Lysine acetyltransferases (KATs) play a critical role in the regulation of gene expression, metabolism, and other key cellular functions. One shortcoming of traditional KAT assays is their inability to study KAT activity in complex settings, a limitation that hinders efforts at KAT discovery, characterization, and inhibitor development. To address this challenge, here we describe a suite of cofactor-based affinity probes capable of profiling KAT activity in biological contexts. Conversion of KAT bisubstrate inhibitors to clickable photoaffinity probes enables the selective covalent labeling of three phylogenetically distinct families of KAT enzymes. Cofactor-based affinity probes report on KAT activity in cell lysates, where KATs exist as multiprotein complexes. Chemical affinity purification and unbiased LC-MS/MS profiling highlights an expanded landscape of orphan lysine acetyltransferases present in the human genome and provides insight into the global selectivity and sensitivity of CoA-based proteomic probes that will guide future applications. Chemoproteomic profiling provides a powerful method to study the molecular interactions of KATs in native contexts and will aid investigations into the role of KATs in cell state and disease.
Lysine acetyltransferases (KATs) play a critical role in the regulation of gene expression, metabolism, and other key cellular functions. One shortcoming of traditional KAT assays is their inability to study KAT activity in complex settings, a limitation that hinders efforts at KAT discovery, characterization, and inhibitor development. To address this challenge, here we describe a suite of cofactor-based affinity probes capable of profiling KAT activity in biological contexts. Conversion of KATbisubstrate inhibitors to clickable photoaffinity probes enables the selective covalent labeling of three phylogenetically distinct families of KAT enzymes. Cofactor-based affinity probes report on KAT activity in cell lysates, where KATs exist as multiprotein complexes. Chemical affinity purification and unbiased LC-MS/MS profiling highlights an expanded landscape of orphan lysine acetyltransferases present in the human genome and provides insight into the global selectivity and sensitivity of CoA-based proteomic probes that will guide future applications. Chemoproteomic profiling provides a powerful method to study the molecular interactions of KATs in native contexts and will aid investigations into the role of KATs in cell state and disease.
Lysine acetylation
plays a critical role in the regulation of transcription,
metabolism, and other central biological functions. Acetylation of
lysine residues can impact protein and genome function through multiple
mechanisms, including physical relaxation of histone–DNA interactions,[1] recruitment of bromodomain-containing effector
proteins,[2] covalent active-site modification,[3] and regulation of protein stability.[4] Lysine acetylation is a dynamic PTM that represents
an equilibrium between the activity of two opposing enzyme classes:
lysine acetyltransferase (KAT) enzymes, which impose the mark, and
lysine deacetylases (KDACs), which remove it.[5] While KDACs have been extensively investigated as epigenetic drug
targets, several analyses indicate KATs can also drive cellular transformation
and cancer progression in a tissue-specific manner. For example, fusion
of the KAT enzyme MOZ to TIF2 is the primary genetic lesion associated
with a subset of leukemias and imbues differentiated red blood cells
with cancer stem cell-like properties.[6] Nonmutant KAT activities can also support oncogenic gene expression
programs, functioning as essential coactivators for transcription
factors such as c-Myc and E2A-PBX gene fusions in cancer.[7]Proteome-wide studies have revealed lysine
acetylation is a prevalent
PTM, rivaling phosphorylation in terms of substrate diversity with
∼4700 human acetylation sites identified to date.[8−10] However, in contrast to the hundreds of known protein kinases, a
recent phylogenetic analysis identified only 18 KATs in the human
genome.[11] The majority of these canonical
KATs fall into four families: GCN5/PCAF, P300/CBP, MYST, and NCOA,
with the rest consisting of transcription factor-related and orphan
(sequence disparate) KAT activities (Supplementary
Figure S1). KAT family members demonstrate significant intrafamily
but little interfamily sequence homology, hindering bioinformatics
approaches to KAT discovery and classification. The functional characterization
of KATs is also limited by their regulation by protein partners and
PTMs, factors that are difficult to recapitulate in vitro.[12,13] Furthermore, while individual KATs have been shown to be susceptible
to inhibition by small molecules and cellular acetyl-CoA/CoA ratio,
methods for comparing the selectivity of these perturbations among
multiple KATs in parallel do not exist.[14,15] Thus, our
ability to discover and characterize acetylation-mediated signaling
would be greatly advanced by the development of new methods for the
global analysis of KAT activity in cellular contexts.Chemoproteomic
profiling provides a powerful alternative to traditional
biochemical assays for measuring enzyme activity in complex biological
settings. In this approach, also commonly referred to as activity-based
protein profiling (ABPP), active-site probes for an enzyme class of
interest are modified with chemical handles enabling detection or
affinity enrichment. Covalent labeling or enrichment of an enzyme
by the affinity probe is then used as a proxy for enzyme activity.[16] Chemoproteomic probes for KDAC enzymes have
been used to discover novel KDAC complexes[17] and characterize inhibitor selectivity in cell lysates.[18] Similar approaches have also been
pursued to study KAT enzymes, utilizing electrophile-containing analogues
of the CoA cofactor.[19,20] However, these probes have not
been widely applied to profile KAT activity, owing to the fact that
most KATs do not utilize mechanisms involving active-site nucleophiles.[21]Here we report a general strategy for
chemoproteomic profiling
of KAT activity (Figure 1a). Bisubstrate inhibitors
targeting three phylogenetically distinct KAT families were converted
to clickable photoaffinity probes to enable KAT labeling and detection.
Cofactor-based affinity probes quantitatively report on KAT-inhibitor
interactions, are applied to identify a previously unknown acyltransferase
activity possessed by the canonical KAT enzyme Gcn5, and report on
KAT activity in cell lysates. Affinity purification and unbiased LC–MS/MS
profiling of probe targets led to the identification of two noncanonical
KAT enzymes, highlighting the existence of several orphan lysine acetyltransferases
present in the human genome. In addition to providing insight into
the global selectivity and sensitivity of CoA-based chemical proteomic
probes that will guide future applications, these studies demonstrate
the ability of chemical tools for profiling KAT activity to provide
new insights into KATs and their molecular interactions in complex
biological contexts.
