Literature DB >> 25246591

Basis for substrate recognition and distinction by matrix metalloproteinases.

Boris I Ratnikov1, Piotr Cieplak1, Kosi Gramatikoff1, James Pierce1, Alexey Eroshkin1, Yoshinobu Igarashi1, Marat Kazanov2, Qing Sun1, Adam Godzik3, Andrei Osterman3, Boguslaw Stec1, Alex Strongin3, Jeffrey W Smith4.   

Abstract

Genomic sequencing and structural genomics produced a vast amount of sequence and structural data, creating an opportunity for structure-function analysis in silico [Radivojac P, et al. (2013) Nat Methods 10(3):221-227]. Unfortunately, only a few large experimental datasets exist to serve as benchmarks for function-related predictions. Furthermore, currently there are no reliable means to predict the extent of functional similarity among proteins. Here, we quantify structure-function relationships among three phylogenetic branches of the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) family by comparing their cleavage efficiencies toward an extended set of phage peptide substrates that were selected from ∼ 64 million peptide sequences (i.e., a large unbiased representation of substrate space). The observed second-order rate constants [k(obs)] across the substrate space provide a distance measure of functional similarity among the MMPs. These functional distances directly correlate with MMP phylogenetic distance. There is also a remarkable and near-perfect correlation between the MMP substrate preference and sequence identity of 50-57 discontinuous residues surrounding the catalytic groove. We conclude that these residues represent the specificity-determining positions (SDPs) that allowed for the expansion of MMP proteolytic function during evolution. A transmutation of only a few selected SDPs proximal to the bound substrate peptide, and contributing the most to selectivity among the MMPs, is sufficient to enact a global change in the substrate preference of one MMP to that of another, indicating the potential for the rational and focused redesign of cleavage specificity in MMPs.

Keywords:  MMPs; protease; specificity-determining positions

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25246591      PMCID: PMC4210027          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1406134111

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  68 in total

1.  Co-evolution of proteins with their interaction partners.

Authors:  C S Goh; A A Bogan; M Joachimiak; D Walther; F E Cohen
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  2000-06-02       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  Global kinetic analysis of proteolysis via quantitative targeted proteomics.

Authors:  Nicholas J Agard; Sami Mahrus; Jonathan C Trinidad; Aenoch Lynn; Alma L Burlingame; James A Wells
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-01-23       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Sequences and topology: from genome structure to protein structure.

Authors:  Sarah A Teichmann; Nick V Grishin
Journal:  Curr Opin Struct Biol       Date:  2008-06-06       Impact factor: 6.809

Review 4.  Protein secondary structure prediction.

Authors:  Walter Pirovano; Jaap Heringa
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2010

5.  The interface between catalytic and hemopexin domains in matrix metalloproteinase-1 conceals a collagen binding exosite.

Authors:  Laurence H Arnold; Louise E Butt; Stephen H Prior; Christopher M Read; Gregg B Fields; Andrew R Pickford
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  Broad antitumor and antiangiogenic activities of AG3340, a potent and selective MMP inhibitor undergoing advanced oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  D R Shalinsky; J Brekken; H Zou; C D McDermott; P Forsyth; D Edwards; S Margosiak; S Bender; G Truitt; A Wood; N M Varki; K Appelt
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1999-06-30       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  An automated stochastic approach to the identification of the protein specificity determinants and functional subfamilies.

Authors:  Pavel V Mazin; Mikhail S Gelfand; Andrey A Mironov; Aleksandra B Rakhmaninova; Anatoly R Rubinov; Robert B Russell; Olga V Kalinina
Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 1.405

Review 8.  Engineering next generation proteases.

Authors:  Mark Pogson; George Georgiou; Brent L Iverson
Journal:  Curr Opin Biotechnol       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 9.740

9.  Combining structure and sequence information allows automated prediction of substrate specificities within enzyme families.

Authors:  Marc Röttig; Christian Rausch; Oliver Kohlbacher
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-01-08       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Catalytic site identification--a web server to identify catalytic site structural matches throughout PDB.

Authors:  Daniel A Kirshner; Jerome P Nilmeier; Felice C Lightstone
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  33 in total

Review 1.  Matrix metalloproteinases - From the cleavage data to the prediction tools and beyond.

Authors:  Piotr Cieplak; Alex Y Strongin
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 4.739

2.  Identification of Protease Specificity by Combining Proteome-Derived Peptide Libraries and Quantitative Proteomics.

Authors:  Martin L Biniossek; Melanie Niemer; Ken Maksimchuk; Bettina Mayer; Julian Fuchs; Pitter F Huesgen; Dewey G McCafferty; Boris Turk; Guenther Fritz; Jens Mayer; Georg Haecker; Lukas Mach; Oliver Schilling
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 5.911

3.  Predictive models of protease specificity based on quantitative protease-activity profiling data.

Authors:  Gennady G Fedonin; Alexey Eroshkin; Piotr Cieplak; Evgenii V Matveev; Gennady V Ponomarev; Mikhail S Gelfand; Boris I Ratnikov; Marat D Kazanov
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteom       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 3.036

4.  Predicting Proteolysis in Complex Proteomes Using Deep Learning.

Authors:  Matiss Ozols; Alexander Eckersley; Christopher I Platt; Callum Stewart-McGuinness; Sarah A Hibbert; Jerico Revote; Fuyi Li; Christopher E M Griffiths; Rachel E B Watson; Jiangning Song; Mike Bell; Michael J Sherratt
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Matrix Metalloproteinase (MMP) Proteolysis of the Extracellular Loop of Voltage-gated Sodium Channels and Potential Alterations in Pain Signaling.

Authors:  Albert G Remacle; Sonu Kumar; Khatereh Motamedchaboki; Piotr Cieplak; Swathi Hullugundi; Jennifer Dolkas; Veronica I Shubayev; Alex Y Strongin
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  High-Throughput Multiplexed Peptide-Centric Profiling Illustrates Both Substrate Cleavage Redundancy and Specificity in the MMP Family.

Authors:  Muskan Kukreja; Sergey A Shiryaev; Piotr Cieplak; Norihito Muranaka; David A Routenberg; Andrei V Chernov; Sonu Kumar; Albert G Remacle; Jeffrey W Smith; Igor A Kozlov; Alex Y Strongin
Journal:  Chem Biol       Date:  2015-08-06

7.  Structural and functional diversity of metalloproteinases encoded by the Bacteroides fragilis pathogenicity island.

Authors:  Sergey A Shiryaev; Alexander E Aleshin; Norihito Muranaka; Muskan Kukreja; David A Routenberg; Albert G Remacle; Robert C Liddington; Piotr Cieplak; Igor A Kozlov; Alex Y Strongin
Journal:  FEBS J       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 5.542

8.  Dissecting MMP P10' and P11' subsite sequence preferences, utilizing a positional scanning, combinatorial triple-helical peptide library.

Authors:  Michal Tokmina-Roszyk; Gregg B Fields
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Massively parallel enzyme kinetics reveals the substrate recognition landscape of the metalloprotease ADAMTS13.

Authors:  Colin A Kretz; Manhong Dai; Onuralp Soylemez; Andrew Yee; Karl C Desch; David Siemieniak; Kärt Tomberg; Fyodor A Kondrashov; Fan Meng; David Ginsburg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  MT1-MMP activatable fluorogenic probes with enhanced specificity via high-affinity peptide conjugation for tumor imaging.

Authors:  Xiuru Ji; Shuping Xie; Yan Jiao; Xiaojuan Zhang; Duxin Sun; Victor C Yang; Mei Wang; Huining He; Lu Sun
Journal:  Biomater Sci       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 6.843

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.