Phosphoinositides regulate many cellular processes, and cellular levels are controlled by kinases and phosphatases. SHIP2 (SH2 (Src homology 2)-domain-containing inositol-phosphatase-2) plays a critical role in phosphoinositide signaling, cleaving the 5-phosphate from phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate. SHIP2 is thought to be involved in type-2 diabetes and obesity, conditions that could therefore be open to pharmacological modulation of the enzyme. However, rational design of SHIP2 inhibitors has been limited by the absence of a high-resolution structure. Here, we present a 2.1 Å resolution crystal structure of the phosphatase domain of SHIP2 bound to the synthetic ligand biphenyl 2,3',4,5',6-pentakisphosphate (BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5)). BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5) is not a SHIP2 substrate but inhibits Ins(1,3,4,5)P(4) hydrolysis with an IC(50) of 24.8 ± 3.0 μM, (K(m) for Ins(1,3,4,5)P(4) is 215 ± 28 μM). Molecular dynamics simulations suggest that when BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5) binds to SHIP2, a flexible loop folds over and encloses the ligand. Compounds targeting such a closed conformation might therefore deliver SHIP2-specific drugs.
Phosphoinositides regulate many cellular processes, and cellular levels are controlled by kinases and phosphatases. SHIP2 (SH2 (Src homology 2)-domain-containing inositol-phosphatase-2) plays a critical role in phosphoinositide signaling, cleaving the 5-phosphate from phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate. SHIP2 is thought to be involved in type-2 diabetes and obesity, conditions that could therefore be open to pharmacological modulation of the enzyme. However, rational design of SHIP2 inhibitors has been limited by the absence of a high-resolution structure. Here, we present a 2.1 Å resolution crystal structure of the phosphatase domain of SHIP2 bound to the synthetic ligand biphenyl 2,3',4,5',6-pentakisphosphate (BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5)). BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5) is not a SHIP2 substrate but inhibits Ins(1,3,4,5)P(4) hydrolysis with an IC(50) of 24.8 ± 3.0 μM, (K(m) for Ins(1,3,4,5)P(4) is 215 ± 28 μM). Molecular dynamics simulations suggest that when BiPh(2,3',4,5',6)P(5) binds to SHIP2, a flexible loop folds over and encloses the ligand. Compounds targeting such a closed conformation might therefore deliver SHIP2-specific drugs.
SHIP2 (SH2 (Src homology 2)-domain-containing inositol phosphatase
2) is one member of the Mg2+-dependent inositol polyphosphate
5-phosphatase family of proteins that cleave the 5-phosphate of phosphoinositide
and inositol polyphosphate substrates. There are 10 known humaninositol
5-phosphatase isoenzymes, and direct involvement in human diseases
is established for various members of this family.[1] SHIP2 catalyzes the conversion of phosphatidylinositol
3,4,5-trisphosphate (PtdIns(3,4,5)P3) into phosphatidylinositol
3,4-bisphosphate (PtdIns(3,4)P2). The water-soluble headgroup
inositol 1,3,4,5-tetrakisphosphate (Ins(1,3,4,5)P4) is
also a substrate for SHIP2, as is phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate
(PtdIns(4,5)P2), but not Ins(1,4,5)P3.[2]Structurally, SHIP2 is a 155 kDa multidomain
protein[3] composed of an SH2 domain that
plays a key role in binding
to other protein partners, the inositol phosphatase domain, a phosphotyrosine
binding site (PTB) in a NPXY consensus sequence, proline-rich sequences,
a sterile α-motif (SAM), and recently identified ubiquitin binding
domain[4] and phosphorylation sites at Ser132,
Thr1254, and Ser1258.[5] SHIP2 is found in
tissues including liver, brain, heart, muscle, and kidney.[3,6] In the resting state, SHIP2 resides in the cytosol and perinuclear
area, but stimulation by external signal molecules effects recruitment
to the plasma membrane where several other proteins may dock to motifs
such as the SH2 domain, proline-rich sequences, and the SAM domain
that may allow the enzyme to coordinate cell-specific activities.[7]The most studied cellular substrate of
SHIP2, PtdIns(3,4,5)P3, recruits downstream enzymes
such as 3-phosphoinositide dependent
kinase-1 and protein kinase B that are directly involved in survival,
growth, and development.[8] Thus, SHIP2 positively
regulates the levels of PtdIns(3,4)P2 and has been proposed
in important pathologies in relation to insulin sensitivity[9] and cancer, for example, in squamous cell carcinoma.[10] Recently, a connection between SHIP2 and release
of viral particles was demonstrated.[11]Although small molecule inhibitors of SHIP2 have been identified
using high-throughput screening,[12,13] their poor
bioavailability precludes consideration as clinical trial candidates.