Figure 1
Cofactor-based affinity probes for the analysis of KAT
activity.
(a) Clickable photoaffinity labeling scheme. (b) Structures of KAT
probes 1–3. Ahx = 6-aminohexanoic
acid.
Cofactor-based affinity probes for the analysis of KAT
activity.
(a) Clickable photoaffinity labeling scheme. (b) Structures of KAT
probes 1–3. Ahx = 6-aminohexanoic
acid.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis and Evaluation
of Chemoproteomic Probes for KAT Enzymes
We envisioned a
general strategy for chemical profiling of KAT
activity based on combining molecular recognition elements from KATbisubstrate inhibitors with a clickable photoaffinity tag for covalent
cross-linking and detection (Figure 1a). Pioneered
by Cole and co-workers, KATbisubstrate inhibitors link CoA with the
ε-amino group of a lysine-containing peptide to form high affinity
interactions with both the substrate and cofactor binding sites of
KAT enzymes.[22] These molecules inhibit
KAT activity with nanomolar potencies, with selectivity for specific
KATs encoded by the sequence of the bisubstratepeptide. On the basis
of literature precedent, we hypothesized that modification of the
N-termini of KATbisubstrate inhibitors might be tolerated without
a large loss in inhibitory potency. This provides a potential site
for incorporation of the clickable photoaffinity element benzophenone-l-propargylglycine (BPyne; Figure 1),
necessary for covalent labeling and detection.[23,24] To test the scope of this approach, we synthesized a suite of KAT
probes based on bisubstrate scaffolds that have been shown to target
three major families of KATs: P300/CBP (Lys-CoA-BPyne; 1), GCN5/PCAF (H3K14-CoA-BPyne; 2), and MYST (H4K16-CoA-BPyne; 3) (Figure 1; Supplementary
Scheme S1).[22,25] KAT probes 1–3 were constructed from BPyne-peptide-bromoacetamide precursors,
synthesized on Rink amide resin utilizing an orthogonal Lys-Dde protecting
group and postcleavage HPLC purification. Nucleophilic displacement
of BPyne-peptidyl-bromoacetamides, with commerical CoA, followed by
final HPLC purification provided probes 1–3 on scales (1–100 μmol) sufficient for biological
evaluation (Supplementary Scheme S1).To test the affect of our structural modifications on molecular recognition
of KAT enzymes, we assayed probes 1–3 against recombinant p300, pCAF, and Mof (MYST1) and compared their
inhibitory activity to that of non-BPyne-containing “parent”
inhibitor scaffolds (4–6; Supplementary Figure S2). Assayed at a single
concentration (1 μM), probes 1–3 demonstrate inhibitory potencies and selectivities that closely
mimic those of parent inhibitor scaffolds 4–6 (Supplementary Figures S3 and S4). Dose-response analysis of Lys-CoA-BPyne (1) demonstrated
an IC50 of 26.7 nM toward p300 (95% confidence interval
[CI95] = 11.75–60.64), within error of the inhibition
by parent compound 4 (IC50 = 34.5 nM, CI95 = 17.5–67.8 nM; Supplementary
Figure S5). Similar results are seen upon comparison of H3K14-CoA-BPyne 2 and parent bisubstrate 5. Together, these results
suggest the BPyne subunit has minimal effects on KAT active-site recognition.
Selective In Vitro Labeling of KAT Enzymes
Next, we
evaluated the utility of 1–3 as KAT
labeling reagents in vitro. KAT probes 1–3 were incubated with purified recombinant KATs, photoirradiated
at 365 nm, and subjected to Cu-catalyzed [3 + 2] cycloaddition (“click
chemistry”) with a fluorescent azide tag.[26] SDS-PAGE analysis of labeling reactions demonstrated dose-dependent
fluorescent labeling of KATs at probe concentrations between 1 and
10 μM. Notably, each probe showed sensitive detection of the
KAT enzyme family it was designed to target, i.e., KAT probe 1 reacted effectively with p300 (P300/CBP), probe 2 with pCAF (GCN5/PCAF),[22] and probe 3 with Mof (MYST) (Figure 2a).[25] Fluorescent labeling required probe, photo-cross-linking,
and Cu2+; omission of any single component abolished labeling
(Supplementary Figure S6). KAT probes 2 and 3, which are ∼3 kDa, caused a significant
gel shift upon photoirradiation that was visible upon Coomassie staining
(Figure 2a, Supplementary
Figure S6). This property allowed us to quantify and optimize
our photo-cross-linking conditions using gel densitometry. In our
optimized photo-cross-linking protocol, we found that ∼33–40%
of pCAF was covalently labeled by 2 after 60 min of irradiation
at 365 nm on ice. These conditions are consistent with the literature,[27] and cross-linking yields were not found to increase
with extended photoirradiation times.
Figure 2
(a) Concentration dependence of probe
labeling for preferred KAT
partners. (b) Structure of fluorescent KAT photoaffinity probe 7. (c) Relative labeling of pCAF by clickable (left) and fluorescent
(right) photoaffinity probes at low (0.1 μM) and high (1 μM)
probe concentrations.
