Jonathan M Elkins1, Stefano Santaguida, Andrea Musacchio, Stefan Knapp. 1. Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Structural Genomics Consortium, University of Oxford , Old Road Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7DQ, United Kingdom. jon.elkins@sgc.ox.ac.uk
Abstract
We present the structure of the human Aurora B kinase domain in complex with the C-terminal Aurora-binding region of human INCENP and the Aurora kinase inhibitor VX-680. The structure unexpectedly reveals a dimeric arrangement of the Aurora B:INCENP complex, which was confirmed to exist in solution by analytical ultracentrifugation. The dimerization involves a domain swap of the activation loop, resulting in a different conformation of the DFG motif as compared to that seen in other kinase complexes with VX-680. The binding of INCENP differs significantly from that seen in the Xenopus laevis Aurora B:INCENP complex currently used as a model for structure-based design for this important oncology target.
We present the structure of the human Aurora B kinase domain in complex with the C-terminal Aurora-binding region of human INCENP and the Aurora kinase inhibitor VX-680. The structure unexpectedly reveals a dimeric arrangement of the Aurora B:INCENP complex, which was confirmed to exist in solution by analytical ultracentrifugation. The dimerization involves a domain swap of the activation loop, resulting in a different conformation of the DFG motif as compared to that seen in other kinase complexes with VX-680. The binding of INCENP differs significantly from that seen in the Xenopus laevis Aurora B:INCENP complex currently used as a model for structure-based design for this important oncology target.
Mammals express three Aurora kinases,
Aurora A, Aurora B, and Aurora
C, encoded by the genes AURKA, AURKB, and AURKC. Aurora C expression
is mainly restricted to testis, where it functions during meiosis,
whereas Aurora A and B play key functions regulating mitosis. Aurora
A is localized to the centrosome and spindle poles, where it drives
centrosome maturation, separation, and bipolar spindle assembly. Aurora
B is the central component of the chromosomal passenger complex (CPC)
that also contains the inner centromere protein (INCENP), borealin,
and survivin. These nonenzymatic components of the CPC play a key
role in regulating kinase activity and localization.[1,2] The Aurora kinases are related to the AGC (protein kinase A, protein
kinase G, and protein kinase C) branch of protein kinases.[3] Part of the activation mechanism for most AGC
kinases is mediated by binding of the phosphorylated C-terminal “hydrophobic
motif”, FXXF(T/S)F, to the N-terminal lobe of the kinase catalytic
domain. However, Aurora kinases lack canonical C-terminal hydrophobic
motifs and are activated in trans through binding of regulatory proteins
to their N-terminal lobe. Aurora A is activated through interaction
with TPX2. For Aurora B and Aurora C, the C-terminal section of the
INCENP protein (the “IN-box”) performs a similar regulatory
function.[4]The structure of human
Aurora A has been determined both without
TPX2[5,6] and in complex with TPX2.[7] The structure of Aurora B has previously been determined
from Xenopus laevis, in complex with INCENP and the
Aurora B inhibitor hesperadin[8] as well
as other inhibitors.[9−12] Human Aurora B is 80% identical to X. laevis Aurora
B over the kinase domain (55–344) and 72% identical to human
Aurora A over the kinase domain. Human INCENP is 50% identical to X. laevis INCENP over the region 835–903 that is
involved in binding to Aurora B.Aurora A phosphorylated on
the activation loop in the absence of
TPX2 has been observed in both active[6] and
inactive conformations.[5,6] Aurora A has been cocrystallized
together with 1 (VX-680, Figure 1) in the presence of TPX2, which caused binding to an active kinase
conformation,[13] and also in the absence
of TPX2, which caused 1 to bind to an inactive conformation
of the kinase domain,[14] although this latter
structure is not yet available in the Protein Data Bank.
Figure 1
Chemical structure
of compound 1 (VX-680).
Chemical structure
of compound 1 (VX-680).Aurora B is activated by phosphorylation of both
Aurora B and INCENP.