Despite human disease being associated with SHIP2 malfunction, no
SHIP2-specific drugs are yet in clinical use, and rational design
of inhibitors is limited by the absence of any structure of SHIP2
in complex with a ligand.Previously, we explored co-crystallization
of the pleckstrin homology
(PH) domain of protein kinase Bα (PKBα) with simple synthetic
benzene polyphosphates and demonstrated that benzene 1,2,3,4-tetrakisphosphate
(Bz(1,2,3,4)P4) is a good surrogate for Ins(1,3,4,5)P4.[14] The crystal structure of the
Bz(1,2,3,4)P4–PH domain of PKBα together with
the Ins(1,3,4,5)P4–PH domain PKBα-complex
were subsequently used to develop a docking protocol to identify drug-like
inhibitors of PKB PH domain by virtual screening.[15]We also identified earlier a synthetic biphenyl-derived
polyphosphate,
biphenyl 2,3′,4,5′,6-pentakisphosphate (BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5) (Figure 1 panel A), as a potent SHIP2
inhibitor.[2] Here, we report the structure
of the phosphatase domain of humanSHIP2 (SHIP2-cd) in complex with
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 at 2.1 Å resolution,
together with results of molecular dynamics simulations that suggest
a rationale for the design of inhibitors of SHIP2.
Figure 1
(A) Structures of biphenyl
2,3′,4,5′,6-pentakisphosphate,
benzene 1,2,3-trisphosphate, and benzene 1,2,4,5-tetrakisphosphate.
(B) Stereoview of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 binding site. The SHIP2 molecule present in the asymmetric unit
and a symmetry-related mate are colored green and white, respectively.
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 is displayed as a stick
model with its carbon atoms colored cyan. BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 is surrounded by the σA-weighted 2Fo – Fc simulated
annealing omit map contoured at 1σ and shown as a gray mesh.
Protein residues and ligand phosphate positions are labeled using
regular and italic fonts, respectively. Interactions between protein
and ligand atoms are depicted as blue (H-bonds) and purple (salt bridges)
dashes. (C) Ligand interaction diagram showing key interactions between
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 and SHIP2. The H-bonds
shown have a maximum length of 2.5 Å. All residues within 4 Å
of the ligand are shown. Yellow circles indicate ligand exposure and
show the degree to which the highlighted atoms are solvent exposed;
the larger the yellow circle, the greater the solvent exposure.
(A) Structures of biphenyl
2,3′,4,5′,6-pentakisphosphate,
benzene 1,2,3-trisphosphate, and benzene 1,2,4,5-tetrakisphosphate.
(B) Stereoview of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 binding site. The SHIP2 molecule present in the asymmetric unit
and a symmetry-related mate are colored green and white, respectively.
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 is displayed as a stick
model with its carbon atoms colored cyan. BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 is surrounded by the σA-weighted 2Fo – Fc simulated
annealing omit map contoured at 1σ and shown as a gray mesh.