(a) Concentration dependence of probe
labeling for preferred KAT
partners. (b) Structure of fluorescent KAT photoaffinity probe 7. (c) Relative labeling of pCAF by clickable (left) and fluorescent
(right) photoaffinity probes at low (0.1 μM) and high (1 μM)
probe concentrations.The alkyne handle of probes 1–3 was chosen for its minimal footprint and versatility toward conjugation
of diverse azide reporters. However, it is not strictly necessary
for ex vivo affinity profiling applications. In order to evaluate
the utility of our bioorthogonal detection strategy, we compared the
labeling of pCAF by clickable probe 2 with a fluorescent
KAT photoaffinity probe, TAMRA-H3K14-CoA 7 (Figure 2b). Both probes facilitate fluorescent detection
of pCAF at high probe concentrations (1 μM), suggesting fluorescent
bisubstrates may be useful profiling agents for KAT enzymes. However,
clickable probe 2 exhibits visibly greater labeling than
fluorescent probe 7 at low probe concentrations (0.1
μM; Figure 2b). This suggests click chemistry
detection strategies improve probe sensitivity, possibly by abrogating
negative interactions of the fluorescent TAMRA reporter on probe-protein
recognition that reduce photo-cross-linking.[28]Moving toward more complex settings, we assessed the specificity
and selectivity of each KAT probe (1–3) using a cocktail composed of p300, pCAF, and the MYST family acetyltransferase
Mof. Specific probe labeling events were defined as those susceptible
to competition by 50–100 equiv of parent KATbisubstrate inhibitors 4–6 (Supplementary
Figure S7), while selectivity refers to the subset of KAT enzymes
labeled by each probe. Interestingly, each probe showed specific labeling
of a unique subset of KAT enzymes at 1 μM, even in the presence
of other KAT superfamily members. For example, Lys-CoA-BPyne 1 showed strong labeling of p300 and pCAF but did not significantly
label the MYST family member Mof (Figure 3).
The p300 signal was specifically competed in the presence of excess
parent inhibitor, while a small portion of the pCAF signal remained,
suggesting a combination of specific and nonspecific interactions
between the 1-pCAF pair. H3K14-CoA-BPyne 2 demonstrated a clear preference for specific labeling of pCAF and
weaker, but detectable, labeling of Mof (Figure 3/Supplementary Figure S8). H4K16-CoA-BPyne 3 most strongly labeled the MYST family member Mof and exhibited
fainter labeling of p300 and pCAF (Figure 3). In addition to its parent bisubstrate, the Mof-3 interaction
was competed by excess Lys-CoA (4), which had no similar
effect on the interaction of pCAF with 2 (Supplementary Figure S8). For all three probes,
selectivities were found to be reduced at higher probe concentrations
(10 μM), where 1–3 exhibit
considerable cross-reactivity (Supplementary Figure
S8). Given its combination of broad-spectrum reactivity and
straightforward synthesis of probe and competitor, these findings
suggest Lys-CoA-BPyne 1 may be the most well-suited of
the probes for applications requiring a general chemoproteomic reporter
of KAT activity. In contrast, when applied at suitably low concentrations,
peptidyl-KAT probes 2 and 3 may be better
suited for applications that require more selective labeling of specific
KAT families or as components of KAT chemoproteomic probe cocktails
designed to achieve broad superfamily coverage.[28]
Figure 3
Selectivity of KAT labeling by probes 1–3 (1 μM) assayed in a mixture of proteins from the P300/CBP,
GCN5/PCAF, and MYST family. Specific labeling events show sensitivity
to competition by parent bisubstrate inhibitors (4–6; 200 equiv).
Selectivity of KAT labeling by probes 1–3 (1 μM) assayed in a mixture of proteins from the P300/CBP,
GCN5/PCAF, and MYST family. Specific labeling events show sensitivity
to competition by parent bisubstrate inhibitors (4–6; 200 equiv).
Chemoproteomic Probes Report on KAT–Small Molecule and
KAT–Cofactor Interactions
Having demonstrated the
ability of our probes to label three classes of KATs, we next sought
to investigate their ability to report on changes in KAT activity
resulting from exposure to diverse molecular stimuli. First we investigated
their ability to report on the affinity and selectivity of small molecule
inhibitors.[18,29] Co-incubation of pCAF with the
known KAT inhibitor garcinol decreased labeling by KAT probe 2 in a dose-dependent manner (Figure 4). Quantification of fluorescent pCAF labeling by gel densitometry
yielded an IC50 of 4.5 ± 1.2 μM for garcinol,
consistent with the literature IC50 value of 5 μM.[30] Similarly, labeling of p300 by Lys-CoA BPyne 1 was sensitive to inhibition by the small molecule inhibitor
C646 (Supplementary Figure S9).[31]
Figure 4
Competitive profiling of KAT active-site
occupancy. (a) Fluorescent
and Coomassie gels from pCAF-garcinol competition experiment. Conditions: 2 (1 μM), garcinol (0, 0.08, 0.16, 0.33, 0.63, 1.26,
2.5, 3.75, 5, 10, 20, 40 μM). (b) Dose-response analysis of
competitive labeling generated via gel densitometry analysis of fluorescent
labeling by KAT probe 2.
Competitive profiling of KAT active-site
occupancy. (a) Fluorescent
and Coomassie gels from pCAF-garcinol competition experiment. Conditions: 2 (1 μM), garcinol (0, 0.08, 0.16, 0.33, 0.63, 1.26,
2.5, 3.75, 5, 10, 20, 40 μM). (b) Dose-response analysis of
competitive labeling generated via gel densitometry analysis of fluorescent
labeling by KAT probe 2.In addition to small molecule inhibition, recent studies
have suggested
KAT activity may be sensitive to changes in cellular acyl-CoA pools,
providing a potential mechanism to link changes in the metabolic state
of the cell to differential histone acylations and epigenetic control
of gene expression.[15,32] To test whether chemoproteomic
probes could provide insight into these mechanisms, we investigated
the ability of four different acyl-CoAs (acetyl,propionyl, butyryl,
and crotonyl-CoA) to compete with 2 for the active site
occupancy of Gcn5, a KAT whose activity has been proposed to be metabolically
regulated (Figure 5).[15,33] We found that high concentrations of acetyl-CoA efficiently competed
labeling by probe 2, consistent with its role as a universal
KAT cofactor. Propionyl-CoA also antagonized labeling, while butyryl-CoA
was a partial antagonist, and crotonyl-CoA did not impede labeling
(Figure 5b). While the ability of Gcn5 to utilize
propionyl- and butyrl-CoA as cofactors has not been previously explored,
our results are consistent with a previous biochemical analysis of
humanpCAF (which has a highly homologous KAT domain). These studies
indicated a kinetic preference for acyl group donors of acetyl-CoA
(kcat/Km ≈
535 s–1 M–1) > propionyl-CoA
(kcat/Km ≈
92 s–1 M–1) ≫ butyrl-CoA
and that malonyl-CoA was not utilized as a substrate.[34] Indeed, we confirmed Gcn5 utilized propionyl- and butyrl-CoA
as substrates via LC–MS/MS analysis (Supplementary
Figure S10).