First, phosphorylation of INCENP at the TSS motif of the C-terminal
IN-box region, which can be performed by Aurora B itself, is important
for full activity.[8,15] Second, autophosphorylation on
the activation loop of Aurora B (for human Aurora B at Thr232) produces
the active kinase.[8] A recent study showed
that phosphorylation on Ser331 of Aurora B by Chk1 was essential for
phosphorylation of the TSS motif of INCENP and also for full activation
of Aurora B.[16]Although most genetic
alterations identified in cancer involve
the Aurora A locus, high expression levels of Aurora B have been detected
and associated with poor prognosis in glioblastoma, ovarian carcinoma,
and hepatocellular carcinoma. Inhibition of Aurora B leads to failure
to biorientate chromosomes and massive polyploidization. As a result
of the induced chromosomal defects, both p53-proficient and p53-deficient
cells undergo apoptosis. Aurora B has therefore become an extensively
pursued anticancer target,[17] and many Aurora
inhibitors have been developed, including recently some isoform-specific
inhibitors.[18−22] The Aurora kinase inhibitors (second generation type 2 inhibitors)
such as 1(23) have considerable
antitumor activity. Compound 1 also inhibits some other
kinases, notably the tyrosine kinase ABL, and crystal structures have
been solved for 1 bound to ABL1[24] and ABL2.[25]To provide a model
for structure-based design and to gain insight
into the molecular mechanism of human Aurora B activation, we determined
the structure of human Aurora B kinase domain, in complex with the
C-terminal IN-box section of human INCENP (residues 835–903)
and the type II inhibitor 1 (Figure 1).
Results
Structure Determination
We began structural studies
on human Aurora B by preparing a set of constructs spanning different
ranges of the gene, all of which included the kinase domain, for overexpression
in Escherichia coli. From this set, three constructs
(55–344, 65–344, and 70–344) expressed large
amounts of soluble protein. However, all of these proteins precipitated
shortly after Ni2+-affinity purification. Therefore, a
bacterial expression construct for the C-terminal part of human INCENP
was prepared, spanning residues 835–903, which is the Aurora-binding
region. This expression construct contained a glutathione-S-transferase purification tag to enable sequential affinity
purification of the heterodimeric Aurora B:INCENP complex by sequential
Ni2+-affinity followed by glutathione sepharose affinity
chromatography. The two proteins were expressed separately, and the
cells were mixed before lysis and subsequent protein purification.
The Aurora B protein was monophosphorylated according to electrospray
ionization mass spectrometry (data not shown). Using this purified
protein, we were able to cocrystallize the Aurora B INCENP heterodimer
in complex with the type II inhibitor 1 and determine
the structure to a resolution of 2.75 Å (Table 1).
Table 1
Data Collection and Refinement Statistics
unit cell [a, b, and c (Å);
α, β,
and γ (deg)]
80.1, 80.1, 92.5, 90.0,
90.0, 120.0
space group
P3121
no. of molecules/asu
1
data collection
resolution rangea (Å)
19.58–2.75(2.90–2.75)
completenessa (%)
99.7 (100.0)
multiplicitya
11.8 (7.0)
Rmergea (%)
0.082 (0.936)
⟨I/σ(I)⟩a
22.6 (2.0)
refinement
R factor
(%)
20.5
Rfree (%)
26.4
rmsd
bond length (Å)
[angle (°)]
0.008 (1.22)
PDB ID
4AF3
Values in parentheses are for the
highest resolution shell.
Values in parentheses are for the
highest resolution shell.
Structure of Human Aurora B
As expected from the primary
sequence similarities, the overall structure of human Aurora B resembles
the structures of X. laevis Aurora B and human Aurora
A, with the exception of the conformation of the activation loop (Figure 2). Unexpectedly, a domain swap was observed; part
of the kinase activation loop was exchanged between two Aurora B molecules
in the crystal lattice, resulting in similar binding of the activation
loop against the C-terminal lobe of the kinase but different conformations
around the DFG (Asp-Phe-Gly) motif at the start of the activation
loop (Figure 3A). Although this is a feature
that has been observed before in kinase crystal structures,[26−28] to our knowledge, this is the first time it has been observed in
an Aurora kinase structure. Activation loop exchange has been suggested
as an activation mechanism for kinases that autoactivate on nonconsensus
binding sites in their activation segment. In the Aurora B:INCENP
complex, the activation segment is disordered after the DFG motif,
including the phosphorylation site Thr232. The C-terminal part of
the activation segment is dislodged from the lower lobe and interacts
with a deep groove generated by the displaced activation segment in
the interacting protomer. Overall, there is a buried surface area
of interaction of 3460 Å2, and the segment is anchored
mainly by aromatic and hydrophobic interactions of Y239, L237, Pro242,
and I245 (Figure 3C,D).