Protein residues and ligand phosphate positions are labeled using
regular and italic fonts, respectively. Interactions between protein
and ligand atoms are depicted as blue (H-bonds) and purple (salt bridges)
dashes. (C) Ligand interaction diagram showing key interactions between
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 and SHIP2. The H-bonds
shown have a maximum length of 2.5 Å. All residues within 4 Å
of the ligand are shown. Yellow circles indicate ligand exposure and
show the degree to which the highlighted atoms are solvent exposed;
the larger the yellow circle, the greater the solvent exposure.The crystal structure of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5–SHIP2-cd complex contains two SHIP2-cd monomers in
the asymmetric unit, but only one monomer accommodates a BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 molecule, bound in a shallow pocket. This pocket was recently
identified as the substrate binding site in the structure of the complex
between the phosphatase domain of INPP5B and PtdIns(4)P (Persson,
C., et al., unpublished data). Close examination
of the bound BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 (Figure 1, panels B and C) reveals multiple interactions
between the 3′-, 4-, 5′-, and 6-phosphates of the ligand
and both side chain and backbone atoms of SHIP2. Additionally, nine
water molecules present in the binding site coordinate the 2-, 4-,
5′- and 6-phosphates, eight of them mediating hydrogen bonds
between SHIP2 and BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 (Figure 1 panel C and Supplementary Table
1). Direct protein–ligand interactions are particularly
focused around the 6-phosphate, involving the side chains of Arg611,
Asn684, and Tyr661 and a longer range (3.3 Å) interaction with
Arg682. These residues all belong to the region designated as the
4-phosphate interacting motif (P4IM) (Persson, C., et al., unpublished data), suggesting that the 6-phosphate of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 to some extent mimics the 4-phosphate of the natural substrate
or product. The 4-phosphate of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 has interactions with the backbone of Thr683 and Asn566,
as well as the side chain of Asn566. Both the 3′- and 5′-phosphates
of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 are connected to Lys541
Nζ through a bidentate interaction, while they also mediate
H-bonding with main chain (3′-phosphate) and side chain (5′-phosphate)
atoms of Ser564.The 2-phosphate protrudes out of the active
site and interacts
with Arg479 (main chain amidenitrogen) and Glu480 (both main chain
amidenitrogen and side chain carboxylate) of a symmetry-related SHIP2
molecule. The neighboring molecule of SHIP2 also forms interactions
with phosphate groups in position 3′-, 5′-, and 6- through
the side chains of Asp483 and Arg479. The symmetry-related SHIP2 molecule
is positioned above the binding site of the SHIP2 monomer that contains
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Crystal structure of two SHIP2-cd molecules and one molecule of
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5. The bound BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 in the catalytic site of SHIP2 (left) has additional interactions
with a second, symmetry-related SHIP2 molecule (right). The mobile
region from the molecular dynamics simulation is shown in blue.
Crystal structure of two SHIP2-cd molecules and one molecule of
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5. The bound BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 in the catalytic site of SHIP2 (left) has additional interactions
with a second, symmetry-related SHIP2 molecule (right). The mobile
region from the molecular dynamics simulation is shown in blue.To clarify which structural properties of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 might favor its interaction with SHIP2, we compared its potency
with the simpler benzene 1,2,3-trisphosphate (Bz(1,2,3)P3) and benzene
1,2,4,5-tetrakisphosphate (Bz(1,2,4,5)P4)[16] (Figure 1 panel A). Enzyme
activity was assayed
by measuring inorganic phosphate released from the substrate Ins(1,3,4,5)P4 (100 μM) using the malachite green phosphate assay
(BioAssay Systems). None of the inhibitors appears to be a substrate
for SHIP2. The percentage inhibition values for the reaction using
100 μM BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5, Bz(1,2,3)P3, and Bz(1,2,4,5)P4 were 76.0 ± 1.5%, 13.6
± 5.2%, and 49.7 ± 1.3%, respectively. IC50 values
obtained using this assay were 24.8 ± 3.0 μM for BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5, >1000 μM for Bz(1,2,3)P3, and 69.3 ±
15.4 μM for Bz(1,2,4,5)P4. Unfortunately, no complex
between any single-ring inhibitor and SHIP2-cd is available from our
co-crystallization trials or soaking with apo-SHIP2-cd crystals.The BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5–SHIP2-cd
complex shows interactions with the phosphates of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 that are spread over two rings; it is unlikely that a single
ring compound could contact the same range of amino acid residues.