Figure 5
(a) Scheme for competitive substrate profiling. (b) Fluorescent
and Coomassie gels from Gcn5-acyl-CoA competition experiment. Conditions: 2 (10 μM), acyl-CoAs (1000 μM), garcinol (40 μM).
(a) Scheme for competitive substrate profiling. (b) Fluorescent
and Coomassie gels from Gcn5-acyl-CoA competition experiment. Conditions: 2 (10 μM), acyl-CoAs (1000 μM), garcinol (40 μM).These data suggest competitive
affinity profiling provides a useful
approach to rapidly gain new insights into KAT inhibitor and substrate
selectivity.
Chemical Affinity Profiling of KAT Activity
in Cell Lysates
The activity of KAT enzymes such as Gcn5
and pCAF is ideally studied
in cellular settings. Recent commentary has suggested the failure
of conventional high-throughput screening campaigns to yield selective
KAT inhibitors may be due to the inability of these screens to interrogate
the ability of small molecules to disrupt native KATs, which can exist
as multiprotein complexes.[11] Therefore,
methods to monitor KAT activity directly from cell extracts are potentially
valuable for next-generation inhibitor discovery efforts. Overexpression extracts of epitope-labeled ATAC (Ada Two-A containing)
complex constitute an advanced model system applied for the study
of GCN5 family KATs in their endogenous setting.[35] We thus asked whether we could use chemoproteomic probe 2 to directly detect KAT activity in these systems, without
the need for prefractionation, affinity purification, or antibodies.
Accordingly, pCAF overexpression extracts from HEK-293 cells were
treated with 2, followed by photo-cross-linking and click
chemistry. Weak but detectable labeling of a protein corresponding
to the molecular weight of pCAF was observed by fluorescence (Figure 6a). Notably, labeling was sensitive to competition
by H3K14-CoA, and immunoblotting confirmed comigration with pCAF.
To further verify labeling, we subjected proteins labeled by 2 in pCAF overexpression extracts to click chemistry with
biotin azide, followed by affinity purification, tryptic digest, and
LC–MS/MS protein identification. Notably, pCAFpeptides were
specifically identified in overexpression extracts treated with 2 (Figure 6b), but not in extracts
pretreated with excess competitor 5 or lysates derived
from HEK-293 cells transfected with an empty vector control (Figure 6a, bottom, Supplementary Table
S1). In addition to overexpression extracts, clickable photoaffinity
probes 1 and 2 are capable of detecting
p300 and pCAF, respectively, when spiked into HeLa cell proteomes
(Supplementary Figure S11). We used this
characteristic to assess the sensitivity of probe 2 and
estimate a lower limit at which GCN5/PCAF family enzymes may be detected.
This is especially relevant since our inability to enrich pCAF from
empty vector transfected HEK-293 lysates indicates expression level
may be a limiting factor for KAT identification. We found that probe 2 could detect as low as 2.5 pmols of pCAF in a standard gel-based
experiment against a proteomic background (Figure 6b). These findings calibrate the ability of chemoproteomic
probes to monitor KAT activity in model systems and cell lysates and
may be useful for the development of chemoproteomic approaches to
screen for selective inhibitors of KATs and KAT-containing multiprotein
complexes.[36,37]
Figure 6
Labeling of KATs in cell lysates. (a)
Labeling of pCAF in HEK-293
overexpression extracts. Comp. = competitor. (b) Proteins identified
in LC–MS/MS experiments as targets of H3K14-CoA-BPyne 2 in pCAF transfected HEK-293 extracts. Control = competitor
treated lane, EV = extract derived from HEK-293 cells transfected
with empty vector. (c) Limit of detection of recombinant pCAF spiked
into HeLa cell proteome. Conditions: 2 (1 μM),
proteome (7 μg), recombinant pCAF (0, 6.25, 5, 3.75, 2.5, 1.25
pmol).
Labeling of KATs in cell lysates. (a)
Labeling of pCAF in HEK-293
overexpression extracts. Comp. = competitor. (b) Proteins identified
in LC–MS/MS experiments as targets of H3K14-CoA-BPyne 2 in pCAF transfected HEK-293 extracts. Control = competitor
treated lane, EV = extract derived from HEK-293 cells transfected
with empty vector. (c) Limit of detection of recombinant pCAF spiked
into HeLa cell proteome. Conditions: 2 (1 μM),
proteome (7 μg), recombinant pCAF (0, 6.25, 5, 3.75, 2.5, 1.25
pmol).