Figure 2
Overview of human Aurora
B kinase as compared to X. laevis Aurora B and human
Aurora A. (A) Human Aurora B with INCENP colored
green and the activation loop colored red. (B) X. laevis Aurora B complex with Hesperadin (PDB ID: 2BFY),[8] with INCENP
colored green and the activation loop colored red. (C) Human Aurora
A complex with 1 (PDB ID: 3E5A),[13] with TPX2
colored green and the activation loop colored red.
Figure 3
Activation loop exchange of Aurora B kinase. (A) The two
Aurora
B molecules in the dimer are colored in yellow and blue, INCENP is
green, and the activation loops are colored red with dashed lines
to indicate where the disordered residues would form a connection.
Part of the activation loop packs against the αC helix. (B)
The electron density at the cross-over point for the domain swap.
The two molecules of Aurora B are colored in orange and blue. The
dashed lines in red indicate the connections that would be made between
Met249 and His250 in the absence of a domain swap. (C) As in panel
A but with one Aurora B:INCENP molecule displayed as a surface, showing
the binding of the activation loop in the dimeric arrangement. (D)
The activation loop residues involved in the binding.
Overview of human Aurora
B kinase as compared to X. laevis Aurora B and human
Aurora A. (A) Human Aurora B with INCENP colored
green and the activation loop colored red. (B) X. laevis Aurora B complex with Hesperadin (PDB ID: 2BFY),[8] with INCENP
colored green and the activation loop colored red. (C) Human Aurora
A complex with 1 (PDB ID: 3E5A),[13] with TPX2
colored green and the activation loop colored red.Activation loop exchange of Aurora B kinase. (A) The two
Aurora
B molecules in the dimer are colored in yellow and blue, INCENP is
green, and the activation loops are colored red with dashed lines
to indicate where the disordered residues would form a connection.
Part of the activation loop packs against the αC helix. (B)
The electron density at the cross-over point for the domain swap.
The two molecules of Aurora B are colored in orange and blue. The
dashed lines in red indicate the connections that would be made between
Met249 and His250 in the absence of a domain swap. (C) As in panel
A but with one Aurora B:INCENP molecule displayed as a surface, showing
the binding of the activation loop in the dimeric arrangement. (D)
The activation loop residues involved in the binding.The electron density unambiguously favored the
loop-exchanged arrangement
over the alternative model of a conventional arrangement (Figure 3B). The residues at the point of the domain swap
form more favorable interactions than they would have in the case
of a nonexchanged arrangement (Figure 3B).
In particular, there is a favorable hydrophobic packing of the side
chain of Met249 with Met244 and a favorable interaction of His250
with His198.Met249, which is important for the formation of
the domain-swapped
form, is not conserved in X. laevis Aurora B, which
has Thr265 instead. Apart from one conservative substitution of an
arginine for a lysine, this is the only difference in the activation
loop between the human and X. laevis enzymes, which
is one of the most highly conserved regions in the whole protein.
Given the very favorable nature of the hydrophobic packing of the
Met249 side chain, it may be that this single amino acid difference
is responsible for the observation of a domain swapped dimeric form
of Aurora B only for crystals of the human orthologue.In this
domain-swapped arrangement, part of the activation loop
packs against the outside of helix αC, which is important for
the activity and regulation of protein kinases. Whether this arrangement
has any effect on the activity or regulation of human Aurora B kinase
is an open question, but it may be partly responsible for the outward
movement of αC relative to the structures of X. laevis Aurora B with 1 and ABL1/2 with 1 (discussed
below).