This is consistent with the IC50 value for Bz(1,2,3)P3 being >1 mM compared to 24.8 μM for BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5. However, Bz(1,2,4,5)P4 not only has an additional
phosphate compared to Bz(1,2,3)P3 but also has “para”-phosphates, providing a larger span for active
site interactions. These factors are consistent with an IC50 value for Bz(1,2,4,5)P4 of 69.3 μM, which is 2–3-fold
higher than for BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 but significantly
lower than for Bz(1,2,3)P3. Finally, it is likely that
limited rotation around the C1–C1′ bond connecting the
two rings allows the phosphate groups in BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 to optimize their interactions with the binding pocket. This
property would confer upon double-ringed aryl polyphosphates a further
advantage relative to single-ringed ones.Crystal structures
of two related 5-phosphatases in complex with
ligands are currently available: the 5-phosphatase domain of SPSynaptojanin
(SPSynaptojanin-cd) in complex with Ins(1,4)P2[17] and the catalytic domain of INPP5B (INPP5B-cd)
in complex with di-C8–PtdIns(4)P (3MTC; Persson,
C., et al., unpublished data). These structures contain
the hydrolysis product formed by removal of the 5-phosphate from the
substrates Ins(1,4,5)P3 and di-C8–PtdIns(4,5)P2 respectively. Phosphatase domains of SHIP2, INPP5B, and SPSynaptojanin
are close homologues, revealed by both sequence conservation (33%
identity and 48% similarity between SHIP2 and INPP5B; 27% identity
and 44% similarity between SHIP2 and SPSynaptojanin) and structure
superposition (rmsd 1.24 Å for 267 superimposed Cα between
SHIP2 and INPP5B, rmsd 1.19 Å for 266 superimposed Cα between
SHIP2 and SPSynaptojanin).Overlays of SPsynaptojanin and INPP5B
complexes with the SHIP2-BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 complex reveal that BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 binding occurs in the region of SHIP2 expected to accommodate
the product (Figure 3). In the SHIP2-cd complex,
the 6-phosphate of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 lies
at only 2.8 and 3.1 Å from the position occupied by the 4-phosphate
of the products in the INPP5B and SPSynaptojanin structures, respectively.
Moreover, similar interactions between protein residues and the phosphates
mentioned above are conserved. The 3′- and 5′-phosphates
of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 are located close
to, and either side of, the 1-phosphate of PtdIns(4)P (Figure 3 panel A) in the overlay with the INPP5B complex
and interact with an equivalent lysine residue (Lys541 in SHIP2 (Figure 1 panel C) and Lys380 in INPP5B). The 4-phosphate
of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 is located close to
the 1-phosphate of Ins(1,4)P2 in the overlay and has an
equivalent backbone interaction (Asn566 in SHIP2 and Tyr704 in SPSynaptojanin).
Ligand–protein interactions in the three complexes are summarized
in Supplementary Table 1.
Figure 3
Overlays of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5-SHIP2-cd
complex (green) with (A) INPP5B-cd–PtdIns(4)P (Persson, C., et al. unpublished data) (3MTC) (blue) and (B) SPSynaptojanin-cd–Ins(1,4)P2[17] (red) complexes. See Supplementary Figure 2 for a model of the SHIP2-di-C8–PtdIns(3,4,5)P3-complex. # The elongated
loop in SHIP2 that closes over the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 during molecular dynamics simulations (see text). * Two loops
containing hydrophobic interactions with the fatty acid tails in the
INPP5B-cd–PtdIns(4)P structure, which are poorly defined or
absent in the SHIP2 and SPSynaptojanin structures.