Chemoproteomic Profiling
of KAT Activity: Probe Reactivity and
Orphan KATs
Having demonstrated the utility of chemoproteomic
probes for the targeted study of KAT activity in cellular contexts,
we last sought to explore their utility for the discovery of potentially
novel KAT activities directly from cancer cell proteomes. Labeling
of whole cell extracts by 1–3 demonstrated
a distinct pattern of specific protein labeling events for each probe,
with KAT probe 1 targeting the largest number of proteins
(Figure 7). To identify the proteomic targets
of broad-spectrum KAT probe 1, HeLa cells were lysed,
photo-cross-linked in the presence of 1, and subjected
to click chemistry with biotin-azide followed by streptavidin enrichment,
tryptic digest, and LC–MS/MS analysis. We identified 16 proteins
that were abundant (>5 spectral counts) and showed >5-fold preferential
enrichment in the absence of competitor (Figure 7b, Supplementary Table S2). Peptides matching
canonical KATp300 and CBP were not observed in our MS/MS data set,
likely due to their low abundance in whole cell lysates (confirmed
by Western blot; Supplementary Figure S12). Of the 16 proteins, 2 were acetyltransferases (green), 5 were
CoA-binding proteins related to primary metabolism (red), with the
remaining hits composed of highly abundant proteins and members of
the proteasome regulatory complex. To validate LC–MS/MS identifications,
we performed probe labeling experiments of two overexpressed and purified
targets of 1: ATP-citrate lyase (Acly), the highest abundance
pulldown target of 1, and N-α-acetyltransferase
50 (Naa50), an acetyltransferase. Both enzymes exhibited competitor-sensitive
labeling, indicative of specific molecular recognition by KAT probe 1 (Figure 7c). Conserved domain analysis
indicated that each protein specifically labeled by 1 either contains or is closely associated with a protein containing
a binding site for an adenine nucleotide-containing cofactor (CoA,
ATP, or NAD(P); Figure 7c). The off-target
engagement of adenosine-binding proteins by KAT probe 1 parallels the widespread reactivity that has been observed for ATP-
and GTP-containing chemical proteomic probes in biological settings.[38−40] This is likely to be a general limitation of chemical proteomic
probes incorporating adenine cofactor-based chemical scaffolds and
highlights opportunities for design improvements as well as the requirement
for orthogonal validation strategies to support chemical proteomic
KAT discovery efforts.
Figure 7
Cofactor-based affinity profiling of endogenous KAT activity
in
a cancer cell proteome. (a) Labeling of HeLa cell proteomes by KAT
probes 1–3 (10 μM). Specific
labeling events show sensitivity to competition by parent bisubstrates
(100 equiv). (b) Proteins identified in LC–MS/MS experiments
as targets of Lys-CoA-BPyne 1. Values represent the average
spectral counts of two biological replicates. Green, acetyltransferases;
Red, CoA-binding proteins. (c) Affinity labeling of recombinant protein
verifies Acly and Naa50 as targets of 1.
Cofactor-based affinity profiling of endogenous KAT activity
in
a cancer cell proteome. (a) Labeling of HeLa cell proteomes by KAT
probes 1–3 (10 μM). Specific
labeling events show sensitivity to competition by parent bisubstrates
(100 equiv). (b) Proteins identified in LC–MS/MS experiments
as targets of Lys-CoA-BPyne 1. Values represent the average
spectral counts of two biological replicates. Green, acetyltransferases;
Red, CoA-binding proteins. (c) Affinity labeling of recombinant protein
verifies Acly and Naa50 as targets of 1.In our data set, two acetyltransferases were enriched:
Nat10 and
Naa50. Nat10 is a noncanonical KAT (referred to here as orphan KATs)
with a GNAT-related fold that displays histone and microtubule acetyltransferase
activity in cells. Biologically, Nat10 has been observed to play a
role in the regulation of telomerase function and nuclear shape and
was recently identified as a druggable target for the treatment of
Hutchinson–Gilford progeria syndrome.[41,42] Naa50 (Nat13) is the catalytic component of the NatE acetyltransferase
complex that is required for proper sister chromatid adhesion and
chromatin condensation in vivo.[43,44] The identification
of Naa50 as a target of Lys-CoA-BPyne 1 initially struck
us as paradoxical, as this enzyme belongs to the N-terminal acetyltransferase
(NAT) family and has been shown to favor protein acetylation of N-terminal
Met residues.[45,46] However, literature investigation
revealed that, of the 7 NAT catalytic subunits encoded in the human
genome, Naa50 is the only member to have biochemically characterized
ε-lysine acetyltransferase activity, providing a molecular rationale
for its targeting by 1.[47] The
selective identification of Naa50 by 1 suggests that
chemoproteomic profiling may have applications in identifying new
KAT activities present in acetyltransferase families that are distinct
in sequence from canonical KATs.The proteomic identification
of two orphan KAT activities by affinity
probe 1 led us to re-evaluate the lysine acetyltransferase
literature and consider whether other KAT activities were also missing
from the list of 18 canonical human KATs (Supplementary
Figure S1). This analysis identified 14 proteins, including
Nat10 and Naa50, not in the list of 18 canonical KATs for which evidence
of lysine acetyltransferase activity has been observed. Sequence alignment
and similarity analyses were used to construct an expanded phylogenetic
tree of acetyltransferase proteins, divided into canonical (P300/CBP,
GCN5/PCAF, MYST, NCOA) and orphan KATs (Figure 8). Notably, many KATs from the initial list of 18 (ATAT1, TF3C4,
ELP3; Supplementary Figure S1) cluster
more closely with orphan KATs, indicative of greater sequence similarity.
Together, these proteins encompass the most comprehensive list of
human KATs assembled to date. However, we take care to point out that
the experimental evidence supporting the activity of all 32 KATs,
canonical and orphan, ranges widely. In particular, this list contains
two proteins (Oga/Ncoat, an orphan KAT, and Src1, a canonical KAT)
for which conflicting observations of KAT activity have been made.[48,49] These discrepancies support the need for universal methodologies
capable of directly assaying KAT activity in endogenous cells, toward
which our current study provides an initial step. In the meantime,
our chemoproteomics-inspired census of KAT activity provides fertile
ground for functional investigation of orphan KAT enzymes using traditional
structural and biochemical approaches, studies that may facilitate
a more complete understanding of lysine acetylation in living systems.