Oligomeric State Distribution
After observing the activation
loop in the domain swapped conformation, to see if the dimeric state
was also observed in solution, we analyzed the oligomeric state of
the complex by analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC). A sedimentation
velocity experiment showed the presence of both monomer and dimer,
with the majority of the sample being dimeric (Figure 4). As the monomer and dimer had different frictional ratios
(f/f0), the data were
modeled as a dual distribution of s and f/f0.[29] The
sedimentation velocity analysis gave molecular weights of 43307 and
81882 for the two species present, which compared well with the expected
values of 41849 and 83680 for monomer and dimer based on the protein
sequences. The frictional ratio for the dimeric species was higher
at 2.09, as compared to 1.94 for the monomeric species, corresponding
to a less spherical dimeric arrangement. Integration of the distribution
resulted in values of 54% dimer and 31% monomer, plus 11% of a species
of approximately 49 kDa with a significantly lower frictional ratio
than the peaks assigned as monomer and dimer.
Figure 4
Sedimentation velocity
analysis of AuroraB:INCENP, showing a 2D
plot of f/f0 on the Y-axis and s on the X-axis.
The smaller and larger peaks correspond to monomeric and dimeric AuroraB:INCENP,
respectively. Peak height is indicated by color on a scale from blue
to red (strongest).
Sedimentation velocity
analysis of AuroraB:INCENP, showing a 2D
plot of f/f0 on the Y-axis and s on the X-axis.
The smaller and larger peaks correspond to monomeric and dimeric AuroraB:INCENP,
respectively. Peak height is indicated by color on a scale from blue
to red (strongest).
Interface between Aurora B and INCENP
The C-terminal
part of INCENP, the IN-box, wraps around the N-terminal lobe of the
Aurora B kinase domain in a manner similar to that seen previously
with the X. laevis orthologue. The two proteins are
50% identical over the region used in the construct for crystallization
(835–903) (Figure 5A). However, although
the binding of the N-terminal part of the N-box (residues 842–863,
“site 1”) closely resembles that of the X. laevis Aurora B INCENP structure (Figure 5B), the
C-terminal part (residues 868–881, “site 2”)
is mostly different, with a substantial variation in the backbone
conformation of the INCENP residues at site 2 (Figure 5C). At site 1, the INCENP backbone adopts the same α-helical
arrangement, with the only significant differences in binding being
for the nonconserved residues Ile856 of INCENP and Leu210 of Aurora
B, which are Arg812 and Tyr228 in the X. laevis orthologue.
The human complex therefore has a hydrophobic interaction at this
point in place of the hydrogen bond between the Tyr and the Arg side
chains in X. laevis.
Figure 5
Interface between Aurora B kinase and
INCENP. (A) Sequence alignment
of human and X. laevis INCENP over the C-terminal
IN-box region. (B) Comparison of human and X. laevis Aurora B:INCENP binding at site 1 (residues 842–863 of human
INCENP) showing the mostly conserved interactions, with two exceptions
highlighted. The X. laevis Aurora B and INCENP are
colored blue and purple, respectively (X. laevis coordinates
were taken from PDB ID 2BFX(8)). (C) Comparison of human
and X. laevis Aurora B:INCENP binding at site 2 (residues
868–881 of human INCENP) showing the mostly nonconserved binding
conformation, with the exception of the terminal Phe881. (D) Binding
detail for site 2 of human Aurora B:INCENP.
Interface between Aurora B kinase and
INCENP. (A) Sequence alignment
of human and X. laevis INCENP over the C-terminal
IN-box region. (B) Comparison of human and X. laevis Aurora B:INCENP binding at site 1 (residues 842–863 of human
INCENP) showing the mostly conserved interactions, with two exceptions
highlighted. The X. laevis Aurora B and INCENP are
colored blue and purple, respectively (X. laevis coordinates
were taken from PDB ID 2BFX(8)). (C) Comparison of human
and X. laevis Aurora B:INCENP binding at site 2 (residues
868–881 of human INCENP) showing the mostly nonconserved binding
conformation, with the exception of the terminal Phe881. (D) Binding
detail for site 2 of human Aurora B:INCENP.At site 2, the INCENP backbone adopts a different
conformation
with only the binding of the very C-terminal Phe881 conserved (Figure 5C). Furthermore, the Aurora αC helix is displaced
relative to the rest of the Aurora structure. The binding is largely
composed of hydrophobic interactions, particularly those around INCENP
Leu875 and Leu877 (Figure 5D). Leu875 is replaced
by a proline in X. laevis INCENP. There is also a
hydrogen bond between the Aurora B Tyr145 (a histidine in X. laevis Aurora B) and the INCENP backbone (Figure 5D).
