-oxyl-2,2,5,5-tetramethylpyrroline-3-carboxylate N-hydroxysuccinimide ester. FITC-labeled octa-argininecontaining
peptides were prepared as described previously.[43] All labeled peptides were purified and characterized by
MS as described above.
Protein Purification and Labeling
The following proteins
were overexpressed in n class="Species">E. coli and purified acn>n class="Chemical">cording
to previously published procedures: hLysRS,[24] CA,[24,44] WM CA-CTD,[23,24] and GagΔP6.[45] Protein concentrations were estimated using
the Bradford assay. Full-length HIV-1 CA and WM CA-CTD were labeled
with Texas Red-X, succinimidyl ester following the suggested protocol
by Molecular Probes. Briefly, 100 μM protein was incubated with
Texas Red-X dye freshly dissolved in anhydrous DMSO, at a 5:1 dye:protein
ratio for 60 min at RT in 150 mM NaCl, 40 mM HEPES, pH 7.5. The reaction
was quenched by addition of 5 μL of 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 8.5, and
unreacted dye was removed by passing the reaction mixture through
a column assembly containing the purification resin provided by the
manufacturer. The covalent labeling was confirmed by visualizing the
fluorescence on a denaturing polyacrylamide gel. The final labeling
stoichiometries were determined by measuring the absorbance at 280
and 595 nm and using the following excitation coefficients: ϵ280 = 32,095 M–1 cm–1 (CA),
ϵ280 = 3,105 M–1 cm–1 (WM CA-CTD), ϵ595 = 80,000 M–1 cm–1 (Texas Red-X). Labeling stoichiometries for
CA and WM CA-CTD were estimated to be 0.8:1 and 1:1 protein:fluorophore,
respectively. 5-Fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) labeling of CA and
hLysRS was performed according to a previously published procedure.[24] Labeling stoichiometries were 0.7:1 and 0.9:1
for CA and hLysRS, respectively.
Library Screening
The library resin (100 mg) was swollen
in n class="Chemical">DCM, washed extensively with n>n class="Chemical">DMF, doubly distilled water, and screening
buffer (30 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 0.05% Tween 20, and 0.1%
gelatin), and blocked overnight at 4 °C with 3% bovine serum
albumin (BSA) in screening buffer. Texas Red-labeled CA protein was
added to the library to a final concentration of 300 nM, and the mixture
was incubated in a Petri dish for 6 h at 4 °C with gentle shaking.
The library was viewed under an Olympus SZX12 fluorescence microscope
(Olympus America) (Supporting Figure s2), and red-colored beads were manually removed from the library with
a micropipet. Prior to the next round of screening, the positive beads
were extensively washed with screening buffer, double ionizedwater,
8 M guanidine·HCl, and N,N-dimethylformamide
(DMF). Secondary screening experiments were performed in the same
way with 500 nM Texas Red-labeled CA-CTD. The positive beads were
individually sequenced by the PED-MS method as previously described.[46]
Equilibrium Binding Measurements
Equilibrium dissociation
n class="Chemical">constants were determined by measuring the FA of 100 nm n>n class="Chemical">fluorescein-labeled
CPs as a function of increasing concentrations of CA, WM CA-CTD, GagΔp6,
or control proteins. The labeled peptides were incubated in amber
tubes with varying amounts of the target protein for 2 h at RT in
binding buffer (40 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, and 2 mM DTT). The
binding of hLysRS to 100 nM Texas Red-labeled CA or WM CA-CTD was
performed in a similar manner. All measurements were made on a Spectramax
M5 plate reader (Molecular Devices). The wavelengths for monitoring
excitation (Ex), emission (Em) and emission cut off (Co) for FITC
and Texas Red were as follows: FITC, Ex = 494 nm, Em = 518 nm, and
Co = 515 nm; Texas Red, Ex = 585 nm, Em = 620 nm, and Co = 610 nm.
Slit widths of 5 nm were used all experiments. Data analysis was performed
as previously described[24] by fitting the
data to a 1:1 binding model with a correction for changes in fluorophore
intensity due to protein binding (OriginPro 8 SRO). To confirm the
binding stoichiometry of CP2 and CP4 to WM CA-CTD, increasing WM CA-CTD
was added to a mixture of 10 μM fluorescein-labeled CP2 or CP4
and 590 μM unlabeled CP2 or CP4 in binding buffer. Changes in
FA were monitored using a Spectramax M5 plate reader and wavelength
settings for FITC as described above. Inhibition and competition assays
are described in the Supporting Methods.
NMR Spectroscopy and Data Processing
Protein purification
for NMR analysis is described in the Supporting
Methods. All NMR spectra were n class="Chemical">collected at 25 °C on a
Bruker 700 MHz spectrometer. Chemical shift assignments were achieved
with the following NMR experiments: HNCA,[47−49] HNCACB,[50] CBCA(n>n class="Chemical">CO)NH,[51] HNCO,[48] TOCSY-HSQC,[52] and
NOESY-HSQC.[53] For titration experiments, 1H,15N HSQC spectra of WM CA-CTD (100 μM or
250 μM) with 1:0, 1:1, 1:2, and 1:5 protein:spin-labeled peptide
ratio were collected. The data were processed and analyzed using NMRPipe[54] and CARA.[55] Signal
intensities were obtained from measuring the cross-peak intensity
of each residue in the 1H,15N HSQC spectra using
CARA[55] and were normalized using a internal
reference signal. The intensity reduction ratios of each residue were
calculated by dividing the signal intensity in the presence by that
of the absence of spin-labeled peptides. The spin quenching experiment
was performed in order to confirm that signal intensity changes were
solely caused by spin-probe. In order to quench the free radicals
of the spin-probe, 5-fold molar excess ascorbic acid was added into
the mixture of WM CA-CTD and spin-labeled CPs (1:5 protein:peptide
ratio). After the quenching, all signal intensities were restored
to the values of the sample containing only WM CA-CTD. Therefore,
signal intensity changes were caused by spin-label due to the interaction
between CPs and WM CA-CTD.
Authors: Brandie J Kovaleski; Robert Kennedy; Minh K Hong; Siddhartha A Datta; Lawrence Kleiman; Alan Rein; Karin Musier-Forsyth Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2006-05-15 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Owen Pornillos; Barbie K Ganser-Pornillos; Brian N Kelly; Yuanzi Hua; Frank G Whitby; C David Stout; Wesley I Sundquist; Christopher P Hill; Mark Yeager Journal: Cell Date: 2009-06-11 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Matthew S Lalonde; Michael A Lobritz; Annette Ratcliff; Mastooreh Chamanian; Zafiria Athanassiou; Mudit Tyagi; Julian Wong; John A Robinson; Jonathan Karn; Gabriele Varani; Eric J Arts Journal: PLoS Pathog Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 6.823
Authors: Angeles S Galindo-Feria; Antonella Notarnicola; Ingrid E Lundberg; Begum Horuluoglu Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2022-05-13 Impact factor: 8.786
Authors: Ziqing Qian; Jonathan R LaRochelle; Bisheng Jiang; Wenlong Lian; Ryan L Hard; Nicholas G Selner; Rinrada Luechapanichkul; Amy M Barrios; Dehua Pei Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2014-06-11 Impact factor: 3.162