Figure 8
Expanded
phylogenetic tree of KAT enzymes, including canonical
KATs and orphan KAT activities observed in this study or annotated
in the literature. KATs are denoted by gene name and relevant pseudonyms.
Uniprot accession numbers and literature references for KAT activity
are provided in the Supporting Information (Table S3).
Expanded
phylogenetic tree of KAT enzymes, including canonical
KATs and orphan KAT activities observed in this study or annotated
in the literature. KATs are denoted by gene name and relevant pseudonyms.
Uniprot accession numbers and literature references for KAT activity
are provided in the Supporting Information (Table S3).
Conclusion
In
summary, here we have described a suite of probes for cofactor-based
affinity profiling of KAT activity. We have defined key structural
features necessary for the covalent labeling and detection of three
families of KAT enzymes and demonstrated the utility of these probes
to monitor KAT activity in settings ranging from purified enzymes
to KAT overexpression extracts to native proteomes. Chemoproteomic
probes of KAT activity provided new insights into KAT inhibitor and
cofactor selectivity and highlighted the existence of several noncanonical
orphan KAT activities that may contribute to cellular acetylation
signaling pathways. In addition to these advances, it is also important
to call attention to the limitations of our initial study. For example,
while we demonstrated the ability of KAT affinity probes to report
on pCAF activity in HEK-293 overexpression extracts, we were unable
to detect canonical KAT enzymes such as CBP and Gcn5 directly from
HeLa proteomes. This may be due to the low abundance of these KATs
in whole cell lysates (Supplementary Figure S13) or the low cross-linking yields of our clickable photoaffinity
probes, which covalently label only ∼33–40% of recombinant
pCAF in vitro. This challenge may be addressed in future studies through
scale-up, nuclear prefractionation, or utilization of multidimensional
protein identification technology (MuDPIT) to increase LC–MS/MS
detection sensitivity.[50] Alternatively,
chemical proteomic studies of kinase and KDAC activity have shown
that noncovalent affinity probe resins can enable enrichment of specific
enzyme classes without the need for photo-cross-linking,[18,51] providing another potential route for the analysis of low abundance
KATs. Furthermore, while the activity of KAT complexes have been shown
to be preserved in cell extracts, these activities would be ideally
studied in living cells and probes 1–3 are not cell-permeable. Cell-penetrating peptides have been used
to promote uptake of KATbisubstrate inhibitors, and similar approaches
may facilitate live cell profiling of KAT activity.[23] These improvements will be important to expand the scope
of chemical proteomic analyses of KAT activity. Regardless, the ability
of our current suite of chemoproteomic probes to highlight an expanded
landscape of catalytic lysine acetylation provides an example of the
power of this approach as currently constituted and sets the stage
for the development of chemoproteomic strategies to identify KAT inhibitors
and the functional characterization of canonical and orphan KAT activities
in cellular settings. Such studies are currently underway, and will
be reported in due course.
Experimental Details
Biochemistry
and Cell Biology
Recombinant pCAF, catalytic
domain (aa 492–658) was obtained from Cayman Chemical. Recombinant
p300, catalytic domain (aa 1284–1673) and recombinant Gcn5,
catalytic domain (497–663), were obtained from Enzo. The plasmid
encoding recombinant MOF, catalytic domain (aa 147–449) was
obtained from Addgene. His-tagged recombinant Mof was expressed in E. coli BL21 and purified via immobilized nickel affinity
chromatography using standard conditions. Acly was obtained from US
Biological. Naa50 was obtained from Origene. Garcinol and C646 were
obtained from Cayman Chemical. Streptavidin-agarose was purchased
from Pierce. SDS-PAGE was performed using Bis-Tris NuPAGE gels (4–12%)
and MES running buffer in Xcell SureLock MiniCells (Invitrogen) according
to the manufacturer’s instructions. SDS-PAGE fluorescence was
visualized using an ImageQuant Las4010 Digitial Imaging System (GE
Healthcare). Total protein content on SDS-PAGE gels was visualized
by Blue-silver coomassie stain, made according to the published procedure.[52] Separation-based assays for KAT activity were
performed on a LabChip EZ Reader instrument (PerkinElmer) kindly provided
by Dr. Jay Schneekloth. Fluorescence assays for the KAT enzyme Mof
were analyzed on a Biotek Synergy 2 (Biotek).
KAT Inhibition Assays
Recombinant KAT activity was
measured by electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) as previously
reported.[53] This assay measures the separation
of FITC-labeled KAT substrate peptides (Histone H3 5-23 QTARKSTGGKAPRKQLATK-Ahx-FITC;
Histone H4 1-19 SGRGKGGKGLGKGGAKRHR-Ahx-FITC)
from their acetylated products following incubation with recombinant
KAT and acetyl-CoA. A model separation is shown in Supplementary Figure S14. P300 and pCAF assays were performed
in 30 μL of reaction buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl,
2 mM EDTA, 0.05% Tween 20, 10 μg/mL BSA) with KAT (p300 [50
nM] or pCAF [10 nM]) and FITC-peptide (FITC-H4 for P300; FITC-H3 for
pCAF; 1 μM). Acetylation of FITC-H3/H4 peptide by p300 and pCAF
was confirmed by LC–MS. Reactions were plated in 384-well plates,
allowed to equilibrate at room temperature for 10 min, and initiated
by addition of acetyl-CoA (final concentration = 5 μM). Plates
were then transferred to a Lab-Chip EZ-Reader at ambient temperature
and analyzed by microfluidic electrophoresis. Optimized separation
conditions were downstream voltage of −400 V, upstream voltage
of −2900 V, and a pressure of −2.0 psi for FITC-H3 and
downstream voltage of −500 V, upstream voltage of −1500
V and a pressure of −2.0 psi for FITC-H4. Percent conversion
is calculated by ratiometric measurement of substrate/product peak
heights. Percent activity represents the percent conversion of KAT
reactions treated with inhibitors 1–6 relative to untreated control KAT reactions, measured in triplicate,
and corrected for nonenzymatic acetylation. Mof showed low activity
toward FITC-H3/H4 peptide substrates and was monitored by fluorogenic
KAT assay using an unlabeled H4 substrate peptide as previously reported.[54] Dose-response analysis of p300 and pCAF inhibition
by KAT probes 1 and 2 and parent inhibitors 4 and 5 were performed in triplicate and analyzed
by nonlinear least-squares regression fit to Y =
100/(1 + 10∧(Log IC50 – X)*H), where H = Hill
slope (variable). IC50 values represent the concentration
that inhibits 50% of KAT activity. All calculations were performed
using Prism 6 (GraphPad) software.