Aurora B:1 Has a Different αC and DFG Conformation
as Compared to Aurora A and X. laevis Aurora B
Compound 1 binds to human Aurora B in a similar conformation
to that seen in complexes with other kinases. A structure of X. laevis Aurora B bound to 1 is not available,
so the structural comparisons of 1 binding considered
here are restricted to the published structures of Aurora A:1 (PDB ID: 3E5A)[13] and ABL2:1 (PDB ID: 2XYN).[25] A structure of an imatinib-resistant mutant ABL1 in complex
with 1 is also available.[24]The glycine-rich loop of Aurora B is in a different conformation
to that of Aurora A in the region around Phe88 (Figure 6A,B). It adopts a conformation similar to the glycine-rich
loop of ABL2 when bound to 1 (Figure 6A,C), although ABL2 has Tyr299 in place of Phe88 of Aurora
B. However, the most significant difference between Aurora A and Aurora
B when bound to 1 is in the arrangement of the DFG motif.
In Aurora A, the DFG motif is arranged with the Phe underneath the
αC helix, while in Aurora B, the αC helix is moved further
out from the ATP site and the DFG Phe is to the side of the helix
with the Asp not well-ordered in the structure (Figure 6D). As ABL1/2 also have a similar arrangement of the DFG Phe
and αC as Aurora A, Aurora B differs from all of these when
bound to 1. The movement out of αC allows more
positional options for the Aurora B DFG motif and also a potentially
bigger “back pocket” for inhibitor binding than in Aurora
A, although due to the placement of the DFG Phe the pocket in this
particular structure is slightly smaller.
Figure 6
Comparison of binding
to 1 by Aurora B, Aurora A,
and ABL2. (A) Aurora B:1. (B) Aurora A:1 (PDB ID: 3E5A).[13] (C) ABL2:1 (PDB ID: 2XYN).[25] (D) Overlay of the DFG motifs of the complexes with 1 of Aurora B (in yellow) and Aurora A (in pink). (E) Overlay
of the DFG motifs of the complexes with 1 of Aurora B
(in yellow) and ABL2 (in blue).
Comparison of binding
to 1 by Aurora B, Aurora A,
and ABL2. (A) Aurora B:1. (B) Aurora A:1 (PDB ID: 3E5A).[13] (C) ABL2:1 (PDB ID: 2XYN).[25] (D) Overlay of the DFG motifs of the complexes with 1 of Aurora B (in yellow) and Aurora A (in pink). (E) Overlay
of the DFG motifs of the complexes with 1 of Aurora B
(in yellow) and ABL2 (in blue).
Comparison of Inhibition of Human and X. laevis Aurora B
Comparison of the IC50 values for inhibition X. laevis Aurora B by three common Aurora kinase inhibitors
with the previously published IC50 values for inhibition
of human Aurora B by the same three inhibitors[100] shows that Aurora B from both species behaves almost identically
(Table 2).
Table 2
IC50 Values (nM) for Inhibition
of Human and X. laevis Aurora B by Three Aurora Kinase
Inhibitorsa
Hs Aurora
B/INCENP
Xl Aurora
B/INCENP
Hs Aurora
A/TPX2
hesperadin
3
3
11
1
31
19
15
ZM447439
51
45
360
Data on the human enzymes from
Santaguida et al.[100] Binding curves can
be found in the Supporting Information.
Data on the human enzymes from
Santaguida et al.[100] Binding curves can
be found in the Supporting Information.