A region
formed by residues Gly676 to Asn684 in SHIP2 is not conserved
in either SPSynaptojanin or INPP5B (Supplementary
Figure 1). This zone is located above the putative substrate-binding
site and includes residues that contribute to the P4-interacting motif
(P4IM) (Persson, C., et al., unpublished data). It
adopts a double-stranded antiparallel β-sheet structure and
the two strands are separated by a β-turn that contains Pro678.
This extension, which is unique to SHIP1 and SHIP2, is almost entirely
solvent-exposed and thus is likely to be flexible. This region appears
to be structured only in the SHIP2 molecule that binds BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5. However, ligand binding cannot be necessary for the structural
organization of this region, because it is defined in a structure
of apo-SHIP2 obtained from a crystal belonging to the same space group
(Persson, C., et al., unpublished data).Because
the crystal environment is different in the two SHIP2 monomers
present in the asymmetric unit, the interactions between the P4IM-containing
loop and a symmetry-related molecule could not occur in the SHIP2
molecule whose P4IM-containing loop is disordered. However, in the
SHIP2 molecule lacking a structured P4IM-containing loop, the region
corresponding to the P4IM-containing loop points toward a zone that
also exhibits disordered elements (the loop formed by residues 456
to 460) in a symmetry-related molecule. Thus, the disorder of the
loop 456–460 might result in the consecutive destructuration
of the P4IM-containing loop.In the structure of INPP5B-cd in
complex with di-C8–PtdIns(4)P,
two loops (Asp305 to Pro317 and Thr371 to Asn379) mediate hydrophobic
contacts between INPP5B and the fatty acid tails of PtdIns(4)P. Although
the first loop is conserved only in SPSynaptojanin, the latter exists
in both SPSynaptojanin and SHIP2. However, neither of these loops
was modeled in the crystal structures of either SPSynaptojanin or
SHIP2 due to their apparent flexibility.Overlays of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5-SHIP2-cd
complex (green) with (A) INPP5B-cd–PtdIns(4)P (Persson, C., et al. unpublished data) (3MTC) (blue) and (B) SPSynaptojanin-cd–Ins(1,4)P2[17] (red) complexes. See Supplementary Figure 2 for a model of the SHIP2-di-C8–PtdIns(3,4,5)P3-complex. # The elongated
loop in SHIP2 that closes over the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 during molecular dynamics simulations (see text). * Two loops
containing hydrophobic interactions with the fatty acid tails in the
INPP5B-cd–PtdIns(4)P structure, which are poorly defined or
absent in the SHIP2 and SPSynaptojanin structures.As noted above, BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 in
the crystal structure has several contacts with a second, symmetry-related
molecule of SHIP2 in addition to its interactions with the active
site. The orientation of the SHIP-specific extension comprising residues
676 to 684 may also be affected by interprotein contacts. Although
the double-stranded antiparallel β-sheet structure it adopts
suggests that the overall conformation of this region is native, the
intermolecular contacts (one H-bond between the backbone carbonyl
of Pro678 and the nitrogen amide of Met502 main chain, and a hydrophobic
interaction between Pro678 and Val525) are both on the β-turn
at the apex of the loop. This could constrain the loop to the orientation
seen in the crystal structure. Furthermore, Arg479 in the neighboring
SHIP2 molecule interacts with the 6-phosphate of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5, effectively preventing closure of this loop over the ligand.Because these factors may perturb the more relevant solution binding
mode of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5, we used molecular
dynamics to investigate the active site binding of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5. When dynamics are performed using the SHIP2-cd–ligand
complex (Figure 4) as a starting point, but
in the absence of the second SHIP2 molecule, the simulation (see Supporting Information) results in the region
composed of residues Ala672 to Asn684 closing over the ligand (see
supplementary movie Loop Dynamics) with the expulsion of several water molecules from the substrate
binding site. The many polar and positively charged residues in this
loop increase the number of potential hydrogen bonds and salt bridges
between the ligand phosphate groups and the protein (Supplementary Figure 2), and the longer range interactions
described above for the crystal structure are shorter and therefore
stronger after the molecular dynamics. The 2-phosphate, which interacts
with the symmetry related molecule in the crystal structure, now forms
H-bonds to Arg571, Lys568, and Val681 within the binding site and
appears less solvent exposed. Additionally, in the loop-closed structure
there are three potential cation-π interactions between Lys451
and Lys677 and the phenyl ring containing the 3′- and 5′-phosphate
groups and Lys568 and the ring with the 2-, 4-, and 6-phosphate groups,
together with the formation of many more H-bonds.