Fluorescent Labeling of
KAT Enzymes for SDS-PAGE Analysis
Purified KAT enzymes (0.5–5
μg) or whole cell proteomes
(20 μg) were incubated with KAT probes 1–3 (1 μM probe for recombinant labelings; 10 μM
probe for proteomic labelings) in PBS (pH 7.0) for 1 h. Control experiments
to correct for nonspecific cross-linking were treated with 1–3 in the presence of 100 equiv of competitors 4–6. Following equilibration, samples
were photo-cross-linked on ice for 1 h using a 365 nm UV light in
a FB-UVXL-1000 UV cross-linker. Probe labeling was detected by Cu(I)-catalyzed
[3 + 2] cycloaddition (“click chemistry”). Click reactions
were initiated by sequential addition of TAMRA-azide 8 (100 μM; 5 mM stock solution in DMSO, structure given in Supplementary Figure S15), TCEP (1 mM; 100 mM
stock in H2O), tris(benzyltriazolylmethyl)amine ligand
(TBTA; 100 μM; 1.7 mM stock in DMSO/tert-butanol
1:4), and CuSO4 (1 mM; 50 mM stock in H2O).
Samples were vortexed and incubated at room temperature for 1 h. Cycloaddition
reactions were quenched by addition of 5x SDS-loading buffer (strongly
reducing) and subjected to SDS-PAGE (22 μL per well). Excess
probe fluorescence was removed by destaining in a solution of 50%
MeOH/40% H2O/10% AcOH overnight. Gels were then washed
with water and fluorescently visualized using a ImageQuant Las4010
(GE Healthcare) with green LED excitation (λmax 520–550
nm) and a 575DF20 filter. For KAT probes 2 and 3, a characteristic intense low molecular weight fluorescence
signal ∼3 kDa was observed (corresponding to the fluorescently
labeled KAT probe [2, 3]), indicative of
a high-yielding click chemistry reaction.
Cell Culture and Isolation
of Whole-Cell Lysates
HeLa
S3 cells (ATCC; Manassas VA) were cultured at 37 °C under 5%
CO2 atmosphere in a culture medium of DMEM supplemented
with 10% FBS and glutamine. HEK-293 cells were obtained from the NCI
Tumor Cell Repository. For isolation of whole cell proteomes, HeLa
cells were grown to 80–90% confluency, washed 3× with
ice-cold PBS, scraped, and pelleted by centrifugation (1400g × 3 min, 4 °C). After removal of PBS cell pellets
were stored at −76 °C or immediately processed. Cell pellets
were resuspended in 1–2 mL of ice-cold PBS (10–20 ×
106 cells/mL) and lysed by sonication (QSonica XL2000 100
W sonicator, 3 × 10 s pulse, 50% power, 60 s between pulses).
Lysates were pelleted by centrifugation (14,000g ×
30 min, 4 °C) and quantified on a Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer using
a Qubit Protein Assay Kit. Proteomes were diluted to 2 mg/mL and stored
in 1 mg aliquots at −76 °C until further processing.
Western Blotting
SDS-PAGE gels were transferred to
nitrocellulose membranes (Novex, Life Technologies) by electroblotting
at 30 V for 1 h using a XCell II Blot Module (Novex). Membranes were
blocked using StartingBlock (PBS) Blocking Buffer (Thermo Scientific)
for 20 min and then incubated overnight at 4 °C in a solution
containing the primary antibody of interest (anti-Gcn5 [3305], anti-CBP
[3378], Cell Signaling, 1:1000 dilution) in the above blocking buffer
with 0.05% Tween 20. The membranes were next washed with TBST buffer
and incubated with a secondary HRP-conjugated antibody (anti-rabbit
IgG, HRP-linked [7074], Cell Signaling, 1:1000 dilution) for 1.5 h
at room temperature. The membranes were again washed with TBST, treated
with chemiluminescence reagents (Western Blot Detection System, Cell
Signaling) for 1 min, and imaged for chemiluminescent signal using
an ImageQuant Las4010 Digitial Imaging System (GE Healthcare).
Enrichment
of KAT Enzymes for Proteomic Analysis
Whole
cell proteomes were adjusted to a final protein concentration of 1
mg/mL and incubated with the indicated probe (1 or 2; 10 μM) for 1 h. HEK-293 enrichments utilized 0.5
mg of proteome as starting material, while HeLa enrichments utilized
1 mg of proteome. Control samples to correct for nonspecific cross-linking
were preincubated with each probe’s cognate competitor (4 or 5; 100 equiv). Following equilibration,
samples were split into 5 × 200 μL aliquots and photo-cross-linked
on ice for 1 h using a 365 nm UV light in a FB-UVXL-1000 UV cross-linker.
Cross-linked samples were then recombined and subjected to Cu(I)-catalyzed
[3 + 2] cycloaddition with TAMRA biotin-azide 9 (Supplementary Figure S15) as previously described.