Discussion
Aurora kinases have been pursued as drug
targets for some time,
particularly in oncology. X-ray crystal structures of Aurora A and
Aurora B have been used extensively to advise medicinal chemistry
efforts, either through ligand-bound structures or through their use
in molecular modeling. Until now, there has not been a structure of
human Aurora B kinase in the public domain, and the X. laevis orthologue has been used instead.It has been predicted previously
that the binding site of Aurora
A:TPX2 has a smaller hydrophobic back pocket than that of Aurora B:INCENP.[19,30] Efforts to develop Aurora isoform-specific inhibitors have naturally
focused on this region as well as on the differences at the entrance
to the ATP binding site.[10,18−21] The Aurora B structure presented here allows direct comparison with
an Aurora A structure with the same inhibitor and confirms that the
hydrophobic back pocket of Aurora B is indeed larger but with the
caveat that the more outward position of αC allows other conformations
of the DFG motif, which may favor or disfavor particular inhibitors.The more outward position of αC is so far unique to human
Aurora B; all of the X. laevis Aurora B cocrystal
structures so far deposited in the PDB have a similar αC position,
even with the inhibitor ZM447439, which binds much further into the
hydrophobic pocket than 1 (PDB ID: 2VRX(9)), although it should be noted that the structure with ZM447439
was obtained by soaking Aurora B:INCENP crystals with the compound,
and a different structure could possibly have arisen by cocrystallization.
For Aurora A in the absence of TPX2, even further outward positions
of αC have been observed, both with type II compounds that extend
significantly into the hydrophobic pocket [e.g., PDB ID: 3DJ6 (mouse Aurora A)]
and with compounds that do not (e.g., PDB ID: 2WTV or 3UNZ). In both of the
structures of Aurora A in complex with TPX2 (which binds on the outside
of αC), αC adopts an inward position.The dimerization
of Aurora B:INCENP that we have observed both
in the crystal structure and in solution is probably the most significant
factor in the different DFG motif arrangement of this complex with 1 as compared to those of Aurora A or ABL. The domain swap
involves a very different conformation of the activation loop, which
is most likely the cause of the different DFG position. It is unclear
to what extent different inhibitors might promote or hinder dimerization.
The AUC experiments showed dimerization in the absence of an inhibitor,
so compound 1 was not the cause of the observed dimerization
in the crystal structure. However, because the dimerization interface
involves αC and is dependent on the activation loop, an inhibitor
that promotes a substantially different αC position or DFG position
could conceivably promote or hinder dimerization.The variation
of INCENP binding between the human and the X. laevis orthologues at the second site next to αC
is probably a feature of the irregular backbone conformation. By contrast,
at the first binding site, INCENP has an invariant α-helical
backbone conformation, which inevitably leads to a more conserved
binding arrangement. Whether INCENP can adopt different conformations
at the second site to accommodate movements of αC during activation
(or inhibition) of Aurora B is a question that has to be explored
in the future.
Materials and Methods
Cloning
DNA for residues 55–344 of the kinase
domain of human AURKB (gi|83776600) was PCR amplified from
DNA in the Mammalian Gene Collection (IMAGE ID 2819846) and inserted
into vector pNIC28-Bsa4 (which carries kanamycin resistance)[31] in-frame with an N-terminal hexahistidine purification
tag and TEV protease cleavage site, by ligation-independent cloning.
DNA for residues 835–903 of human INCENP (gi|102467235, inner centromere protein isoform 1) was PCR amplified from INCENP
cDNA and inserted into vector pGTvL1-SGC (which carries ampicillin
resistance) in-frame with an N-terminal glutathione S-transferase purification tag and TEV protease cleavage site, also
by ligation-independent cloning. These plasmids were each transformed
separately into chemically competent E. coli BL21
(DE3) containing a plasmid for expression of rare tRNAs.
Protein Expression and Purification of Aurora B:INCENP Complex
Colonies from the transformation were used to inoculate LB media
containing 34 μg/mL chloramphenicol and either 100 μg/mL
ampicillin (for INCENP) or 50 μg/mL kanamycin (for Aurora B).