Figure 4
Crystal structure conformation (green
(protein) and brown (ligand))
and the post dynamics conformation (blue (protein) and purple (ligand)
of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5–SHIP2-cd
complex; see Supplementary Loop Dynamics movie).
Thus, using
the complex between SHIP2-cd and BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 as a starting point, but without the neighboring crystallographic
molecules of SHIP2, the dynamics simulation may produce a complete
and more accurate portrayal of the network of interactions between
the two molecules depleted of crystal packing artifacts. The recently
identified inhibitor (3-((4-chlorobenzyl)oxy)-N-((1S)-1-phenylethyl))-2-thiophenecarboxamide) (AS1949490[12], Supplementary Figure 3) was also synthesized and investigated in co-crystallization studies
with SHIP2. Due to its aqueous insolubility it was impossible to co-crystallize
this compound with SHIP2-cd. Modeling shows that AS1949490 could bind
in the region occupied by BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 (Supplementary Figure 3), and dynamics
(data not shown) show that movement of the loop accommodates the docked
AS1949490 in the active site leading to expulsion of aqueous medium
and a more hydrophobic environment. We suggest that introducing more
electronegative groups into such hydrophobic compounds may provide
more specific interactions in a closed-loop binding pocket proposed
here.When a model of a SHIP2:di-C8–PtdIns(3,4,5)P3-complex is constructed (Supplementary
Figure 4) it can be seen that the diacylglycerol chains exit
the active site well away from the flexible loop. Indeed, when dynamics
are also carried out on a SHIP2:Ins(1,3,4,5)P4-complex
derived from this model similar loop movement is observed (data not
shown). Thus, the behavior of the flexible loop is dependent upon
whether a ligand is present and on the structure of that particular
ligand. It can be concluded that the loop can likely adjust to whatever
ligand is in the binding site.Crystal structure conformation (green
(protein) and brown (ligand))
and the post dynamics conformation (blue (protein) and purple (ligand)
of the BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5–SHIP2-cd
complex; see Supplementary Loop Dynamics movie).In summary, we have determined the first crystal
structure of the
5-phosphatase domain of SHIP2 in complex with a ligand in the catalytic
site. Although attempts to crystallize SHIP2 with its natural phosphoinositide
and inositol polyphosphate substrates and the corresponding hydrolysis
products were not successful, a wholly synthetic polyphosphate, BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5, was effective. The biphenyl framework of BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 may allow a pattern of phosphate groups to be presented over
two aromatic rings that to some extent can rotate relative to one
another, allowing optimization of polar interactions with residues
in the binding pocket. These data reinforce the emerging use of aryl
polyphosphates as surrogates of inositol polyphosphates and phospholipid
head groups for co-crystallization studies. Molecular modeling and
dynamics studies of the complex suggest that a flexible region unique
to SHIP proteins may close over the ligand during binding. Targeting
a closed conformation of this loop and the SHIP2-specific residues
within it may provide a strategy for the design of small molecule
and drug-like inhibitors of SHIP2.