Final concentrations for click reactions were as follows: HeLa proteome
(1 mg/mL in PBS), probe 1 (10 μM), TAMRA biotin-azide
(40 μM), TCEP (1 mM), TBTA (100 μM), tert-butanol (4.8%), and CuSO4 (1 mM). Samples were vortexed
and incubated at room temperature for 1 h. Ice-cold 4:1 MeOH/CHCl3 (2.5 mL) was then added directly to the reaction mixture
and mixed vigorously by vortexing. The biphasic solution was centrifuged
(4000g × 20 min, 4 °C), and protein precipitated
at the interface as a solid disk. Liquid layers were carefully discarded,
and the resulting precipitate was resuspended in ice-cold 1:1 MeOH/CHCl3 (1 mL), sonicated on ice to resuspend, and repelleted by
centrifugation (14,000g × 10 min, 4 °C).
This wash step was repeated with ice-cold MeOH (1 mL). The resulting
cell pellet was air-dried to remove excess methanol and redissolved
in 1.2% SDS (1 mL) using iterative cycles of heating (95 °C)
and sonication. Redissolved protein was allowed to cool to room temperature
and added to 5 mL of PBS to give a final SDS concentration of 0.2%.
Samples were then treated with 100 μL of streptavidin-agarose
resin (prewashed 3× with 1 mL of PBS) and rotated for 1 h at
room temperature. Streptavidin-agarose bound samples were then washed
sequentially with 0.2% SDS in PBS (3 × 10 mL) and PBS (3 ×
10 mL). Samples were then prepared for on-bead digest by reduction
with 10 mM tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP) and alkylation with
12 mM iodoacetamide. Samples were diluted to 2 M urea with 50 mM Tris-Cl
pH 8.0 (400 μL total volume), followed by addition of trypsin
and 2 mM CaCl2. Digests were allowed to proceed overnight
at 37 °C. After extraction, tryptic peptide samples were acidified
to a final concentration of 5% formic acid and frozen at −80
°C for LC–MS/MS analysis.
Liquid Chromatography–Mass
Spectrometry and Data Analysis
Tryptic peptides enriched
by probe 1 were loaded onto
a reverse phase capillary column and analyzed by LC separation in
combination with tandem MS. Peptides were eluted using a gradient
of 5–42% over 40 min with the flow rate through the column
set at 0.20 μL/min. Data was collected in a dual-pressure linear
ion trap mass spectrometer (ThermoFisher LTQ VelosPro) set in a data-dependent
acquisition mode. The 15 most intense molecular ions in the MS scan
were sequentially and dynamically selected for subsequent collision-induced
dissociation (CID) using a normalized collision energy of 35%. Tandem
mass spectra were searched against UniProt H. sapiens protein database (01-13 release) using SEQUEST (ThermoFisher). Search
parameters were fixed as follows: (i) enzyme specificity: trypsin;
(ii) variable modification: methionine oxidation and cysteine carbamidomethylation;
(iii) precursor mass tolerance ±1.40 amu; and (iv) fragment ion
mass tolerance ±0.5 amu. Only those tryptic peptides with up
to two missed cleavage sites meeting a specific SEQUEST scoring criteria
(Delta Correlation (ΔCn) ≥ 0.08 and charge state dependent
cross correlation (Xcorr) ≥ 1.9 for [M + H]1+, ≥
2.2 for [M + 2H]2+, and ≥3.1 for [M + 3H]3+) were considered as legitimate identifications. Spectral count values
depicted in Figure 7 represent an average of
two biological replicates. Raw spectral counts for biological duplicates
of probe-enriched and control experiments are provided in Supplementary Table S2.
Phylogenetic Analysis
Amino acid sequences for canonical
and orphan lysine acetyltransferases were obtained from Uniprot. Accession
numbers are provided in Table S3 (Supporting Information). A pairwise alignment was generated using Clustal Omega,[55] and a phylogenic tree was constructed using
the neighbor-joining method. All phylogenetic trees were displayed
in hyperbolic space using Hypertree, with branches of the tree designated
by different colors and labeled by name where appropriate.[56]
Authors: Matthew P Patricelli; A Katrin Szardenings; Marek Liyanage; Tyzoon K Nomanbhoy; Min Wu; Helge Weissig; Arwin Aban; Doris Chun; Stephen Tanner; John W Kozarich Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2007-01-16 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Brian J P Huntly; Hirokazu Shigematsu; Kenji Deguchi; Benjamin H Lee; Shinichi Mizuno; Nicky Duclos; Rebecca Rowan; Sonia Amaral; David Curley; Ifor R Williams; Koichi Akashi; D Gary Gilliland Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Jonathan H Shrimp; Carissa Grose; Stephanie R T Widmeyer; Abigail L Thorpe; Ajit Jadhav; Jordan L Meier Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Jonathan H Shrimp; Alexander W Sorum; Julie M Garlick; Laura Guasch; Marc C Nicklaus; Jordan L Meier Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2015-10-31 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Wilson R Sinclair; Daniel Arango; Jonathan H Shrimp; Thomas T Zengeya; Justin M Thomas; David C Montgomery; Stephen D Fox; Thorkell Andresson; Shalini Oberdoerffer; Jordan L Meier Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Alexander W Sorum; Jonathan H Shrimp; Allison M Roberts; David C Montgomery; Neil K Tiwari; Madhu Lal-Nag; Anton Simeonov; Ajit Jadhav; Jordan L Meier Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Benjamin D Horning; Radu M Suciu; Darian A Ghadiri; Olesya A Ulanovskaya; Megan L Matthews; Kenneth M Lum; Keriann M Backus; Steven J Brown; Hugh Rosen; Benjamin F Cravatt Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: David C Montgomery; Julie M Garlick; Rhushikesh A Kulkarni; Steven Kennedy; Abdellah Allali-Hassani; Yin-Ming Kuo; Andrew J Andrews; Hong Wu; Masoud Vedadi; Jordan L Meier Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 15.419