The cultures were grown overnight in baffled shaker flasks at 37 °C
with shaking. These cultures were used to inoculate TB media by adding
15 mL of culture to 1 L of TB (containing either 80 μg/mL ampicillin
or 40 μg/mL kanamycin) in baffled shaker flasks. When the cultures
had an OD600 of approximately 1.2, the temperature was reduced to
20 °C. After a further 25 min, protein expression was induced
by addition of isopropyl β-d-1-thiogalactopyranoside
to 0.5 mM. The cultures were left shaking at 20 °C overnight
before the cell pellets were harvested by centrifugation. The cells
were resuspended in Binding Buffer (20 mM imidazole, 200 mM NaCl,
and 50 mM Tris, pH 7.8) with the addition of 0.5 mM tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine
(TCEP) and protease inhibitor cocktail (Sigma). The resuspended cells
were stored at −20 °C.For protein purification,
the resuspended cells for the Aurora B and INCENP expressions were
combined and thawed together (4 L of culture of Aurora B and 6 L of
culture of INCENP). The combined cells were lysed with a high-pressure
homogenizer (Avestin). Polyethyleneimine was added to a concentration
of 0.15%, and the lysate was centrifuged at 38000g for 20 min at 4 °C. The supernatant was filtered and loaded
onto 10 mL of nickel-chelating resin. The resin was washed with Binding
Buffer and with Binding Buffer containing 40 mM imidazole. The protein
was eluted with Binding Buffer containing 250 mM imidazole, and the
eluate was loaded onto a column of 10 mL of glutathione sepharose
4B resin (GE Healthcare). This resin was washed with Binding Buffer
before the protein was eluted with Binding Buffer containing 10 mM
reduced glutathione. The hexahistidine and GST tags were removed by
overnight treatment with TEV protease at 4 °C. The digested sample
was concentrated to 4 mL volume and loaded onto a Superdex75 gel filtration
column (HiLoad 16/60, GE Healthcare) pre-equilibrated in GF Buffer
(20 mM Hepes, pH 7.5, 200 mM NaCl, and 0.5 mM TCEP). Fractions from
the gel filtration containing the desired AuroraB:INCENP complex were
pooled and passed through a column of 1 mL of glutathione Sepharose
4B and then loaded onto a column of 0.7 mL of nickel-chelating resin.
This resin was eluted with 5 mL each of GF Buffer containing 20, 40,
60, 80, 100, and finally 120 mM imidazole. The desired protein complex
appeared in the 40–120 mM imidazole fractions. These fractions
were pooled, compound 1 was added, and the sample was
twice concentrated to 250 μL and then diluted to 4 mL with GF
Buffer. Finally, the sample was concentrated to 200 μL volume
at which the protein concentration was 6 mg/mL.The protein
identities were verified by electrospray ionization
time-of-flight mass spectrometry (Agilent LC/MSD). The observed mass
of Aurora B showed between 1 and 4 phosphorylations.
Crystallization and Data Collection
The AuroraB:INCENP:1 complex (PDB ID: 4AF3) was crystallized at 20 °C in 300 nL drops from
a 2:1 ratio of AuroraB:INCENP:1 (6 mg/mL protein) and
reservoir solution (10% w/v PEG3350, 0.2 M KSCN, 10% ethylene glycol,
and 0.1 M BisTrisPropane, pH 6.15). The crystals were cryoprotected
in reservoir solution with 25% (v/v) ethylene glycol and flash-frozen
in liquid nitrogen. X-ray diffraction data were collected at 100 K
on beamline I04 at DIAMOND.
Structure Determination and Refinement
The diffraction
images were processed using XDS[32] and the
CCP4 suite of programs.[33,34] The structure was solved
by molecular replacement using PHASER[35] with the structure of X. laevis Aurora B (PDB ID: 2BFX) as a search model.
The structure was refined against maximum likelihood targets using
restrained refinement and TLS parameters, as implemented in the program
REFMAC.[36] Positive difference electron
density for the INCENP protein component and the inhibitor 1 was visible in the initial maps. Iterative rounds of refinement
were interspersed with manual rebuilding of the model using COOT.[37] Progress of the refinement was judged throughout
by following a reduction in Rfree (calculated
from a random 5% of the data that was excluded from the refinement).