Experimental Section
Chemistry
Biphenyl 2,3′,4,5′,6-pentakisphosphate
BiPh(2,3′,4,5′,6)P5 was synthesized according
to a previous report.[2]
Protein Purification
The sequence encoding SHIP2-cd
residues 419–832 was subcloned into the vector pNIC-MBP in
which an N-terminal 6 × His-tag followed by a TEV protease cleavage
site is added. The proteins were expressed in Escherichia
coli strain BL21(DE3) R3 pRARE. Cultures were grown in TB
medium supplemented with 8 g L–1 glycerol, 100 μg
mL–1 kanamycin, and 34 μg mL–1 chloramphenicol in a LEX bioreactor system (Harbinger Biotechnology)
at 37 °C until OD600 reached ∼2. Cultures were
down-tempered to 18 °C over a period of 1 h before target expression
was induced by addition of 0.5 mM IPTG. Expression was allowed to
continue overnight. Cells were harvested by centrifugation (4,430
× g, 10 min, 4 °C), and the pellet was
resuspended in lysis buffer (100 mM HEPES, 500 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol,
10 mM imidazole, 0.5 mM TCEP, 2000 U Benzonase Merck, Complete EDTA-free
protease inhibitor, pH 8.0). Cells were disrupted by sonication (Vibra-Cell,
Sonics) at 80% amplitude for 3 min effective time (pulsed 4 s on,
4 s off), and cell debris was removed by centrifugation (49,000 × g, 20 min, 4 °C). The supernatant was decanted and
filtered through a 0.45 μm flask filter. The filtered lysate
was loaded onto Ni-charged HiTrap Chelating HP (GE Healthcare) column
and washed with IMACwash1 buffer (IMACwash1 buffer: 20 mM HEPES,
500 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 10 mM imidazole, 0.5 mM TCEP, pH 7.5) followed
by IMAC wash2 buffer (20 mM HEPES, 500 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 25 mM
imidazole, 0.5 mM TCEP, pH 7.5). Bound protein was eluted from the
IMAC column with IMAC elution buffer (20 mM HEPES, 500 mM NaCl, 10%
glycerol, 500 mM imidazole, 0.5 mM TCEP, pH 7.5) and subsequently
loaded onto a HiLoad 16/60 Superdex 75 Prep grade column (GE Healthcare)
equilibrated in gel filtration buffer (20 mM HEPES, 300 mM NaCl, 10%
glycerol, 0.5 mM TCEP, pH 7.5). The N-terminal histidine tag was proteolytically
removed by incubating the target protein with His-tagged TEV protease
in a molar ratio of 30:1 at 4 °C overnight. SHIP2 was purified
from tag and protease by passing the reaction mixture over a Ni-charged
1 mL HiTrap Chelating HP column pre-equilibrated with IMACwash1 buffer.
During concentration of the cleaved protein the buffer was changed
to gel filtration buffer.
Crystallization; Data Collection, Structure Determination and
Refinement; SHIP2 Inhibition assay; and Modeling Methods
Authors: Stephen J Mills; David Komander; Melanie N Trusselle; Stephen T Safrany; Daan M F van Aalten; Barry V L Potter Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2007-04-24 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Fabrice Vandeput; Laurent Combettes; Stephen J Mills; Katrien Backers; Alexandre Wohlkönig; Jan B Parys; Humbert De Smedt; Ludwig Missiaen; Geneviève Dupont; Barry V L Potter; Christophe Erneux Journal: FASEB J Date: 2007-01-30 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Stephen J Mills; Fabrice Vandeput; Melanie N Trusselle; Stephen T Safrany; Christophe Erneux; Barry V L Potter Journal: Chembiochem Date: 2008-07-21 Impact factor: 3.164
Authors: Jia Yu; David G Ryan; Spiro Getsios; Michelle Oliveira-Fernandes; Anees Fatima; Robert M Lavker Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-11-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Zi Wang; Yao Nie; Kunxiao Zhang; Henghao Xu; Theresa A Ramelot; Michael A Kennedy; Maili Liu; Jiang Zhu; Yunhuang Yang Journal: Arch Biochem Biophys Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 4.013
Authors: Stephen J Mills; Camilla Silvander; Gyles Cozier; Lionel Trésaugues; Pär Nordlund; Barry V L Potter Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Johanne Le Coq; Marta Camacho-Artacho; José Vicente Velázquez; Clara M Santiveri; Luis Heredia Gallego; Ramón Campos-Olivas; Nicole Dölker; Daniel Lietha Journal: Elife Date: 2017-08-09 Impact factor: 8.140