AUC
Sedimentation velocity measurements were made at
40000 rpm with a Beckman An50 Ti rotor in a Beckman XL-1 ultracentrifuge
at 4 °C. The protein sample was dialyzed overnight in 20 mM Hepes,
pH 7.5, 200 mM NaCl, and 0.5 mM TCEP, and the protein concentration
was 1.4 mg/mL for measurements. Absorbance data (280 nm) were analyzed
using SEDFIT.[38,39]
Activity Measurements
Kinase assays were performed
as previously described.[15] Briefly, reaction
mixes contained 50 μM ATP, 1 mM DTT, 1 mM Na3VO4, 5 μCi γ-[32P]ATP, 1 μg of histone
H3 as substrate, 1 μL of DMSO or drugs dissolved in DMSO, and
the indicated kinases. Reaction mixes were incubated for 1 h at 30
°C, quenched with SDS loading buffer, and resolved on 14% SDS-PAGE.
Incorporation of 32P was visualized by autoradiography.
Densitometry analysis was performed using ImageJ software (National
Institutes of Health). IC50 values were calculated from
log–dose response curves using Prism 4 software (GraphPad Software,
Inc.).
Authors: Kelly Anderson; Jingsong Yang; Kristin Koretke; Kelvin Nurse; Amy Calamari; Robert B Kirkpatrick; Denis Patrick; Domingos Silva; Peter J Tummino; Robert A Copeland; Zhihong Lai Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2007-08-18 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Andrew A Mortlock; Kevin M Foote; Nicola M Heron; Frédéric H Jung; Georges Pasquet; Jean-Jacques M Lohmann; Nicolas Warin; Fabrice Renaud; Chris De Savi; Nicola J Roberts; Trevor Johnson; Cyril B Dousson; George B Hill; David Perkins; Glenn Hatter; Robert W Wilkinson; Stephen R Wedge; Simon P Heaton; Rajesh Odedra; Nicholas J Keen; Claire Crafter; Elaine Brown; Katherine Thompson; Stephen Brightwell; Liz Khatri; Madeleine C Brady; Sarah Kearney; David McKillop; Steve Rhead; Tony Parry; Stephen Green Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2007-03-21 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Nicholas D Adams; Jerry L Adams; Joelle L Burgess; Amita M Chaudhari; Robert A Copeland; Carla A Donatelli; David H Drewry; Kelly E Fisher; Toshihiro Hamajima; Mary Ann Hardwicke; William F Huffman; Kristin K Koretke-Brown; Zhihong V Lai; Octerloney B McDonald; Hiroko Nakamura; Ken A Newlander; Catherine A Oleykowski; Cynthia A Parrish; Denis R Patrick; Ramona Plant; Martha A Sarpong; Kosuke Sasaki; Stanley J Schmidt; Domingos J Silva; David Sutton; Jun Tang; Christine S Thompson; Peter J Tummino; Jamin C Wang; Hong Xiang; Jingsong Yang; Dashyant Dhanak Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Elizabeth A Harrington; David Bebbington; Jeff Moore; Richele K Rasmussen; Abi O Ajose-Adeogun; Tomoko Nakayama; Joanne A Graham; Cecile Demur; Thierry Hercend; Anita Diu-Hercend; Michael Su; Julian M C Golec; Karen M Miller Journal: Nat Med Date: 2004-02-22 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Dhanasekaran Karthigeyan; Soumik Siddhanta; Annavarapu Hari Kishore; Sathya S R R Perumal; Hans Ågren; Surabhi Sudevan; Akshay V Bhat; Karanam Balasubramanyam; Rangappa Kanchugarakoppal Subbegowda; Tapas K Kundu; Chandrabhas Narayana Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-06-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sarah Picaud; David Da Costa; Angeliki Thanasopoulou; Panagis Filippakopoulos; Paul V Fish; Martin Philpott; Oleg Fedorov; Paul Brennan; Mark E Bunnage; Dafydd R Owen; James E Bradner; Philippe Taniere; Brendan O'Sullivan; Susanne Müller; Juerg Schwaller; Tatjana Stankovic; Stefan Knapp Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sonya M Hanson; George Georghiou; Manish K Thakur; W Todd Miller; Joshua S Rest; John D Chodera; Markus A Seeliger Journal: Cell Chem Biol Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 8.116
Authors: Sanne Hindriksen; Arne J Bramer; My Anh Truong; Martijn J M Vromans; Jasmin B Post; Ingrid Verlaan-Klink; Hugo J Snippert; Susanne M A Lens; Michael A Hadders Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 3.240